Reports JobSeeker will rise are ‘factually incorrect’: Aston

Social services minister slams reports that unemployment payment will rise by $75 a week.

social services minister anne ruston

Social services minister Anne Ruston has said that reports the JobSeeker unemployment rate will rise by $75 a week after September are “factually incorrect”.

As part of its COVID-19 assistance package, the government temporarily increased the JobSeeker payment, formerly known as Newstart, to $1100 a fortnight, but it is due to revert to $565 a fortnight at the end of September.

New Corp reported at the weekend that instead of reverting to $565 a fortnight, the payment would be permanently boosted to $715 a fortnight, an increase of $75 a week.

Since the age of Age Pension eligibility has risen, older Australians are now the largest cohort of people accessing the JobSeeker payment.

Ms Ruston said the report of a permanent increase in the JobSeeker rate was “factually incorrect”.

"There is no submission to the effect that has been reported in the paper that is currently before me or I'm aware of," she said.

"Given I'm the social services minister, you'd like to think I'd be aware of it.

"I know of no such proposal and you can read into that what you'd like."

Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) chief executive Dr Cassandra Goldie said an increase was necessary, but the reported increase, which amounted to just an extra $10 a day, did not go far enough.

Dr Goldie said it was important that income support recipients had enough money to cover the basics of life.

“While we welcome (reports) that the government is planning a permanent increase, it must allow people to cover the basics, and we know that an increase of $10 a day won’t go far enough,” she said.

“We need to let people know we have their backs. We must adequately raise the rate of JobSeeker.

“A $10 a day increase to the old, low Newstart rate won’t be enough to allow people to cover their housing costs, food, bills and transport.

“As we handle the COVID-19 health crisis and confront the economic crisis, more people than ever before will struggle to find paid work. Just in the last week we’ve seen thousands of job losses,” Dr Goldie said.

“It’s clear to everyone, including the government, that we can’t turn back to where we were when people were struggling to survive on $40 per day. This is not enough to live, let alone to cover the basics.

“There must be an adequate, permanent increase, which ensures people do not lose their homes. Even with the supplement, only 1.5 per cent of rentals are affordable for people on JobSeeker Australia-wide. We know that with the Coronavirus Supplement people have been struggling to cover their rent. People are telling us they need every single dollar they are getting now with the doubling of JobSeeker in order to cover the essentials.

“Making sure people have enough to cover the basics is not only the right thing to do but the smart thing to do for the economy. A $75 per week permanent increase to the old rate is effectively a $200 per week cut to the current rate. Cutting the incomes of almost two million people by $200 per week in September would not be what businesses and the economy need to rebuild,” Dr Goldie explained.

A recent release from leading think tank the Grattan Institute also calls for JobSeeker to be increased by at least $100 a week while increasing the rate of Commonwealth Rent Assistance by 40 per cent.

According to the Grattan Institute’s Recovery Book, the government should announce extra economic stimulus – including spending on social housing and shovel-ready maintenance and infrastructure projects – in or before the October Budget, with the goal of getting hundreds of thousands of Australians back to work and dragging unemployment back down to about 5 per cent by the middle of 2022.

Do you think the rate of the JobSeeker payment needs to be increased? Should it stay at the coronavirus rate permanently?

If you enjoy our content, don’t keep it to yourself. Share our free eNews with your friends and encourage them to sign up.

