I'm from the generation which still sends thank you notes, although in the last few years it's more likely to be an email or a text. I've tried to call but no one under 40 ever picks up their bloody phones.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
So let me do that straight up: a thank you to the eight Labor members of Parliament who signed an open letter, wrangled by the Australian Council of Social Services, calling on the federal government to raise the rate of JobSeeker, Youth Allowance and other income support payments. Yes, many of us signed that letter. Me, maybe you. But our signatures didn't put in jeopardy our futures with a party that likes folks to toe the line. So thank you, Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Victoria), newbie Mary Doyle (Aston, Victoria), Carina Garland (Chisholm, Victoria), Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, South Australia), Peter Khalil (Wills, Victoria), Louise Miller-Frost (Boothby, South Australia), Alicia Payne (Canberra, ACT) and Kate Thwaites (Jagajaga, Victoria). Looks like no one north of Belconnen gives a rats.
That took guts and we appreciate it.
As it is, it was only a minute ago, as I revealed, the government was flying kites. Wasn't planning to raise the rate at all. Was only planning to give any increase to those over 55. We weren't fooled, were we, dear readers? A Labor government can't possibly leave people in poverty, can it?
So, firstly, happy to see the increase. Now before you go all "Albo is a traitor" and "this was weak as piss", let me say this. I have three children and survived their threenager and their subsequent teenager years. The only way to change terrible behaviour is to reward good behaviour. And that's pretty much what we need to do now. Well done, Albo. Well done, Jimbo. Not let's see you do it again, much sooner than the next budget.
As you will know (because not possible to avoid budget coverage), the rate of JobSeeker was raised by $40 a fortnight. This is not much. I have had a brief look at the prices in the cheaper supermarket in Jim Chalmers' seat of Rankin. I'll let you use your imagination but it rhymes with, nah, nothing rhymes with it. With the increase you could buy a kilo of mandarins and of apples, a couple of litres of milk, some eggs, maybe some meat, cheese, some Shapes for the kids. Sounds great - but my guess is that mostly this $40 will go towards overdue rent and overdue bills, not to fill empty tummies.
READ MORE:
Because here's one of the big problems for those on JobSeeker. Most don't get rent assistance, says Charmaine Crowe, ACOSS's program director for social security. That's because they might not appear on the rental agreement. They might be couch-surfing. They might be living with family and friends - and still need to contribute. Some are homeless. And those in public housing don't get rental assistance. In good news, the over-55s get a more substantial increase if, bad news, they have been on JobSeeker more than nine months. God, I loved Jacqui Lambie on Radio National Thursday morning who said we needed to recognise some people will never be employed. So few people speak that kind of common sense. Instead they come out with the "get a job" gibberish.
We have a substantial number of people in this country who need more help - and while I'm not usually a softly, softly kind of woman, I feel like hectoring Albo and Jimbo won't bring them along. Mind you, even I, nearly unembarrassable, was somewhat embarrassed when Chalmers was on Wednesday asked during his National Press Club address why the government wasn't doing more to make the comfortable even more comfortable.
"So why do people on the dole get more money out of this budget but not a household of more than a 160k a year who, for example, don't get the electricity bill relief? What do you say to those working full-time about why those on the dole get relief but they don't? And if the answer is stage 3 tax cuts next year, why were you seemingly too ashamed of them to mention them in the budget."
Where is my eyeroll when I need it? As Chalmers replied, to rousing applause, social security prioritises the most vulnerable. "I mean, that is the whole basis of social security."
D'oh. Surely even Angus Taylor could get that. Surely. When he does, we can all say: "Well done, Angus."
Anyhow, nowhere in the budget speech did we hear anything about those ridiculous stage 3 tax cuts. Maybe Chalmers was too ashamed to mention them? Apparently, he said, he didn't need to give them a shoutout because they were already legislated. But I have another idea. I reckon they might be up for a bit of renovation.
READ MORE JENNA PRICE OPINION COLUMNS:
Danielle Wood, chief executive of the Grattan Institute and the good fairy of economics, made what some considered to be a throwaway line about a trim to the tax cuts but, just as I bet on the government raising the rate, I now bet on those changes. Just FYI, the stage 3 tax cuts are not all about providing caviar cash for the wealthy. She proposes leaving in the 37 per cent tax bracket for those earning between $120,000 and $200,000.
So, this budget gets a credit, say, 65 out of 100. It did the right thing for single parents, did the right thing in its initial renovations of Medicare. Good work on supporting people who want to solarise their homes.
Terrible work on the surplus. I get that it's a giant "up you" to the Coalition and I get how tempting that is. But I'll tell you who would like - and who need - a fecking surplus. That's the thousands and thousands of Australians on JobSeeker.
- Jenna Price is a regular columnist and a visiting fellow at the Australian National University.
Jenna Price is a Canberra Times columnist and a visiting fellow at the Australian National University.
Jenna Price is a Canberra Times columnist and a visiting fellow at the Australian National University.
