Extract from The Guardian
Plan to extend penalties for those looking for work estimated to cost government $25m over four years
The Abbott government has been accused of “wasting money on big-stick
compliance” after the budget showed a policy to extend penalties for
jobseekers who miss appointments would cost more than it raised.
The government said it would introduce stronger and more immediate penalties for jobseekers who did not meet their mutual obligation requirements.
The measure was estimated to deliver savings of $6.9m over three years, the budget papers said, but carried associated costs of about $32m over four years. It therefore appears in the budget as a net cost of about $25m over four years.
The policy involves the extension of the ‘no show no pay’ principle to missed appointments and activities like work for the dole “to encourage positive jobseeker behaviour and compliance”.
“Jobseekers who fail to undertake adequate job search will be subject to income support payment suspension until they demonstrate genuine job search efforts,” the budget papers said.
“These jobseekers would also no longer be able to have the financial penalty waived by agreeing to undertake a compliance activity.”
The Greens senator Rachel Siewert said the government should scrap the “big stick” approach because it would cost more money than it would save.
Siewert said the policy reflected the government’s worldview that “those who are in need of help should be met with distrust”.
“This measure in its current form serves nobody,” she said.
“If the government is going to spend $3 to earn just $1 back, it should be better invested on measures that genuinely help people to engage with, find and maintain attachment to work.
“The measure is aggressive and accentuates an unfair picture of those that seek support whilst unemployed. We should take a more compassionate stance.”
The $24.9m cost appears in the budget under the item labelled “Growing Jobs and Small Business — further strengthening the jobseeker compliance arrangements”.
When asked about the expense outstripping the saving, a spokesman for the assistant employment minister, Luke Hartsuyker, pointed to the government’s broader efforts to encourage job seekers “to do the right thing”.
“The government is committed to reducing the costs and red tape burden for employment providers, and other organisations, of non-attendance by jobseekers at appointments and activities,” the spokesman said.
“The changes build on reforms introduced over the past six months which have seen jobseeker compliance at certain appointments increase from 65% to nearly 90%. The changes provide stronger incentives for jobseekers to do the right thing first time, and by doing so, job seekers are less likely to incur an payment penalty.”
The jobseeker compliance measure is separate from the government’s revamped policy for unemployed people under 25 years to wait four weeks before receiving Newstart payments.
The government on Tuesday dumped its 2014 budget measure to take people aged under 30 years off income support for six months at a time, after widespread criticism from welfare and business groups and a majority of senators.
The government said it would introduce stronger and more immediate penalties for jobseekers who did not meet their mutual obligation requirements.
The measure was estimated to deliver savings of $6.9m over three years, the budget papers said, but carried associated costs of about $32m over four years. It therefore appears in the budget as a net cost of about $25m over four years.
The policy involves the extension of the ‘no show no pay’ principle to missed appointments and activities like work for the dole “to encourage positive jobseeker behaviour and compliance”.
“Jobseekers who fail to undertake adequate job search will be subject to income support payment suspension until they demonstrate genuine job search efforts,” the budget papers said.
“These jobseekers would also no longer be able to have the financial penalty waived by agreeing to undertake a compliance activity.”
The Greens senator Rachel Siewert said the government should scrap the “big stick” approach because it would cost more money than it would save.
Siewert said the policy reflected the government’s worldview that “those who are in need of help should be met with distrust”.
“This measure in its current form serves nobody,” she said.
“If the government is going to spend $3 to earn just $1 back, it should be better invested on measures that genuinely help people to engage with, find and maintain attachment to work.
“The measure is aggressive and accentuates an unfair picture of those that seek support whilst unemployed. We should take a more compassionate stance.”
The $24.9m cost appears in the budget under the item labelled “Growing Jobs and Small Business — further strengthening the jobseeker compliance arrangements”.
When asked about the expense outstripping the saving, a spokesman for the assistant employment minister, Luke Hartsuyker, pointed to the government’s broader efforts to encourage job seekers “to do the right thing”.
“The government is committed to reducing the costs and red tape burden for employment providers, and other organisations, of non-attendance by jobseekers at appointments and activities,” the spokesman said.
“The changes build on reforms introduced over the past six months which have seen jobseeker compliance at certain appointments increase from 65% to nearly 90%. The changes provide stronger incentives for jobseekers to do the right thing first time, and by doing so, job seekers are less likely to incur an payment penalty.”
The jobseeker compliance measure is separate from the government’s revamped policy for unemployed people under 25 years to wait four weeks before receiving Newstart payments.
The government on Tuesday dumped its 2014 budget measure to take people aged under 30 years off income support for six months at a time, after widespread criticism from welfare and business groups and a majority of senators.
No comments:
Post a Comment