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Jim
    30th Jun 2020
    10:25am
    There isn’t a one size fits all solution to this issue, some people might recall 2 young ladies on tv who somewhat proudly stated they had no intention of looking for work, they lived in a household of 4 young ladies, they pooled their Newstart allowance and I think one of them was getting the rental assistance, which gave them an income of approx $2300 per fortnight, many people working full time jobs wouldn’t get anywhere near that especially after tax, they could also earn a few Bob extra without it affecting their welfare payment. The other side of the coin is a young or older family struggling on Newstart after losing their jobs, they may have a mortgage, they may have kids going to school they probably have other commitments that they would have been managing ok until they lost their jobs, many would have probably paid tax for years, the first example has contributed nothing, the next group the older generation, little chance of ever working again, depending on their age they may have to spend any accumulated wealth they have accrued through many years of work and paying tax, they have no time left to make up any losses. I readily admit I don’t have any answers, but clearly just coming up with a random figure to suit all circumstances doesn’t seem the way to go.
    Tanker
    30th Jun 2020
    11:13am
    Very true Jim. This is a complex problem but essentially Newstart is way too low at its previous rate and statements to that effect were being made across the board. That does have to be addressed.
    It will be a farce if the promised tax cuts for the wealthy go ahead as they don't need it and should they get it they won't spend it in a way that will help the economy.
    Genuine effort need to be made to sort out the issue of inequality that exists in Australia in a way it hasn't before.
    Jim
    30th Jun 2020
    1:58pm
    I agree tanker, don’t know how we can address the problem equably, it doesn’t seem to matter which brand of government we have there has always been a problem with how to best help everyone in need. I volunteered for about 5 years after I retired, I was with community transport in the Illawarra area, my personal biggest shock was to see how many older women were in quite dire circumstances and some of them seemed to be very vulnerable, it fair broke your heart, the biggest issue for them was in safe housing, in my humble opinion this is the area most in need, I have suggested some solutions before, but I don’t pretend to be an expert, but one idea I have suggested in the past was to build purpose built dwellings similar to the migrant hostels that were around in 50s, they should only be available to people over a certain age, it might not suit everyone, but I think many would welcome them.
    sunnyOz
    30th Jun 2020
    2:38pm
    Jim - I absolutely agree! A few months ago, whilst walking my dog in the local park, I got speaking to a group of '4 x young 20's hippy campers'. Having done some travelling, we talked about where we'd been, how we got there, adventures, etc. I asked how they managed to finance their travels - and got the reply - 'simple'. They happily told me they were all on the the Newstart of $275 a week. Each of them kept $50 for themselves - then pooled the balance. So that still gave them $1800 a fortnight. They had been travelling for nearly 10 months and were on their way to hippy heaven, Nimbin. I queried how they managed their job search obligations, and they said they all had listed their home address at one of the uncles who lived in some remote little town, where jobs were mostly impossible, and none had ever been questioned.
    They occasionally replenished the kitty by doing odd fruit picking jobs, had enough to buy their required weed, free camped almost exclusively, and had no plans of stopping for at least 2 years. Though their van was old, it was in good condition, fully equipped with top of the range solar, good side annex, very comfortable.
    I bet they are rubbing their hands with glee at now getting $4,000 a fortnight!! ($550 each a fortnight, deduct their $50 = $500 x 8). I don't know any families of 4 getting that fortnight amount TAX FREE.
    Aussiefrog
    30th Jun 2020
    3:22pm
    Hear, hear, truer words couldn't have been spoken!
    Farside
    30th Jun 2020
    5:24pm
    sunnyoz, no doubt your hippy campers are pleased with their current circumstances, as are the kids previously working one or two shifts per week now receiving an extra $1000 or more each fortnight on Jobkeeper. I suspect there are many families doing likewise and living together while pooling their social security payments, just not in a campervan. Imagine them with the option as Jim suggests to live with a couple of dozen others in purpose built cloisters with common areas, gardens and so on in some rural idyll.
    Tood
    30th Jun 2020
    10:50am
    Need to try and sort out the wheat from the chaff, same with these being paid $1500 and refusing to go back to work they need to be cut off immediately
    sainter
    30th Jun 2020
    11:12am
    The old newstart payment is to low for the majority of people on this payment,there are cases such as Jim posted,but they are very small minority people like Anne Ruston are totally out of touch with the ordinary person on this Jobseeker payment....the payment needs to be increased for a number of reasons,one is the participation program people are put on and what is expected from it.With so many people looking likely to go on the Jobseeker payment in the very near future it can't stay on that figure that Ruston is saying.Maybe she should trying living on for a month or more...might change her tunnel vision attitude.
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    3:42pm
    Spot on sainter, the old Newstart was way too low.
    sainter
    30th Jun 2020
    11:12am
    The old newstart payment is to low for the majority of people on this payment,there are cases such as Jim posted,but they are very small minority people like Anne Ruston are totally out of touch with the ordinary person on this Jobseeker payment....the payment needs to be increased for a number of reasons,one is the participation program people are put on and what is expected from it.With so many people looking likely to go on the Jobseeker payment in the very near future it can't stay on that figure that Ruston is saying.Maybe she should trying living on for a month or more...might change her tunnel vision attitude.
    Hobbit
    30th Jun 2020
    11:22am
    Stimulating the economy is quicker when you give low-income people a boost, they spend it rather than reinvesting it, largely because they have no other choice.
    johnp
    30th Jun 2020
    2:06pm
    Agree 100%. If a boost to the economy is wanted, the low income group is the demographic that would provide that. They spend everything they have instead of socking it away in such as bank account !!
    Farside
    30th Jun 2020
    5:27pm
    stimulus was mentioned when the allowance was first announced however we don't hear much of it these days. It makes a lot more sense than the BS housing stimulus.
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    3:43pm
    Agree Hobbit and johnp
    Brissiegirl
    30th Jun 2020
    11:42am
    People who have a mortgage and suddenly find themselves without employment would be financially devastated. Legitimate workers deserve help, but life unfortunately is full of ups and downs and we all have to ride them out. Governments cannot resolve every life issue. How any government, this one now printing money, can continue supplying the needs of the masses, is a mystery to me.

