Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

This is Anti-Poverty Week, when we pay attention to issues of poverty in this country. The aims of Anti-Poverty Week this year are to strengthen public understanding of the causes and consequences of poverty and hardship around the world and in Australia and to encourage research, discussion and action to address these problems, including action by individuals, communities, organisations and government.

A lot of what I'm going to talk about tonight is the actions that the government needs to be taking to address poverty. I think there are a number of community organisations doing some really essential work, and I will be talking about the outcomes of some of that work during my talk as well.

As far as we in the Greens are concerned, far too many people in this country battle daily with poverty and the impacts of poverty and inequality. Living in poverty has significant negative effects on people's physical and mental wellbeing, on societal cohesion and stability and on economic growth and productivity, to the point where we have seen industry and business talking about its impacts and the need to address the issues around poverty.

Currently, there are 2,990,300 people—that's 13 per cent of our population—living below the poverty line. That's after taking account of their housing costs. Of those, 731,000 are children under the age of 15. In fact, 17.4 per cent of all children are living below the poverty line. People who rely on social security as their main source of income are particularly vulnerable to living in poverty and hardship, with 57.3 per cent of people on income support living below the poverty line.

And there are some particularly vulnerable groups in that cohort of people. Fifty-five per cent of people receiving Newstart allowance are living in poverty, 51.5 per cent of people receiving parenting payment are living in poverty, 36.2 per cent of those receiving disability support pension are living in poverty, 29.3 per cent of people receiving carer payment are living in poverty and 13.9 per cent of those living on the age pension are living in poverty. These are not just statistics; these are real people living in poverty.

On Sunday the Australian Council of Social Service released a report titled A future for all children: addressing child poverty in Australia. Remember that 17.4 per cent of all children are living in poverty. It found that Australia's child poverty trend is heading in the wrong direction. It is absolutely essential that we address this issue and change it. Poverty has a devastating impact on children and their wellbeing. The report found that children and young people deprived of food, clothes and other materials have reduced engagement with school, sometimes due to hunger, shame or being excluded or marginalised. It impacts children's development, education and eventually employment opportunities.

The Salvation Army 2017 report on children in families from a little bit earlier this year included a total of 1,495 children across 638 households and found that more than half experienced severe deprivation and went without five or more essential day-to-day items. The top 10 items that respondents to this survey could not afford for their children related to connectedness, education, social participation and basic nutrition. For households with children aged 17 or younger, nearly two in five could not afford fresh fruit or vegetables every day and nearly one in four could not afford three meals a day. Approximately one in five could not afford medical treatment or medicine prescribed by the doctor. Nearly one in three could not afford a yearly dental check-up for the child. Half could not afford to update school items, and 56 per cent did not have money to participate in school activities. More than half—55 per cent—could not afford a hobby or other activities for the child. Almost three in five respondents could not afford an internet connection for their child.

We must address child poverty as a priority. The ACOSS report finds the federal government could reduce child poverty by committing to reduce poverty by at least 50 per cent by 2030 in line with the Sustainable Development Goals. I was so pleased this afternoon when the Senate passed the motion calling on the government to commit to reducing poverty by at least 50 per cent by 2030. ACOSS also talks about increasing the Newstart allowance, including for single parents—and I'll come back to that issue—establishing a single-parent supplement that increases as children grow older and they cost more to support; indexing the working-age and family payments to wage movements as well as prices; improving employment and training programs for single parents, including career counselling and vocational training; guaranteeing secure, affordable housing, including working with state and territory governments to abolish no-cause evictions; and restoring two days of weekly subsidised child care to make sure it's available to parents not in paid employment. These are excellent ways to start addressing issues around poverty and child poverty in particular.

I just want to focus on single-parent households for a minute or two because these households are particularly vulnerable and have faced perverse tightening of their income support over the last five years. The latest research from the Social Policy Research Centre at the University of New South Wales found that single parents receiving Newstart allowance are unable to afford a minimum healthy standard of living. At $544 per week, that includes Newstart, the family tax benefit and rent assistance. The social security payments fall short of a minimum budget by $132 per week.

Absurdly, social security payments for single parents fall as their children grow older and become more expensive. Anybody who has brought up teenagers knows how expensive they are. The ACOSS report found that when their youngest child turns five, family tax benefits drop by $23 per week. When their youngest child turns eight, the parent is moved from the parenting payment onto the lower Newstart allowance, cutting the family's income by another $85 a week—an issue some people might think that I have spoken about ad nauseam in this chamber.

In 2016, the unemployment rate amongst single parents was 14 per cent, more than twice the national unemployment rate of six per cent. This reflects the challenges faced by single parents to find child care, retrain and find a job that is family friendly.

The social safety net is failing to address poverty. Not long ago I also outlined how far behind the Newstart payment is in terms of allowing people to get out of poverty. I remind the chamber that the University of New South Wales recently released their report, Budget Standards: A new healthy living minimum income standard for low-paid and unemployed Australians. This report outlined just how far Newstart is falling behind the norms. The report found for those out of work and reliant on Newstart allowance, the safety net provisions fall short of budget standards estimates by $96 a week for a single person, $58 a week for a couple with one child, and $126 a week for a couple with two children.

Newstart and youth allowance are particularly woefully inadequate. It is absolutely time that the Newstart and youth allowance rates were increased. Otherwise, we are going to be condemning families to live in poverty and fall further and further behind. I urge the government to commit to at least halving poverty by 2030 and to increase the Newstart allowance.