|
|
|
Where Young Australians have Missed OutAnalysis of the 2001-2002 Budget31 May 2001Introduction The Howard Government’s 2001-02 Budget contains very little good news for the majority of Australia’s young people struggling to make the transition from school to work or study and independent living. Young people will continue to fall through the cracks left by a ‘mean and tricky’ Government whose focus clearly ends at the next federal election and whose vision is on winning back those constituencies whose votes may get them over the line on election night. While there is virtually nothing for young people in this Budget, big business can look forward to $5 billion in tax cuts. The Coalition’s 2001-2002 budget was a disappointment for young people and those who support them. It served to reinforce the perception that this Government merely pretends to listen to young people and then chooses not to act. The findings of Minister Kemp’s own National Youth Roundtable and the Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan taskforce report echo criticisms expressed by the Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) ,National Union of Students, St Vincent de Paul, The Brotherhood of St Laurence and other youth sector organisations. Despite this spate of recent reports indicating that more and more young people are in crisis, income support payments for young people remained untouched and below the poverty line in last week’s budget. The latest poverty reports show that simply being young places a person in a high-risk category for poverty in Australia. This high degree of disadvantage among young people is being fuelled by the policies of the Howard government. The Coalition’s constant boasts about the state of the economy now ring hollow as more and more Australians, particularly young Australians, are asking: `If things are so great, why am I doing it so tough?' Young people did not receive their fair share of the economic growth when the economy was growing under the Coalition and this latest budget confirmed their fears about just how low they fall in Coalition priorities during an economic downturn. This paper canvasses the specific areas of policy where the budget has failed to address the crisis facing many of Australia’s young people. Nothing for youth income support Welfare reform, talked-up as the centrepiece in the Coalition’s so-called ‘caring’ budget, has done nothing to ease the financial struggle faced by young people on income trying to make a transition to independence. Changes to youth allowance payments in 1998, allegedly in order to simplify and standardise payments, have resulted in gross inequalities. In July 1998, about 15,000 of the 16 and 17-year-olds receiving the youth training allowance, roughly half the number on the youth training allowance, failed to qualify for the new youth allowance payment. This budget does not contain any additional funding to increase income support for young people to above the poverty line - the maximum rate of payment is still $145.00 a week. Young people are having their benefits slashed for failing to adhere to the most minor regulations. Breaching penalties range from $280 to $350 for failing to reply to an official letter and from $630 to $1,300 for failing to attend an interview. The average penalty for rule infringements is $763 About 53 percent of all welfare penalties are imposed on people under the age of 25, including 58 percent of all purely administrative breaches, such as missing an interview. This is because previous mutual obligation requirements were largely targeted at young people. Breaching is particularly high for current participants in Work for the Dole schemes. Nearly half the participants in these schemes- 7,000 out of 18,000 - were breached in the 15 months to March 1999. These penalties have left increasing numbers of unemployed youth and students destitute, given that the Youth Allowance is currently only about half the Henderson poverty line for a young single person. In the financial year 1999-2000, according to official statistics, 13,647 people, or 7.7 percent of those receiving an allowance, received three breaches resulting in a total loss of allowance for eight weeks. Far from the punitive system lessening, there has been a 250 percent increase in the number of people penalised since 1997. In 1999-2000, some 302,000 breach penalties were imposed on 200,000 people, cutting government spending by $170 million. Another 172,000 penalties were imposed, but were revoked on appeal. According to Senate Estimates discussions young people are less likely to appeal Centrelink decisions. No GST compensation Like pensioners and self-funded retirees, young people have been particularly vulnerable to the Coalition’s GST because they are paying more in GST and getting back less. Young people generally have lower incomes and are more likely to be unemployed. Because they earn less, they haven’t benefited from the Coalition’s tax cuts. Young people spend a higher proportion of their income on goods and services that have risen because of the GST. This includes items most used by young people such as clothes, entertainment, bills, transport and software, compared to other age brackets. This also means that when the CPI figures eventually flow through to allowances