    People who have been on Newstart for more than a year should be thoroughly screened - even on the old rate, and more so if there's a small increase. I have a current example of a man living with his parents who uses the present extra Covid money to buy more alcohol and cigarettes. He sits around all day doing nothing, going out goodness-knows-where with similar-minded mates and contributing absolutely nothing to the community. With the (incorrect) news that the Newstart money will be significantly, permanently, increased, his words (not mine), "Oh great, I'll never have to work again". There's many people who have always found clever ways to live quite nicely on the current Newstart - even without any increase.

    Besides this type of rorting, think about Australian pensioners who are so often rudely treated by Centrelink as deceptive beggars, with every miserable dollar being calculated, re-calculated and hunted down like petty criminals, during the last few years of life, having worked hard since youngsters, never asking for a hand-out.

    The do-gooders loudly vouch for the "rights" of unemployed, but the same advocates rarely reach the pension radar. The do-gooders, including writers for this publication, are highly vociferous when it comes to introducing end-of-life disincentives for people to maintain and keep their family homes. The professional do-gooders, thinly disguised as helpers of the poor, are imo thinly veiled green-eyed laughable virtue signalling warped monsters.
    Farside
    30th Jun 2020
    1:15pm
    the ability to "live quite nicely on the current Newstart" is somewhat relative as to what you consider to be nice.
    Brissiegirl
    30th Jun 2020
    2:58pm
    Yes Farside, you're right. I probably should have said " found clever ways to live quite contentedly". (Otherwise they would get a job).
    Aussiefrog
    30th Jun 2020
    3:23pm
    Absolutely, well said.
    Farside
    30th Jun 2020
    5:33pm
    contentedly yep. I wonder how many pensioners would be content on Newstart or as adept at finding those clever ways. As sunnyoz commented above, four 20 something hippies sharing a camper and pooling their benefit can be quite content at that stage of their lives; there is nothing stopping four oldies pooling their resources tho I doubt many would be as content regardless of the happy hours and weed smoked.
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    3:51pm
    Agreed Farside, their wouldn't be too many Pensioners contented on the old Newstart. Well at least the fellow using his payment on cigarettes and alcohol are contributing to the government through the gov. taxes on them!
    HGDEE2020
    30th Jun 2020
    11:43am
    I agree Newstart is too low, especially for those nearing retirment age. However I would rather see an increase in the rent assistance allowance & that would help a lot of people.
    patti
    30th Jun 2020
    1:22pm
    I agree, HGDEE, it would help the renters. But would do nothing for those who are still paying a mortgage, as I was until last year, out of an Age Pension. It was very hard. The government does not help anyone in that situation, unfortunately.
    Youngagain
    2nd Jul 2020
    7:09pm
    No help for those with high costs of home ownership, whether they have a mortgage or not. Many renters are far better off than home owners, especially if the home is old and needs extensive maintenance and is in an area where rates and water costs are high. The system is patently unfair. Some renters are quite well off. I know some who get their power, gas and most of their food included in their rent. One couple I know pays rent to satisfy Centrelink requirements but gets most of it refunded in cash for doing odd jobs around the property. Not all renters are hard up, but many homeowners are really struggling and would be better off selling up and renting. The system should not punish people for having chosen to battle to pay off a home.
    fearlessfly
    30th Jun 2020
    11:45am
    Nasty piece of work this one ! It seems that to be a minister in the Morrison Liberal government, you need to project that "I don't give a crap about you poor wankers" image. There's about a dozen of these horrible people out there who are stand-out suppressors of the poor and disadvantaged - you know quite well who they are !
    inextratime
    30th Jun 2020
    12:26pm
    And the Labor party with its shameless branch stacking tricks and various other alleged corrupt methods really does care about the electorate. LOL.
    Paddington
    30th Jun 2020
    12:49pm
    She comes across very coldly for sure. She seems competent but heartless.
    There are sick people on that payment too now as all have been channeled into it.
    So, yes, it is a broad spectrum of individuals.
    No matter what you do there will some who are needier than others but to discriminate would probably hurt the vulnerable ones.
    The bonus is these people are the spenders. Think of it as a payment into the economy rather than giving unworthy people money.
    sainter
    30th Jun 2020
    7:32pm
    Paddington she doesn't only come across as cold and heartless....she is.
    sainter
    30th Jun 2020
    7:32pm
    Paddington she doesn't only come across as cold and heartless....she is.
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    3:58pm
    "she doesn't only come across as cold and heartless....she is."
    Absolutely spot on there!!
    dweezy2176
    30th Jun 2020
    11:57am
    It would also be "factually incorrect" for any one to state that the minister has ever forgotten
    to ensure she claims every last cent of available allowances!
    Condescending to those less fortunate seems to be the standard for any politician these days .. We ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER except some are more IN than others!
    travelman
    30th Jun 2020
    12:17pm
    You are right Jim, no one knows what is going to happen, but one thing I am sure is this, government by its track record will be too incompetent to get this country in good economic order. They couldn't do the wise move for Virgin Airlines and now it has been bought my an American group. As for the treasurer he hasn't the intelligence to manage a child's piggy bank let alone a nation's economy. I believe you could do a better Job Jim and I don't even know you or your abilities. One thing I do know, that if this government don't do the job right we MUST use our power, people power to throw them out of parliament.
    inextratime
    30th Jun 2020
    12:29pm
    Why on earth would a government spend taxpayers money on an airline that had already racked up 7 billion $ in debt ???? A US company may have bought Virgin but it will be nothing like the model that was operating and there is no guarantee that it will make money. Its called private enterprise where shareholders shoulder the risk, not mums and dads.
    JO
    30th Jun 2020
    12:42pm
    Virgin was very badly managed and BROKE pre virus and overseas majority owned by 2 Chinese 20% each Etihad 20% Singapore Airlines 20% Branston 10% Public 10% .... as a taxpayer of Australia why would I want to see money paid to these people....
    KSS
    30th Jun 2020
    12:53pm
    travelman, you mean you wanted the Australian government to prop up a foreign enterprise with Australian taxpayer funds much as they did with Holden cars? You do remember how that turned out right?
    SuziJ
    30th Jun 2020
    12:54pm
    The JobSeeker payment MUST be at least what the Age, Disability & Carer payments are now.

