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

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

The Department of Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business' report for 2018-19 does the usual thing of extolling the virtues of how fantastic things are in that department, which is at great odds with what is actually happening out there on the ground, particularly when it comes to the way that jobseekers are supported and supported to meet their mutual obligations.

This week, the Australian Unemployed Workers' Union released a new report that demonstrates that Australia's mutual obligation system is broken and is hurting people. Their survey had just over a thousand respondents to date, and I think they are still gathering information. But they have reported that those who participated in the survey included people using jobactive, people using disability support services, people on Work for the Dole and ParentsNext participants. The survey actually contains more data from jobseekers than the government's own expert panel report on these services. The results of the survey show how current mutual obligation requirements are punitive and that the majority of jobseekers are not getting benefit from the current employment services. Respondents indicated a high level of dissatisfaction at the kinds of activities that were put in the job plans. The results show that respondents do not feel their provider appointments are useful for getting a job and how the majority of people do not have a good relationship with their provider. The majority of respondents do not believe that their provider was funding items that would have been useful for them to achieve their employment goals. The majority of respondents said that the employment services do not help with job searches and that job search requirements are unreasonable for the majority of jobseekers. Further, jobseekers reported that they believe they are receiving payment suspensions in error and that the targeted compliance framework is not flexible or fair. The survey highlighted the consequences for jobseekers whose payments are cancelled. Seventy-five respondents indicated that payment cancellations had led to the most extreme consequence—that is, homelessness.

The Australian Workers Union are calling on the government to undertake an urgent review of the mutual obligation requirements. The survey shows that the jobactive system is very clearly broken and that it's not fit for purpose. The government is currently evaluating the jobactive model to assess the extent to which the stated objectives are being met, and I seriously hope that the government's process includes the voices of those who have lived experience. Every day of every week that they are on income support and using jobactive's system, they feel like the system is failing them.

Today I met with the most amazing group of campaigners and people with lived experience, from the Raise the Rate campaign. They presented findings from another survey that has been undertaken by National Union of Students young campaigners and the Australian Council of Social Services. This highlights young people's experiences living on allowances, particularly youth allowance and Newstart. That survey shows overwhelmingly how the low rates of youth allowance and Newstart are putting young people behind and jeopardising educational opportunities. That survey included a total of 862 participants within the age range of 16 to 30 who are receiving some sort of income support payment. The outcomes are quite shocking: 62 per cent had less than $100 per week left after paying rent. Just over half of the participants have had to couch surf or use other forms of unstable accommodation, 89.9 per cent of participants said they had to skip at least one meal a week and 92 per cent of participants said the low rate of payments made them feel isolated.

As we can see, the system of mutual obligations is failing and the payments are too low. We need to change the system, and we need to raise the rate. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.