they under-compensate young people for the rising cost of living. Young people are more likely to rent in the private market and therefore get slugged with the GST- induced rent rises as a result of landlords paying GST on all of their inputs without being allowed to claim input tax credits. It is disappointing that young people receiving a Disability Support Pension will miss out on the Government’s one-off $300 bonus targeted only at aged pensioners. Labor has identified two key criteria for rollback – making the GST fairer, and making the GST simpler. Labor is committed to doing everything possible to remove the GST/BAS nightmare from the shoulders of small business. As economic growth delivers greater tax revenues over time, Labor will have an ongoing process for handing that revenue back to those most hurt by the GST. Our committee will ensure that we get the best advice on where best to act. Labor won’t be promising what we can’t afford. And all of our commitments will be detailed before the election. Re-badging Labor’s Earning Credits Program The budget resurrection of Labor’s Earning Credit Scheme, abolished in 1997 by the Coalition, is a positive move to assist young people on income support to take up full-time, regular part-time or irregular casual work. This initiative will allow an individual to keep more of their income support payment while working. Under the Coalition’s new Working Credit scheme a young person who gets some work can have their earnings offset against the Working Credit they have built up. This means less income will be counted under the income test, and the person will keep more of the payment than under the current rules. For example, someone who has no income in a fortnight will automatically build up Working Credit of $48 in that fortnight. If they earn $24 in a fortnight their Working Credit balance will increase by $24. For each fortnight their income is less than $48, people will continue to build up their credit to a maximum of $1,000. When they subsequently report income to Centrelink, this will first be counted against their income test free area, then their Working Credit balance, and then against the income test taper rates (40%, 50% or 70% depending on their payment and level of earnings). Finally…the Coalition admits that mutual obligation also means obligation on the side of Government Labor has argued consistently that the mutual obligation principle has to contain a training element and that mutual obligation also means obligation on the side of government. Labor has called for a training component for Work for the Dole since it was imposed on young job-seekers and students in 1998. New arrangements under Mutual Obligation as announced in the budget: Job Search Training Jobseekers aged 18 and 20 years- will be required to participate in Job Search Training at three months’ unemployment or earlier, and at six months’ unemployment and at least annually thereafter. The requirements are: · 200 hours of community work or 130 hours of part-time work or 100 hours of study over 26 weeks or an activity from the Mutual Obligation menu. Jobseekers aged 21 to 39 years- will be required to participate in Job Search Training at three months’ unemployment or earlier, and at six months’ unemployment and at least annually thereafter. The requirements are: · 240 hours of community work or 130 hours of part-time work or 100 hours of study or an activity from the Mutual Obligation menu. Training Credits Training Credits are being introduced for job seekers who meet minimum attendance and participation requirements in a Work for the Dole program or job seekers who meet the requirements by undertaking community work activities. Eligible job seekers will have fully participated in: Work for the Dole Training Credit eligibility- • 16 weeks- the Training Credit worth $500 • 21 weeks- the Training Credit increases to $650 • 26 weeks- the Training Credit increases to a maximum $800 Community work Training Credit eligibility- • 240 hours- the Training Credit is worth $50 • 315 hours- the Training Credit is worth $650 • 390 hours- the Training Credit is worth a maximum $800 Training Credits can be used to cover the cost of accredited training, including that provided by employers. Community Work Coordinators will advise eligible job seekers on the choice of suitable approved training and be responsible for administering Training Credit payments. Although Labor welcomes the Coalition’s job training initiatives announced in the budget, the Government gets no points for originality. Labor’s Workplace 2000 report released in February 2000 and Labor’s submission to the welfare review process called for reform to government provisions of job training including: better referrals under the Job Network; tailored job search training, increased intensive assistance, improved sequencing of employment assistance and more staff for Centrelink. No help for the unemployed now and no plan to create jobs This budget does not deliver on job creation. The Coalition has failed to provide any targeted initiatives that actually create jobs. This is despite their own predictions that general unemployment of around 7% will continue to rise through to June next year. This is particularly bad news for young people who are currently faced with