    When you go off the Carer or Disability payment, the jolt to the system is $300 a fortnight LESS to live on, even if you're still paying the same amount in rent and other bills.

    The other problem is that JobSeeker reciepients are NOT ELIGIBLE for vehicle registration concessions like the other 3 are, which makes it doubly hard to be able to keep the car registered just so you can look for jobs.

    Then there's the 'older' people on the JobSeeker. How on earth are they supposed to get a job if they're in the 55+ age bracket, have medical problems of their own, and have been out of work for over 10 years? It's impossible, especially when they're REQUIRED to look for 4 jobs per month, instead of the old 1 per month.

    My ex is in this situation, even though he's still looking after me 35+ hours per week. Just because we're no longer living together under the same roof, he's been kicked off the Carer payment to JobSeeker. He's got just under 4.5 years before he's eligible for the Age Pension.

    This is another bias against those who can't live together if they're not married because of religious beliefs. We're supposed to live in a society that upholds the status of marriage, not tear it down.
    seagirl
    30th Jun 2020
    1:12pm
    Well said! you are right how can JOBSEEKER lived on it and so sad see country like Australia have jobseeker so low i can't understand it..
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    4:00pm
    Well said SuziJ and agree entirely with you. I feel sorry for anyone having to go back onto the old Newstart. It's so cruel and heartless.
    LFC
    30th Jun 2020
    1:50pm
    My view on any extension of the Jobseeker payment is that, firstly only those who lost full or part employment from COVID 19 qualify. We should not reward "professional" do little bluggers who feed off welfare and are now enjoying a "bonus" thru to September and maybe beyond. If you can prove your existing livelihood was impacted then you qualify, if you were on benefits before CoVid you do not. Harsh yes but you should not reward those who never want to work. Believe payment should be equal with Age Pension payment, which in itself not enough but that is an issue for another day
    Ms Logik
    30th Jun 2020
    7:41pm
    LFC,
    I think you have a wrong perception of people's qualifications who were on welfare before CoVid 19. There are always people who abuse the system. But, many of us are over 55, there is about a 1% chance to get a paid job again, some have medical problems and it's not our fault that the pension age was put up to 67. Most of us have worked most of our lives. I felt safe and happy with my income since beginning of May. By the way, many of us older but not pension age yet "oldies" engage in community work. To qualify for the Jobseeker Allowance one can either look for jobs (that are not existent) or volunteer 15 hours a week. That's a lot community work done! And it's good for the mental sanity of people, too. Because we get a sense of belonging and purpose.
    We are not like the cat on your couch :)
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    4:02pm
    LFC, Ms Logik is exactly right, there were more people over 55 on the old Newstart than young people.
    older&wiser
    30th Jun 2020
    2:19pm
    I am still astounded at the number of people who do not understand the difference between Jobseeker & Jobkeeper. On another forum page, someone wrote that 'she knew of many people on the Jobseeker payment of $550 a week who were refusing to go back to work'. She rambled on about them getting paid more to sit at home.
    I very politely replied saying this was incorrect. That Jobseeker was for the unemployed - Jobkeeper was for those who were legally employed and had an employer to ask them to return to work. Instead - I was contacted by the admin saying my comment had been deleted as it was 'inflammatory'.
    All this 'talk' of an increase of $75 a week, is just that - talk. There are also SO many people saying that 'yes, the $75 should be added to the current $550!'
    As so many people have commented here, one size does not fit all - the same with the DSP. If you do (or don't) tick the right boxes, you are declined. Rather than being on the dole, young people should be encouraged into education, whilst those in more senior years, and not yet eligible for Aged Pension, should definitely get more assistance than the old rate of $275.
    sunnyOz
    30th Jun 2020
    2:42pm
    I have to agree with you. I think too many people just think of 'handouts, handouts, handouts', with dollar signs in front of their eyes. I nearly lost my house a few years ago after being forced onto Newstart after shafted from my job. Trying to live on Newstart and pay a mortgage was impossible so I had to dive into my minimal super to keep the roof over my head. $550 a week would have been heaven.
