Kate Chaney (Curtin, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I acknowledge that the government made some attempts to alleviate poverty in the budget released last night, and these are important, but the biggest impact government could have on alleviating poverty would be increasing JobSeeker to above the poverty line. So what is the right amount of support? In a country like Australia, we should be able to set our safety net at a level that means people can still access the basics of life and live with dignity but that we're not destroying incentives to work. We should be able to avoid people living below the poverty line, which is about $68 a day for a single adult. This assumes the basics and no complexities in your life. As anyone trapped in poverty knows, there are complexities that add to costs—health issues, family complexities, mundane challenges like not having a big enough fridge or transport so you can't buy in bulk. Below this level, this poverty line, we're trapping people in poverty. They can't focus on getting a job because they're worrying about how to feed their kids or keep their housing.

In my work at Anglicare WA, I heard heartbreaking stories about choosing between food and medication or how one bill can spin you out of control. Our system is punitive: people feel shame and isolation, they lose connection with their communities and they find themselves in entrenched disadvantage. So what are we doing now? People on JobSeeker are living on $49 a day, now increased to $52 a day, which is well below the poverty line of $68 a day. This increase is better than nothing, but it won't make a significant difference.

What does the government actually think about this? The government's own Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee found that every available indicator showed that the current rates of JobSeeker and related payments were seriously inadequate when they're measured against payments overseas, against the minimum wage, against pensions or against poverty lines. It recommended restoring the relativities of the mid-1990s, when unemployment benefits were about 90 per cent of the age pension. This would be an increase from $49 a day to $68 a day. The change made in the budget is $3 a day, instead of the $19 a day recommended by the panel.

What do communities think? There is broad community support for a substantial increase. ACOSS has issued an open letter calling for this $19 a day increase. This has been signed by a huge range of MPs, community leaders, economists, prominent leaders and academics. The BCA and the Committee for Economic Development of Australia backed this change too.

My community of Curtin is relatively wealthy. One of the things that constantly impress me is that my community is not entirely self-interested. I meet people every day who are worried about others, people who want to live in a country where we treat people fairly. The data bears this out. Surveys consistently show that a majority of people think that JobSeeker should be higher than it is.

What would it cost to put unemployed people out of poverty? ANU analysis shows that lifting JobSeeker to 90 per cent of the pension rate would cost about $5.7 billion a year, which is a four per cent increase in total welfare payments and less than one per cent of total government spending. So we could increase government spending by one per cent and lift nearly one million people out of poverty.

How could we pay for this? I acknowledge that we need to address the structural deficit in the budget—inflation affects everyone—but in a budget of $680 billion surely we can find $6 billion so that all Australians can be fed and housed and live with dignity. There are numerous ways to do this. There's broad appetite for a Ken Henry-style review of our tax system. We could consider taxing passive income. We could increase the GST. We could make serious reforms to the PRRT. Or, in the absence of broader tax reforms, we could reshape the stage 3 tax cuts.

After COVID we have a greater understanding of how easily hardworking people can slip into crisis. In every budget we as a country are making decisions about what we value. Of the $680 billion we spend, we can find $6 billion to significantly change the lives of one million people. I urge the government to listen to the voices of the community, business and its committee and make a commitment that no Australian will live in poverty. (Time expired)

See this speech in context