a rising unemployment rate of 23.3% (ie.15-19 years), compared to 9.7% that is the total rate of persons looking for full-time work. While Labor supports the additional investment of Government funds away from the ‘big end of town’ towards jobseekers, the catch is that it will not provide any relief now. The Government’s new welfare training initiatives such as Working Credit and the Literacy and Numeracy Training Supplement aren’t expected to kick in until September 2002, a full 16 months away. This will not help the number of young Australians currently unemployed. Extension of Mutual Obligation to Parents From July 2002 jobseekers under 39 years of age on Newstart allowances will have to select from a menu of mutual-obligation requirements or join a work-for-the-dole program by default to retain their benefits. The Government’s welfare reform package includes the extension of mutual obligation to parents in receipt of parenting payment. While Labor supports measures that genuinely assist parents to re-enter the workforce, we have not been reassured that measures introduced will not conflict with parenting responsibilities or result in a cut to their income through government fining. These include the requirement for parents to meet part time activity requirements (150 hours every six months) once their youngest child reaches age 13. One of the key concerns of the McClure Report is the growing number of families in which neither parent is working. Labor’s concern is that this escalation in jobless families has come as a result of the withdrawal of labour market programs and the Government’s decision to force programs such as JET to provide assistance to more people with fewer resources. In this context an upfront commitment of funding is required. Transition to Independent Living Allowance will not fully implemented until 2003 The provision of a one off payment of up to $1,000 to young people exiting State care is a welcome initiative. It is designed to provide assistance for utility connections and other essential costs associated with independent living. Young people will need to provide a transition plan and participate in a mentoring program. The main criticism of this initiative is that it will not take effect until 2003. It is not clear whether this payment will be retrospective. No relief for universities In the 1996 Budget, $1 billion dollars was cut from university funding over four years, and changes made to HECS increased student payments by more than a billion dollars. As graduates, young people have suffered Government increased HECS charges and lowering the repayment threshold to around $22,000. As graduates young people have suffered Government increased HECS charges and lowered the repayment threshold to around $22,000. Any new money for education merely goes part of the way towards restoring funding stripped away in previous Costello budgets. The 2001/02 education budget: • Re-announces the innovation statement, putting back just $3 billion of the $5 billion that the Howard Government cut from universities and research and development. Most of this money is not scheduled to flow back into the system for four or five years. • Announces $230 million of new funding for TAFE, which is less than the amount which the Government cut from both TAFE and VET in 1996 and 1997; • Announces 670 extra university places a year when the number of Australian students at university fell by more than 3,000 last year: a sign that many young people are being ‘priced out’ of higher education; and • Serves up a cheap imitation of Labor’s ‘Learning Gateway’ with funding for an online curriculum for schools. In adopting these measures, John Howard has admitted that he was wrong to cut universities and research and development by $5 billion; wrong to cut TAFE and VET funding by $240 million; wrong to attack government schools and introduce the Enrolment Benchmark Adjustment (EBA) and wrong to drive Australian university student numbers down. With the possible exception of a postgraduate loans scheme to assist young people who already have an undergraduate degree, there is nothing to support young people with educational aspirations. The Budget does provide some scholarships for regional universities. The new allocation of $35million however returns just one sixth of the funding cut from regional universities by the Howard Government in 1996. A Labor government will redirect millions of dollars in extra funding from Australia's wealthiest private schools and use it for capital spending in needy public schools, prestigious new teaching scholarships, teacher retraining, and regional universities. No new money for public hospitals Young people like many other Australians depend on our public hospitals. This Budget has failed to provide more funding to our public hospitals and relieve the pressure they are already under due to inadequate funding by the Howard Government. The Independent Inquiry into public hospital funding revealed that the Howard Government had consistently short changed public hospitals. To meet its health obligations the Howard Government should have committed an additional $215 million for our public hospitals in this budget. Instead, there is nothing new. Medicines and doctors’ bills have continually gone up under the Howard Government