    KSS
    30th Jun 2020
    3:09pm
    What part of 'temporary' do people not understand. Both the jobseeker payments (for those who lost their job as a direct result of actions against COVID-19) and the jobkeeper (intended for those who were still 'employed' but were unable to actually work) were always for a 6 month period. The biggest mistake (if you call it that) was that the payments were made indiscriminately regardless of the nature of the job or the wages previously earned. This has resulted in some people receiving far more than their regular wage and some now refusing to return to work as others have already said.

    The [oint is the jobseeker and jobkeeper payments should not be confused with the regular newstart payments. There may well be a case to be made for increasing the unemployment benefit but that issue should NOT be muddied by the jobseeker and jobkeeper temporary aid.
    Farside
    30th Jun 2020
    5:57pm
    O&W - I am surprised your explanation of the difference between Jobkeeper and Jobseeker was seen as inflammatory, especially given some of the commentary on these pages.

    These two payments are quite different and the reality is paying people more on Jobkeeper than they received previously is an aberration that should be corrected. It's no wonder some do not wish to return to low wage work with former employers if they are going to experience a reduction in pay.

    Talk of doing away with the temporary covid allowances is premature while there are currently 12 receiving benefits for each job advertised. Even if some folk are skiving off, an employer would rather engage a worker who wants to be there. This situation is not going to change suddenly however the Government could open up job vacancies by temporarily reducing pension age to encourage some into early retirement.
    stevo
    30th Jun 2020
    3:34pm
    I believe the old rate for what is now called Job Seeker is quite enough when you consider what the Old Age Pension pays per fortnight. How could the Federal Government pay more fortnightly to Job Seeker than the Old Age Pension after all the people on the Old Age Pension have NO hope of getting a job. It just doesn't make sense unless the OLD AGE PENSION RATE is increased at the same time. That will give Pensioners incentive to spend more and most of all live a more comfortable life than they do at the present. Also us Pensioners have long memories and come the next Federal Election we will remember and there will be more of us by then.
    McDaddy
    30th Jun 2020
    3:46pm
    Mate the Age Pension is nearly double the normal rate of Jobseeker. What are you on about?
    Farside
    30th Jun 2020
    6:00pm
    I would be surprised if many pensioners would exchange the pension for the Jobseeker allowance.
    Beelzebubbles
    30th Jun 2020
    3:59pm
    Ann Ruston is a repugnant excuse for a human being. Mind you, the same can be said for the rest of the LNP infestation. This....creature...regularly trots out the "dole bludger" myth, along with claiming that any increase to Newstarve will be spent on drugs. Meanwhile, she & her fellow parasites wallow in rorts, blatant corruption, and gorge themselves using a meal allowance of more than $180 A DAY. The simple fact is that unemployment benefits in Australia are criminally low, and are so by design. They don't want those pesky poor people getting uppity!
    KSS
    30th Jun 2020
    4:27pm
    I'm sure she would be more complimentary about you! Or at least less offensive.
    Tood
    30th Jun 2020
    5:43pm
    suck it up KSS, Anne Ruston is a mean piece of sh*t, a robot would have more empathy
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    4:05pm
    So agree with Beelzebubbles and Tood. She is mean and vile.
    Observer
    30th Jun 2020
    4:43pm
    What the hell is going on? Yesterday I bought a pkt of face tissues for $1. Today I went back to buy some more. The shelves are bare except for 2-3 pkts of the same face tissues. Today they are $3 per pkt compared to $1 yesterday?
    Toilet paper shelves are almost bare and the price of toilet paper has almost doubled?
    What is going on?
    Alan
    30th Jun 2020
    8:22pm
    The real question is what do people actually need, other than their wants. People may to go for coffees, to be able to drink alcohol or smoke or do other social things. The allowence needs to provide for reasonable costs of food and other essentials and not smokes and alcohol or a daily coffee. Accommodation can be assisted through direct rental subsidies.

