Parenting Payments Single
Feb. 7th, 2013 12:21 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
emma_in_dreamAt the beginning of this year the rules changed so that single parents (let’s face it, mothers) move from Parenting Payments to New Start when their youngest child is eight. The ostensible reason is to motivate these women to find work.(1) The result is a massive reduction in income, from a maximum of $663 fortnightly to a maximum of $533 fortnightly, a policy which seems to kick those who are already down.(2)
I have a whole heap of reservations about this policy,(3) but if I take their goal as it is written I can still think of much better ways to implement it. I wonder what a policy aimed at the same end – getting single parents into paid work – which used incentives rather than punishments might look like?
Here are some options.
Option One
What if there were some incentive for employers to hire women coming off Parenting Payment Single? Like an ex gratia payment equivalent to the amount the Government saves in this move. Since the Government is paying out $130 less each fortnight for each woman, that’s $3,380 per year, a nice little bonus for a small business. (Realistically, of course, it a tithe would come out for administration, but still, $3,000 is not to be sneezed at).
This would be using the carrot instead of the stick. It would make the women more desirable as employees, thereby achieving the stated goal of increasing employment and ‘independence’ for women formerly on parenting payments.
Option Two
A large part of the problem with single parents seeking work is that the working day and the school day are not the same. So, maybe the Government could increase employment among single mothers if there was a bonus for employers offering jobs that ran 9:30 til 2:00, since these are effectively the hours that women can work without using child care which takes away the monetary reward for paid work. Again, the Government has that $3,380 per year which it has taken out of the purses of single mothers. So maybe this is something it could be spent on?
Option Three
Of course, the options above offer the incentive to the employer, leaving the women themselves still down financially. So what about offering the women a hiring bonus of $3,380? If you’ve been living on parenting payments for a long time, this is a huge amount of money, a massive incentive. Also, frankly, it seems a lot more fair since the Government has just taken this amount off the women. At least under this model they would get a chance of winning it back.
See, three options right off the top of my head, none of which cost more than the Government was spending in 2012 on Parenting Payments Single anyway.
I welcome discussion on this.
(1) ‘The program is designed to encourage people to take up more work.’ Kim Carr, interview with the ABC, 15 November 2012
(2) Various sums have been given in the media, but I base this on the Centrelink website.
(3) Some of the issues I have with this move – I loathe the assumption that parenting somehow magically stops when the kid turns eight. It is hypocritical that this policy forces single women into paid work when married women who stay at home are celebrated as self-sacrificing madonnas. It was announced with very little lead in time and has been chaotically managed, with single mothers being told to destroy their Pensioner Cards and then told that it was a whoops!mistake. It is a blatant attempt to save money. It is a blatant attempt to curry favour with the electorate by demonising single mothers (a classic of the Howard playbook, now enthusiastically taken on by Labor). It is just plain mean to kick people who actually are the battlers that the whole electorate claims to be. The entire conversation is framed as though the only ones who have an income reduction are the deadbeat mothers when in fact the children are going to suffer. I just plain hate this policy.
Disclaimer, this policy may possibly affect me if my circumstances change in the future. Though even as I write this I am aware that this is the case for the vast majority of people. Ie. Anyone who has or may have kids may at some point need Government support.
I have a whole heap of reservations about this policy,(3) but if I take their goal as it is written I can still think of much better ways to implement it. I wonder what a policy aimed at the same end – getting single parents into paid work – which used incentives rather than punishments might look like?
Here are some options.
Option One
What if there were some incentive for employers to hire women coming off Parenting Payment Single? Like an ex gratia payment equivalent to the amount the Government saves in this move. Since the Government is paying out $130 less each fortnight for each woman, that’s $3,380 per year, a nice little bonus for a small business. (Realistically, of course, it a tithe would come out for administration, but still, $3,000 is not to be sneezed at).
This would be using the carrot instead of the stick. It would make the women more desirable as employees, thereby achieving the stated goal of increasing employment and ‘independence’ for women formerly on parenting payments.
Option Two
A large part of the problem with single parents seeking work is that the working day and the school day are not the same. So, maybe the Government could increase employment among single mothers if there was a bonus for employers offering jobs that ran 9:30 til 2:00, since these are effectively the hours that women can work without using child care which takes away the monetary reward for paid work. Again, the Government has that $3,380 per year which it has taken out of the purses of single mothers. So maybe this is something it could be spent on?
Option Three
Of course, the options above offer the incentive to the employer, leaving the women themselves still down financially. So what about offering the women a hiring bonus of $3,380? If you’ve been living on parenting payments for a long time, this is a huge amount of money, a massive incentive. Also, frankly, it seems a lot more fair since the Government has just taken this amount off the women. At least under this model they would get a chance of winning it back.
See, three options right off the top of my head, none of which cost more than the Government was spending in 2012 on Parenting Payments Single anyway.
I welcome discussion on this.
(1) ‘The program is designed to encourage people to take up more work.’ Kim Carr, interview with the ABC, 15 November 2012
(2) Various sums have been given in the media, but I base this on the Centrelink website.
(3) Some of the issues I have with this move – I loathe the assumption that parenting somehow magically stops when the kid turns eight. It is hypocritical that this policy forces single women into paid work when married women who stay at home are celebrated as self-sacrificing madonnas. It was announced with very little lead in time and has been chaotically managed, with single mothers being told to destroy their Pensioner Cards and then told that it was a whoops!mistake. It is a blatant attempt to save money. It is a blatant attempt to curry favour with the electorate by demonising single mothers (a classic of the Howard playbook, now enthusiastically taken on by Labor). It is just plain mean to kick people who actually are the battlers that the whole electorate claims to be. The entire conversation is framed as though the only ones who have an income reduction are the deadbeat mothers when in fact the children are going to suffer. I just plain hate this policy.
Disclaimer, this policy may possibly affect me if my circumstances change in the future. Though even as I write this I am aware that this is the case for the vast majority of people. Ie. Anyone who has or may have kids may at some point need Government support.