and there is no relief from the previous harsh measures that have shifted more and more costs onto consumers. No new money for Legal Aid or Community Legal Centres The 2001 Federal Budget provides no additional assistance to young people who are unable to afford the cost of legal services. Commonwealth funding for legal aid remains static in this budget. Since assuming office in 1996, the Howard Government has slashed the Commonwealth funding for legal aid. In the last year of the previous Labor Government, Commonwealth spending on legal aid was $160 million. But in 2001- 2002, the Commonwealth will spend only $114 million on legal aid. The Budget’s forward estimates contain a real cut to Commonwealth legal aid funding in excess of $402 million. In the forthcoming financial year, only $21.8 million has been allocated for community legal services - a decrease of $3.9 million from 2000-2001. This leaves open the possibility of further budget cuts to existing centres that are already struggling to meet increased demand caused by the harsh legal aid cuts. As a result, fewer young Australians are able to access legal advice than ever before. No new assistance for the homeless The Government came up with no new initiatives in last week’s budget to provide more beds for homeless young people and their families in crisis or in their transition to stable housing. Funding for the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP) was boosted by a Democrat deal to pass the GST and was reflected in last year’s budget. There is no evidence that the increased funding is being spent on a growth in SAAP services such as the provision of new beds, rather than being gobbled up in administration. Funding for the Reconnect program received a small decrease in spending for 2000. According to the Portfolio Budget Statements (FACS) for 2000-01, Reconnect was to have an estimated budget of $13.24m in 2000-01. The latest Portfolio Budget Statement (2001-02) states that the final estimate for Reconnect for 2000-01 is $12.83m. This figure may be attributed to delays in getting services operational. When Labor left office in 1996, total funding for the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement (CSHA) was approximately $1490m. By 1999-2000 this funding had declined to $1331m. In real terms, the decline in funding over this period has been of the order of $222m ie. if funding was maintained in real terms since 1996, then the 1990-2000 figure would have been $222m higher. (Figures from Report on Government Services 2001, Productivity Commission Table 16A.39). The latest Budget figures show a continuing decline in ‘bottom line’ Commonwealth funding for the CSHA. Base funding is being reduced via the continued application of a 1% ‘efficiency dividend’ and the identified priority areas (Aboriginal Rental Program, Crisis Accommodation Program and the Community Housing Program) are pegged at 1996 funding levels. Budget disappointments for most rural and regional Youth This Budget is a serious disappointment for young people living in rural and regional Australia. The youth initiatives announced in the Young People in Rural Industries initiative provide funding for leadership training, a Young Farmers’ forum, scholarships, training for improved corporate governance skills. This initiative however only targets 18-35 year-olds who have chosen a career in Australia’s agriculture, fisheries and forestry industries. There are some scholarships for regional universities, but this $35m returns just one sixth of the funding cuts the Howard Government made to regional universities in 1996. This Government has not delivered. Young people in rural and regional Australia, in work, at home and on the land are all feeling the pinch now and are insecure about their futures. Young people living in Australia’s outer suburbs and regional centres have also been left out in the cold with no capacity to access either the wealth of the capital cities, or the Government’s rural assistance programs. Indigenous Youth Under the Australians working together package $10.2m is provided to assist indigenous students to stay in school or undertake vocational training (estimated 1600 students will receive assistance). Australian Defense Cadets have been given $845,000 over three years to develop programs to encourage indigenous youth into cadet programs. Reith’s reforms here to stay - nothing for young workers Young workers are subject to systemic discrimination in the Governments industrial relations ‘paradise’. This Budget does nothing to change that situation. The Government has allocated $3.1 million to reduce compliance and administration costs accrued by small business in meeting their equal opportunity requirements, but provides nothing for young people or women who face discrimination in the workplace. A major objective of the Government’s industrial relations legislation has been to limit the conditions that can be put into awards. This has had particularly adverse effects on young workers who are more likely to be in low skilled and low paid employment in industries, such as hospitality, where they are required to work unsociable hours. Young people are also over-represented in part-time and casual work and are vulnerable to unscrupulous workplace practices. Sport and the Arts