    I would like to see an increase in Newstart to be built on a package of items which are adequate to allow a person to live modestly but not to the extent that it enables them to not actively seek work.
    Marigold
    1st Jul 2020
    11:27am
    Those currently without work need enough to cover essentials - a roof over their head (rent or mortgage) food, clothing, transport costs (public or, if they can do it, car or bike) power bills etc and irregulars like medical needs. They also need something to keep emotionally healthy (mine used to be a tea and cake for me and choc milk and cake for my daughter once a fortnight) it can be nice food, trips to friends - it can be simple and cheap but will fit into what some consider a waste. People will do it in different ways and none should be judged. Many of the young travellers etc being criticized here today will be the workers of the future (and the taxpayers) as even with the current temporary increase strict budgeting is necessary in order to survive. That extra they have is also being spent in Australia so feeding back into the economy - rent paid to investors, food from local supermarkets, clothing needs, power and other incidentals from Australian retailers, etc. Even when it goes back to a lesser level the Australian economy will be on the receiving end. There will always be some that people will criticize and its sad that they are being used with no proof that those people plan never to work but also to represent all jobseekers.
    libsareliars
    1st Jul 2020
    3:36pm
    Of course Jobseeker needs to be increased fro the old Newstart Payment. I think it should be left at the rate it is now, all that money will go straight back into the economy and will help us recover from the recession. I know the LNP is ideologically opposed to helping our most vulnerable, not a very christian or compassionate way of looking at them. It would boost our economy so i don't understand why they are so against a rise. Must be just incredibly cruel and mean i guess.
    fearlessfly
    1st Jul 2020
    3:45pm
    That last sentence really sums up the Liberals mate !!
    Big Kev
    2nd Jul 2020
    11:04am
    I get rather sick of the Govt and their media trolls saying that increasing Centrelink payments will encourage people not to work. This increase will still have them well below the minimum wage. People on current rate that I know even couple of people sharing house skip meals and eat noodles just to survive and pay rent.
    I receive super which is $500 per ftnt more than increased rate. It is $80 per ftnt more than health benefits card. Due to that $2100 per year, I and my wife who has no income incur $10,000 per year in health care payments despite private insurance. We regularly are short of money at end of fortnight and have no fat in our budget. So please Scomo don't come out with this garbage about not wanting to work. The only people that don't feel like applying for work are those with physical disabilities who don't qualify for the extremely toughened disability pension arrangements and have faced years of rejection. Leave benefits as they are! Buy one less war machine and it will pay for it.
    Farside
    2nd Jul 2020
    12:55pm
    it seems nonsensical to focus on the incentive to work while there are more unemployed than there are jobs available. Much better for everyone involved those jobs go to one of the many who want or need the work than those who do not. Perhaps if Gov ensured that a full-time job pays the minimum of a living wage so people in those jobs do not find themselves fighting poverty.
    hydrasarah
    3rd Jul 2020
    10:35pm
    At Virginia Beach Attorneys Group we are at a mission to remove the cloud of mystery that surrounds the law by cutting out the barrier by secure communication.
    Virginia beach personal injury attorney


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles