What’s happening with the McClure welfare review?

Parliament house flag post
Australian cash and coins

What’s happening with the McClure welfare review?

Posted 19/03/2014 by Luke Buckmaster

The Government is conducting a review into welfare payments, headed by former Mission Australia CEO, Patrick McClure. This post briefly outlines what is currently known about the McClure review, including its objectives, processes and possible outcomes.

Late in 2013, it was reported that McClure had been asked to provide recommendations on streamlining and improving Australia’s system of welfare payments. While initially it was thought that the review would examine the entire system, the Government clarified that it would only be looking into working age payments such as Newstart Allowance (NSA) and the Disability Support Pension (DSP). Payments such as Age Pension and the various forms of family assistance will not be examined.

Previous McClure review

In 1999, McClure was asked to chair a welfare review for the Howard Government, resulting in the Green Paper, Participation support for a more equitable society. This proposed the transformation of the welfare system into a ‘participation support system’ based around themes such as mutual obligation, simplification and partnerships between government, business and recipients. The purpose would be to better match income support goals (social protection, equity) with social and economic participation goals. A key proposal was for working age payments to be rolled into a single payment, with the possibility of add-ons to assist those with particular needs. Ultimately, the Howard Government did not adopt this recommendation, instead focusing on promoting mutual obligations within the existing payment framework (for example, the 2005 Welfare to Work package).

The process for the earlier McClure review was substantially more open than the current one, which the Government has described as ‘predominately an internal review’. The earlier McClure review had a dedicated ‘Welfare Reform’ website that contained a Government Discussion paper, public submissions, media releases, Terms of Reference, the membership of the Welfare Reform Reference Group and related background papers. The Government advertised for public submissions and received 366 from a variety of sources including individuals, community groups, peak bodies and government agencies. An interim report was made available for public comment in early 2000, followed by the final Green Paper in August 2000.

Current McClure review

In contrast, the current review has no website, no formal terms of reference and no process for receiving public submissions. The Government has not given an indication of whether and in what form the findings of the review will be released to the public.

Most of what is known about the current McClure review is on the basis of responses to questions at the recent Additional Budget Estimates hearings. According to information tabled by the Department of Social Services (DSS), the ‘overarching theme for theme of the Review … is maximising participation for wellbeing and better life outcomes, with the ultimate goal of the welfare system being to support people to participate to the extent they are capable’.

The focus on participation is similar to the previous review. Similarly, the ‘Guiding principles’ and ‘Pillars of reform’ appear to have much in common with the themes of the earlier McClure review.

Guiding principles of the welfare system

Pillars of reform

Provides incentives to work for those who are able to work

Building individual and family capacity

Adequately supports those who are genuinely not able to work

Engaging with business

Supports social and economic participation through measures that build individual and family capacity

 

Building community capacity

Is affordable and sustainable both now and in the future across economic cycles

 

A simpler and sustainable income support system

Is easy to access and understand, and able to be delivered efficiently and effectively

 

 

No call for broader community input has been made. By 27 February 2014, there had been 30 consultations with various stakeholders. Participation has largely been on the basis of invitation, although according to DSS Secretary, Finn Pratt, ‘people have expressed interest in being consulted and have got into the process that way’.

According to Mr Pratt, while there is no formal reporting date, there is likely to be an interim report in the first half of the year and a final report ‘midyear or a bit after midyear’. DSS has budgeted $1.7 million for the review. In addition to McClure, the review team comprises Wesley Aird, Sally Sinclair and a team of 14 departmental officers.

The Minister, Kevin Andrews, has provided some hints in media reports as to what may be proposed by the review. For example, he has asked McClure to examine options for ‘diverting’ people with mental health conditions from receiving DSP into some more temporary income support arrangement. He has made a similar suggestion in relation to young people deemed to have a partial capacity to work.

The Minister has also said that in the longer term, the Government would look to reform the gap between the rate of payment for NSA and DSP, including considering McClure’s earlier proposal for a single working age payment.

 

Comments

  • 29/06/2014 4:31 PM
    Patricia Simmons said:

    As a Social Worker, who works each day with welfare recipients, the majority of whom are suffering drug and alcohol addiction (and associated mental health disorders / behaviors), I believe that there needs to be incentive for them to get off drugs, stop drinking alcohol given they are unable to control their use and start to live a meaningful life contributing to the society they live in. DSP payments for this group should be provided short term, whilst the recipient is in a live in drug and alcohol program that last 6 weeks, and then the payment should revert to Newstart. There should be some expectation that the recipient does what is necessary to recover from their addiction given they have recognized it sufficiently to obtain DSP. Often this group is labeled by the Professionals as 'suffering a mental health disorder' which in fact their behaviors are all related to their drug and alcohol misuse and these behaviors would evaporate if they resolved their drug and alcohol misuse. 'Harm Minimization' as a policy needs to be overhauled as someone addicted to alcohol, cannot reduce their use, the nature of addiction is that the user has lost control.

  • 9/07/2014 3:54 PM
    Beth said:

    It would be great to start the review with the "community" pillar. Disadvantage and marginalisation impact on everyone - not just individuals accessing welfare benefits. An emphasis on building the capacity of community leaders to support participation and engagement of all members is highly necessary in a revised welfare system. Creating opportunities for those most disadvantaged to have a voice, and be a part of their own solutions is extremely important for reviewing, designing and planning a new way forward. For example, greater consultation beyond a website feedback mechanism is necessary to engage people who are homeless, people experiencing drug and alcohol problems, people who speak languages other than English etc. Placing the emphasis on the community ensures responsibility is distributed more evenly across the community. For example, it is no longer the person with a disability taking from a welfare system, but a community coming together to identify attitudes, physical access barriers, rehabilitation/assistive devices that are needed to ensure everyone is included and supported to be fully participating members of their community. Focusing on the individual as the centre of change will ensure the welfare system continues in much the same way it has always done. We need to recognise that the majority of people receiving welfare support do not want it to be that way, and with greater understanding and responsibility placed on communities to change (as opposed to the individual that needs to change) will enable long-term sustainable and resilient communities.

  • 25/02/2015 8:12 AM
    Amanda said:

    By all means, review the welfare system......but give us jobs to go to! I have been desperately trying to find a job, with some degree of longevity, and have been temping, and on welfare payments during that time. It is EXTREMELY hard to jump from job to job, and to be applying and applying for work. This hasn't just been a short term scenario. I basically haven't had permanent employment for over 18 months. (I was made redundant at my previous work, due to their last in, first out policy). I am over 50 and this is a stressful situation. It needs to be understood that with temping, there is an expectation to learn a job in a very short period of time, and that that job may only mean employment for a day/week/month etc. I would love some support from the Govt during this process ie job creation


Thank you for your comment. If it does not require moderation, it will appear shortly.
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Add | Email Print

FlagPost

Flagpost is a blog on current issues of interest to members of the Australian Parliament


Parliamentary Library Logo showing Information Analysis & Advice

Archive

Syndication

Tagcloud

refugees asylum immigration Parliament climate change elections social security health financing Australian Defence Force women taxation welfare policy Australian foreign policy welfare reform sport Medicare employment illicit drugs gambling higher education disability Middle East Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency World Anti-Doping Agency Australian Bureau of Statistics health reform emissions trading industrial relations united states statistics private health insurance Carbon Pricing Mechanism United Nations school education indigenous Australians aid steroids WADA federal budget politics labour force Australian Federal Police transport detention criminal law ASADA Afghanistan governance poker machines income management people trafficking Fair Work Act 43rd Parliament Australian Public Service International Women's Day Australian Crime Commission Papua New Guinea parliamentary procedure National Disability Insurance Scheme children's health food OECD debt defence capability federal election 2013 Australian Electoral Commission aged care environment election results Senate pensions law enforcement UK Parliament pharmaceutical benefits scheme planning skilled migration multiculturalism people smuggling doping child protection HECS Higher Education Loan Program paid parental leave High Court international relations corruption federal state relations Asia Australia in the Asian Century dental health New Zealand ALP political parties constitution public service reform forced labour aviation coal seam gas crime customs social media ADRV Census Newstart Parenting Payment health employee employer Federal Court foreign debt gross debt net debt European Union domestic violence Constitutional reform food labelling carbon tax banking terrorist groups United Kingdom leadership public policy terrorism welfare Australian Security Intelligence Organisation intelligence community Drugs research and development voting mental health health system human rights Northern Territory Emergency Response science Electoral reform regional unemployment productivity accountability military history Indigenous Indonesia Pacific Islands speaker superannuation middle class welfare welfare systems question time animal health Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry trade unions integrity same sex relationships foreign bribery Australian Secret Intelligence Service firearms export liquefied natural gas local government referendum children Australian economy mining forestry Tasmania financial sector Canada United Nations Security Council climate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change expertise Senators and Members family assistance by-election US economy housing affordability ASIO new psychoactive substances synthetic drugs UNODC reserved seats regulation Parliamentary remuneration Population Hung Parliament federal budget 2011-12 paternalism public health slavery Trafficking in Persons Report homelessness school chaplains ministries water federal election 2010 Medicare Locals primary care regional students Youth Allowance entitlements salary sea farers violence against women Special Rapporteur transparency money laundering early childhood education asylum seekers national security bulk billing China disability employment World Trade Organization Australia renewable energy language education Italy roads international students skilled graduate visas temporary employment visas apologies standard of proof arts health risks World Health Organisation disciplinary tribunals railways infant mortality honorary citizen suspension of standing and sessional orders live exports contracts workplace policies peace keeping disorderly conduct same-sex marriage Parliament House retirement Rent Assistance constitutional recognition of local government anti-dumping national heritage NHMRC nutrition GDP world heritage submarines Somalia defence budget First speech election timetable sitting days prime ministers standing orders public housing cancer gene patents genetic testing carbon markets universities Ireland public interest disclosure whistleblowing Productivity Commission vocational education and training limitation period Trade; tariffs; safeguards; Anti-dumping leave loading political engagement Korean peninsula counselling pests suicide social policy alcohol computer games plebiscites therapeutic goods Therapeutic Goods Administration federalism federation preselection Iran sanctions baby bonus early childhood National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care Murray-Darling Basin citizen engagement policymaking biosecurity hendra environmental law COAG Ministerial Councils nuclear Work Choices republic hospitals qantas ANZUS Norway President Barack Obama Presidential visits advertising electricity energy maritime floods ADHD stimulant medication 44th Parliament 2015 e-voting internet voting nsw state elections Indigenous health procurement citizenship Defence ACT Norfolk Island External Territories High Court; Indigenous; Indigenous Australians; Native Title Indigenous education ABS Trade Age Pension Death penalty capital punishment execution Bali nine Bali bombings emissions reduction fund; climate change child care funding refugees immigration asylum ACT Assembly Criminal Code Amendment (Misrepresentation of Age to a Minor) Bill 2013 sexual abuse online grooming sexual assault of minors social services EU fishing asylum refugees immigration political finance donations Antarctica Diplomacy Disability Support Pension by-elections state and territories China soft power education Fiji India fuel Scottish referendum Members of Parliament Middle East; national security; terrorism Racial Discrimination Act; social policy; human rights; indigenous Australians Migration; asylum seekers; regional processing China; United States; international relations fiscal policy innovation Bills NATO workers anti-corruption fraud bribery corporate ownership whistleblower G20 economic reform standards copyright Australian Law Reform Commission industry Governor-General Animal law; food health policy employment law bullying Economics efficiency foreign aid human rights; Racial Discrimination Act smoking plain packaging tobacco cigarettes Work Health and Safety Asia; Japan; international relations youth Foreign policy Southeast Asia Israel Palestine political financing US politics Australia Greens Horn of Africa peacekeeping piracy Great Barrier Reef solar hot water Financial Action Taskforce terrorist financing Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling Stronger futures rural and regional political parties preselection presidential nomination Racial Discrimination Act Australian Greens

Show all
Show less
Back to top