Despite sport being a big winner in the budget, the Coalition failed to get the funding balance right between elite and community sport and regional and metropolitan sport. This budget does not give sufficient attention to junior development and sporting initiatives targeted at young people, particularly in rural and regional areas. The Government pledged additional funding of $9.6m over three years to the Australia Council. As the Portfolio Budget Statement does not include a breakdown for the Youth and Emerging Artists Initiative and therefore it is not clear whether this is new money or simply new administrative arrangements. Civic education not considered important Despite 2001 being Australia’s Centenary of Federation year characterised by a time for celebration and reflection upon the qualities that define our nation and its people, this year’s budget contains no new money for civics education initiatives. The Discovering Democracy program was launched in May 1997 and provides teaching resources on civics education. Funding for the program hasn’t changed apart from a funding decline from $17.5m over 1997-2000 Budgets to $13.4 million as announced in the 2000-01 Budget. Civics education helps young people understand the workings of their own and other political systems as well as the relationship of Australian politics and government to world affairs. Education in civics and government produces informed and responsible participation of Australia’s citizens and enables contemporary debate on civic engagement by all Australians. Last year saw the voluntary liquidation of the Constitutional Centenary Foundation who had provided public education initiatives in the ten years up to the Centenary of Federation. There were no new budget initiatives earmarked to fill this gap. Cuts to funding for the environment The environment is an issue of great concern to young people. It is disappointing that environmental spending under the Howard Government has been characterised by spending cuts, deceptive accounting and broken promises, and this budget is no different Last week's budget revealed National Heritage Trust spending next year will be $120 million less than this year, with major cuts to National Landcare (down from $63.5m to $31.2m), Bushcare (down from $100m to $83.8m), Murray Darling Basin (down from $50.7m to $35m), Coasts and clean seas (down from $33m to $24.4m), and World Heritage $9.7m to $8.9m. The Government has also taken $45.9 million from greenhouse emission reduction programs to put into policy development - a policy that has Australia siding with the US on its rejection of the Kyoto Protocol. It has also effectively cut $10 million from programs to reduce the impact of prawn trawling on the Great Barrier Reef. Poor response to the Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce report The much-awaited Government response to the Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce: Footprints to the Future report, leaked by Labor in April, was formally presented during the Budget. The taskforce was announced by the Prime Minister on 1 September 1999 and set up as major part of the Government’s response to the recommendations of the Prime Minister’s Youth Homelessness Taskforce’s final report ‘Putting Families in the Picture’ in 1996. The Youth Pathways taskforce is a joint initiative of the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs and Family and Community Services. The Taskforce was charged with developing a five-year national action plan focused on improving support for young people and their families during young people’s transition to independence. New initiatives announced in the Budget as part of the Government’s response to the Youth Pathways report include: · Job Placement Employment and Training (JPET) and Jobs Pathways Programs (JPP)- to continue at current levels to 2005; · Enterprise and Career Education Foundation- to extend its Work Placement Coordinator arrangements into remote areas of central and northern Australia, ensuring national coverage; · Mentor Marketplace – An expansion of the Government’s mentoring pilot announced in 1998 to help to connect young people to paid employment and the concept of life long learning; · Pilot of Career Advisors in schools - To pilot 30 career and transition advisers to work with schools, local communities, young people and their families to help young people (13-19yrs) moving from school to work. · Pilot Integrated Community Support – To pilot 18 programs testing ways to achieve successful integrated community support, including through government agencies, for young people in transition. The Government stated in the Budget papers that it was planning to further consult before announcing a comprehensive package to respond to the report’s 24 recommendations in the next budget . During 2001-02, the Government will consult with stakeholders regarding the report of the Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce, Footprints to the Future, on how to best advise and support young people in their transition thro school, and from school into further education, employment and independence. (Budget Paper No.1 p 1-16 2001) Given the comprehensive consultation conducted with various stakeholder groups during the formation of the taskforce’s report it appears that the government has simply chosen not to act. Questions on notice from Senate Estimates hearings on 22 February 2001 in relation to the Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce report revealed: QUESTION: In the terms of reference for the Taskforce it states that they were meant to report in March 2000. Could you please a justification for this delay? ANSWER:
