Government also criticised for signalling it will introduce tougher penalties for work-for-the-dole participants

This article is more than 3 years old

This article is more than 3 years old

Social security groups have warned the government will face a “significant backlash” if it cuts welfare in next month’s budget, while criticising a proposal to introduce tougher penalties for work-for-the-dole participants.

The federal government signalled this week it would take a more punitive approach to the work-for-the dole program, penalising those who fail to turn up to interviews or appointments by stripping their welfare payments.

News Corp Australia reported measures to be announced in next month’s budget would close a “loophole” allowing “bludgers” to repeatedly skip interviews or work-for-the-dole commitments without losing their welfare payments.

We’re being softened up for more paternalistic welfare policy. We must resist | Eva Cox Read more

The government already has broad powers to strip welfare payments and impose penalties for those who fail to meet their obligations under the scheme, but uses its discretion to waive the punishments.

Typically, it does not actually impose a penalty if the jobseeker re-engages. That waiver is designed to keep welfare recipients actively looking for jobs and prevent them from being pushed further into disadvantage.



The Australian Council of Social Service chief executive officer, Cassandra Goldie, warned against punishing jobseekers without first creating employment opportunities.

“There’s only one job for every four people unemployed. And there’s only one job for every 10 if you count people who are underemployed,” Goldie said.

“Until we address the lack of jobs, punishing people further is not a solution to getting them into work,” she said.

Goldie said the requirements on work-for-the-dole participants were onerous and complex, while the level of income support benefit was only $38 a day.

She rejected the “mean-spirited, tired narrative” against social security recipients.

“This is a non-issue that the government is trying to turn into a diversion, trying to send out a message that we are a country of ‘lazy dole bludgers’, which the public absolutely knows is not the case,” she said.



The employment minister, Michaelia Cash, said there was a cohort of people in Australia who actively refused to do suitable work.

“I think all taxpayers would rightly expect that those who can work should work and our welfare system should be there as a genuine safety net, not as something that people can choose to fund their lifestyle,” she said on Monday.

The government’s tough talk on welfare came before a poll, published by News Corp on Tuesday, showed the majority of voters (61%) oppose cuts to welfare in next month’s budget.



The Australian Unemployed Workers’ Union said the poll showed the tide was turning on “bashing dole bludgers”.

“I think people are starting to see through it,” the union president, Owen Bennett, said.



“When you look around there is very few jobs available ... I think most people who live in the real world, as opposed to the government, understand what it’s like in the job market.”



Goldie said the poll sent a very strong message to the government ahead of the budget.

She said low-income families were already facing a $6,000 reduction in their annual budget due to the recent freezing of the family tax benefit, and the loss of the schoolkids and baby bonuses, the savings of which were not redirected towards supporting low-income groups.

“The very idea that a government that is still talking up tax cuts for companies, tax cuts for people on higher incomes … there’s going to be a severe backlash if the government delivers a budget that once again falls the hardest on those with the least,” Goldie said.

Acoss have pointed to an independent 2010 review of the jobseeker compliance system to question the government’s proposed work-for-the-dole crackdown.

The review found welfare recipients often breached their requirements due to confusion about their obligations. It found increasing financial penalties for non-engagement risked “undue hardship” to a vulnerable section of the community.

“The last independent review of the mutual obligation regime recommended people be allowed to re-engage to get their payments,” Goldie said.

“This keeps a person in the system and gives them a better chance of assistance in getting a job.”

Labor calls for answers on work-for-the-dole death Read more

Bennett said there had already been significant increases in the number of penalties to jobseekers.



Government data appears to support this. The government suspended 1,852,762 payments for a failure to attend an interview or appointment in 2015-16, compared with 1,210,241 in 2014-15.

“These measures will actually have the opposite effect, they will push people further away from work as they go deeper and deeper into poverty,” Bennett said.



The overwhelming majority of jobseekers re-engage in compulsory appointments under the current system.



In 2015-16, 88% of jobseekers re-engaged after missing an earlier appointment.