Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

This motion is focused on the complete furphy that the government still runs about Newstart and Youth Allowance, and that is that they are transition payments, that people go on them and off them and then move into work. I wish life were, in fact, like that, like it was previously when people could easily find work and were only on unemployment benefits for a relatively short period of time—perhaps a matter of weeks; up to six weeks. That simply is not the fact in 2019. In fact, it wasn't the fact in 2012 or in the mid-noughties when the value of Newstart started decreasing compared to payments like the age pension and when people started getting stuck on Newstart for longer and longer and longer. Let's look at how long people stay on it. The latest information from the Department of Social Services shows that people spend, on average, 156 weeks on Newstart. That's right: three years. Some people are stuck on it for a lot longer, and I'll go into that detail very shortly.

It's clearly not a transition payment. It is clear that people are living in poverty when they're living on Newstart. The data shows us that, out of the 722,923 recipients of Newstart, 128,139 people were on Newstart for one to two years; 200,196 people were on Newstart for two to five years; 125,408 were on Newstart for between five and 10 years; and 27,765 people were on Newstart for over 10 years. It is very clear that Newstart is no longer a transition payment. For thousands of Australians, being on Newstart and youth allowance is unfortunately a lasting reality.

If only the argument that people should get a job were true. The latest statistics said there were only 159,000 jobs available compared to 722,923 people who are looking for work. There is clearly a great imbalance between the number of people looking for work and the actual jobs available. When you look at the evidence, you can see that poverty in and of itself is in fact a barrier to finding a job.

Our employment services are failing to assist people adequately. It's costing us, as in fact was mentioned by the government yesterday, nearly $7 billion. Those services are not doing the job properly, that was also established through the jobactive inquiry that reported late last year. It showed that the jobactive services were not doing the job, that people are only getting parts of those services, that they're not getting adequate support and that they're not getting support that meets their needs. Thanks to the changes in the eligibility process, many of the people who are on Newstart have a partial disability. Through welfare to work, people were transferred off the disability support pension onto Newstart. Those people with the partial capacity to work (a) are not getting properly supported through the jobactive system and (b) are also getting stuck on Newstart for a long time.

Newstart can't be a transition payment when there aren't enough jobs. Many people are therefore condemned to long-term unemployment. Data released by Minister Cash shows that nearly four in five jobactive participants have had their payments suspended in the last 12 months. So people are not only on particularly poor payments but also now more at risk of losing those payments by having them suspended through the new targeted compliance program or, in fact, having them cancelled.

Anybody who thinks that people are living on Newstart is so sadly out of touch with reality because trying to live on just over $277 a week is no picnic—believe me. Last night I read out the accounts of people stuck on the cashless debit card. On Monday night, I read out into the chamber the experiences that people had sent to me about life on Newstart. There was a gentleman, aged 59, living with his two dogs in a tent because that's all he could afford. The latest Anglicare survey of housing affordability showed no affordable housing—none!—in any of our major cities around this country.

Can the government please stop running the argument that this is a transition payment and that people just want to be stuck on Newstart. They don't. I've never heard from one person on Newstart who thinks it's fantastic to be stuck on Newstart and they really want to stay there. What I have heard from people is that they are struggling to make ends meet, even to be able to buy second-hand clothes in order to be able to dress appropriately, for example, for an interview; and to be able to feed their kids.

The latest data, just the other day, from ACOSS showed how many people are skipping food, skipping meals, and that parents in particular do that in order to feed their children, as of course you would. If you are low on resources and you have a choice between feeding your children and feeding yourself, of course you are going to feed your children—although children are also going without. I've had people send me accounts of their experiences, telling me about how they didn't send their child to school that day because they couldn't send them with lunch. People also send me accounts of how bad they feel when their child can't go to a birthday party because they can't afford a present for their child to take to the birthday party. And they don't have birthday parties for their children, because they simply can't afford it.

Yesterday, the latest Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey, commonly called the HILDA Survey, was released. The survey found that the proportion of people living below the poverty line increased from 9.6 per cent to 10.4 per cent in 2017. The poverty line in Australia is around $460 a week for a single person with no children. But Newstart is just $277.85 a week, which falls far—significantly so—below the poverty line.

In the minute and a half before I finish speaking, I'd also like to remind people that Newstart has not been increased—a real increase—for 25 years. It has simply not kept up properly with the cost of living, particularly the cost of living when you are on a low income, and the goods that you need to buy. If we look at the replacement rates for unemployment payments, Newstart is the second lowest unemployment payment in the OECD. The government also runs the argument, 'Oh, it's not so bad, because you get extra supplements.' I really hope that the people who are on Newstart who get an extra 65c a day under the energy supplement, which is the majority of the supplements that they receive, spend their 65c wisely! I don't think that even buys you a stamp in this country anymore. As for the people who receive rent assistance—the majority of people on Newstart don't get rent assistance—remember that statistic I gave you about the lack of affordable housing? The money they get for rent assistance goes nowhere near what you need to find an affordable property and a place to live. Newstart is too low. It is a barrier to employment. It is unfair that this country is not raising Newstart. (Time expired)