JASON CLARE – Federal Member for Blaxland – Minister for Home Affairs, Justice and Defence Materials
– Please declare where you stand on Income Management.
- Come to a speak out against Income Management at Jason Clare’s electorate office at 400 Chapel Rd. Bankstown
Friday 27th April 12 Noon
As part of the 2011 Federal Budget, the Australian government announced that it plans to spend $117.5 million over the next five years to introduce Income Management to five “disadvantaged” communities across Australia.
These locations are:
Bankstown, New South Wales / Logan, Queensland / Rockhampton, Queensland /Playford, South Australia / Shepparton, Victoria
Income Management will commence in these sites from 1st July 2012 and will be compulsorily applied to welfare recipients in the “trial sites” who are assessed by Centrelink to be “vulnerable to financial crisis” and they will have 50% of their payment quarantined. Parents and legal guardians referred to Centrelink by child protection authorities (Community Services) will have 70% of their income compulsorily quarantined.
Centrelink will issue a ‘BasicsCard’ to people who have had their payments quarantined. This card may only be used to purchase priority items eg. food, clothing and utilities from government approved outlets such as: Woolworths, Coles, Target, Kmart, Best and Less and Big W.
The Government estimates that 20,000 people will participate in Income Management in the five locations over the next five years. This is around 1000 persons per location each year.
Income management was first rolled out as part of the racist Intervention in the Northern Territory in 2007. Aboriginal communities have experienced almost 5 years of hardship and shame as a result of this and related policies.
Income Management in the Northern Territory has been widely criticised, both locally and internationally as it stigmatises and humiliates welfare recipients, wastes money on bureaucratic administration and discriminates specifically against Aboriginal people. In the NT Income Management costs approximately $4,400 per person per year in administration costs alone. There is no evidence base to support the expansion of the system.
Despite this Jason Clare, your Federal Member, in a media statement last year declared - "Income management has already proven effective in trial locations in Perth and the Kimberley in Western Australia, Cape York in Queensland and throughout the Northern Territory."
The Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs states that Income Management will deter people from spending their Centrelink payments on alcohol, tobacco and gambling and will promote spending on fresh food, clothing and the payments of bills.
Jason Clare, in the same media statement already referred to above, declared - "This is designed to make sure that welfare payments are spent in the best interest of children, rather than tobacco, alcohol and gambling."
Independent research conducted by the Menzies School of Health, Darwin suggests that Income Management has had no beneficial effect on tobacco and cigarette sales, soft drink or fruit and vegetable sales. A recent report by the Equality Rights Alliance surveyed 180 women on income management in the NT. It found that 79% wanted to exit the system, 85% had not changed what they buy and 74% felt discriminated against. A report released by the Australian Indigenous Doctors Association (AIDA) concludes that compulsory income management in the NT has profoundly long-term negative impacts on psychological health, social health and wellbeing and cultural integrity (March 2010).
International research suggests welfare reforms that utilise sanctions such as the income management system place additional stresses on families with young children and has the potential to increase family breakdown and child abuse.
Where it has been implemented, income management has been found to be an expensive and administration-intensive approach with no evidence to suggest that it delivers outcomes that justify its complexity and cost.
When the Government first announced the Bill that has allowed the expansion of income management in late 2009, and extending into its review period in 2010, the vast majority of the submissions that were received by the Senate Committee that was established to review the Bill opposed the extension of income management. These submissions represented the views of most members of the welfare lobby, Aboriginal organisations, women’s organisations, legal services, religious groups, human rights agencies, medical groups, unions and others.
These groups opposed the legislation for a range of compelling reasons relating to the lack of any substantial evidence for the efficacy of compulsory income management and the lack of serious investigation into the potential detrimental consequences of this policy which the Government has still not explored or seriously considered.
A strong new coalition “Say No to Government’s Income Management Not in Bankstown Not Anywhere” has formed in Bankstown. The campaign has initiated a call for a national moratorium on income management – demanding immediate amnesty for those already on the system and a halt to plans for expansion. Its founding statement has been endorsed by more than 50 organisations including unions, church and community groups.
Margaret Goneis, Chairperson of Bankstown City Council Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee said that she is angered by the proposed changes and the effect it will have on individuals already struggling financially: “People need improved access to transport, health services, mental health care and assistance with the high cost of medications – income management will not address these needs”.
Randa Kattan, the Executive Director of the Arab Council of Australia, represents a large constituency of Australians of Lebanese descent in Sydney’s Bankstown that form part of one of the largest and most vibrant multicultural suburbs in the country. Kattan recently said “When I’m on talkback radio within the community with SBS or others, the callers consistently say the same thing: “Because it is Bankstown, because it is highly populated by the Arab community — Lebanese people — and because of the reputation Bankstown has gained over the years due to the negative media feedback. People feel targeted. It’s highly derogatory, highly patronising - all of it.”
The lack of serious community consultation on the matter is another parallel with the experience of Indigenous Australians living under the scheme in the Northern Territory.
The Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) has now added its weight to concerns about compulsory income management schemes. In a recent media release PHAA Vice President Vanessa Lee stated “Compulsory income management for Aboriginal people discriminates against and disempowers individuals and leaves them with insufficient resources to manage their own lives.” “PHAA believes an intervention to quarantine welfare payments and allow families to buy food should only be implemented on a voluntary basis, as determined through a comprehensive engagement process with affected individuals, and as a last resort.”
According to the PHAA, any form of income management should use a rights-based approach in line with the UN Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples which emphasises the rights of Indigenous peoples to pursue their development in keeping with their own needs and aspirations. “This also has implications for the roll out of income management for both Indigenous and non- Indigenous Australians in other States and Territories, including New South Wales and other areas of Queensland.”
Through this change in policy, the Government is not so much moving away from discriminating against Aboriginal people as expanding its discrimination to include a wider group of low-income and disadvantaged Australians.
The Federal Government maintains that Bankstown and the other trial sites were chosen based on a variety of factors including unemployment levels, youth unemployment, skills gaps and the length of time people have been on income support payments and yet they have not provided any substantial evidence to support the argument that Bankstown or the others sites specifically needs, or would benefit from, the introduction of such a regime, or that income management generally benefits people on welfare; in fact, as already outlined, much of the evidence points in the other direction.
Come on Jason Clare, we want you to declare what your position on Income Management really is. Your constituents will be directly affected by this ineffective and punitive method of social control and they deserve to know.
Come to a speak out at Jason Clare’s electorate office at 400 Chapel Rd. Bankstown
Friday 27th April 12 Noon
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3469513.htm