The Taskforce was established in late September 1999, with an expected reporting
date of March 2000, in response to a key recommendation of the Youth Homeless
Taskforce. A visionless Government The 2001-02 Budget wasn’t about Australia’s future. It is a Budget framed by the politics of panic, not the politics of conviction. The Government has been forced to use up the surpluses to cover up the growing hurt of its GST. The Government’s recent backflips and $20 Billion dollar spending spree, of which 90% of it occurred in the last six months, all reflect the government’s desperation to shore up support from the traditional supporters it has put under siege. Perhaps more than any other group, young people look for leadership qualities that inspire confidence and optimism for the future. They look for a political party that has vision and the potential to give it form through effective policies and sound governance. This Budget did nothing to inspire young Australians and only served to reinforce the common belief that young people do not matter in the eyes of this government. The Howard Government’s way has seen many more young people become disengaged from society, while Labor not only has a vision but has its priorities right. Labor’s leader rejects Howard’s style of leadership that is taking the art of political manipulation to new heights. More than ever vision and substance are the point of distinction for Labor. In Kim Beazley we have a leader of integrity, substance and vision. Labor’s Agenda for Government
As Kim Beazley said last week in his budget reply, Labor will get better value for the Australian people out of government spending. We can reorder spending - from Coalition priorities to Labor priorities. Labor is committed to ensuring that all Australians share in the nation’s benefits. Whether this means making the GST fairer and simpler by removing the tax from women’s sanitary products - or improving services like Australia Post and Telstra. Labor will ensure that all Australians enjoy a better standard of living including Australia’s young people who represent the future of our nation. KIM
BEAZLEY’S BUDGET REPLY SPEECH 2001- Extract We in the Labor Party are going to give people a real choice - a choice between a Labor Government that wants to help people, that is on the side of Australian families, and an increasingly out of touch Government only interested in trying to buy its way back into office. We will return to Australian values - decent standards in public hospitals, looking after our elderly in their need, making sure every Australian child gets a good education, and maintaining living standards in the country as well as the cities. And most importantly we will look at ways to ensure a good future for our children in the Knowledge Nation. There is no reason why this country cannot be a place that invents and produces the best products in the world. Yet there is nothing in this Budget to help Australia build a strong future, to give our talented young people the best education and training so they will want to stay here and develop ideas to make this country prosper. Instead, this Budget confirms what Australians have long known: whatever John Howard gives people; he will take away -- with the GST -- in the blink of an eye. That’s the missing part of the Treasurer’s speech of 2001 - a commitment to justice and fairness for all - for struggling Australian families not just the people this Government needs to get itself re-elected. At the next election -- only months away at most -- the people of this country will be faced with a very stark choice. They will have on offer a stale, five year old Government that has stopped listening, and run out of ideas. A Government whose only vision for Australia was to introduce a new tax, the botched, unfair, and badly administered GST. The Labor Party has a stronger vision. We look to a future of greater prosperity for all Australians -- those who live in the cities, and those who choose the quieter roads; We want to create a future where the protection of our beautiful environment is an integral part of our growth and development as a nation; We want a future in which our people’s health care is provided by virtue of citizenship, not wealth; We will work for a future in which quality education is there for all, not just the privileged; We will work to make Australia one of the world’s leading Knowledge Nations, harnessing the new age of communications for the benefit of all our people; These things will put bread and butter onto our tables and ensure our people survive and prosper. But we need food for the soul as well. We need to be a unified nation, reconciled with the country’s first inhabitants. And we need to bring home our Constitution, and make an Australian our Head of State. These reflect the values Australians have discovered in themselves as they built this great nation over the past 100 years.
|
|
|
