Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Love or livelihood: a cruel dilemma for those of us with extreme disabilities

By David Heckendorf - posted Tuesday, 6 May 2014


All of these considerations result in the wheelchair user being required to pay higher than average rent.

Alternatively, if the wheelchair users are public housing tenants, the state government charges twenty-five per cent of both their incomes: hence, they do not enjoy any economy of scale in relation to rent.

Argument Two: The individual's financial welfare is his/her own concern

Australia has an income support system that is designed to be a safety net for people unable to support themselves without calling on the resources of the community. The income and assets tests are used to target the system so that it remains sustainable and affordable for Australian taxpayers. (Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs)

Advertisement

Further, the Australian Treasury states that the primary purpose of Australia's transfer, or social security, system is to provide individuals with a 'minimum adequate standard of living': (2010: 485).

While the intention behind the Treasury's words may accord with the Disability Convention (Article 28), in a media release on 22 March 2013 the ACOSS reported that approximately 620,000 people with disabilities live in poverty. Price Waterhouse Coopers in their 2011 publication estimates that approximately 45% of people with a disability in Australia live in or near poverty: more than double the OECD average of 22%.

The Australian Government's own reports (see Table 19) show that 91.7% of Disability Support Pensioners earn no income (i.e. less than 9% earns any money) and less than 1% earn over $1,000 per fortnight.

Argument Three: Income support is a privilege which must be balanced with responsibilities

This understanding of social welfare was made popular in the 1980s' and 1990s by right-wing governments in the United Kingdom and the United States. The Howard Government's welfare reforms also saw increased social obligations expected from welfare recipients.

Esteemed writers, such as Aristotle (a government should govern for all its citizens) and John Locke (members join self governing communities to benefit from the membership), have provided our politic system's foundation and have included notions of human rights.

More importantly, however, in 2008 Australia ratified the United Nations Disability Convention. In doing so, it acknowledged that the welfare of people with disabilities is a community concern.

Advertisement

Article 28 of the Convention requires Australia to recognise the right of persons with disabilities to an adequate standard of living not only for us but also for our families.

Argument Four: Income support is not a personal asset

Few Disability Support Pensioners would be able to articulate how the thresholds work or which precise level of earned income is the optimum return of investment of their time, energy and work-related expenses. Most, however, would have a sense that there is a diminishing return.

My own experience is a testament. In the 1980s when I was 'employed' in a large Sydney sheltered workshop and earning five dollars a week, we often heard it said that if we were paid more, it would reduce our invalid pensions. I would suspect similar half-truths would continue today.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

14 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

David Heckendorf has profound Cerebral Palsy, which affects his physical ability to care for himself. Notwithstanding these limitations he holds a Masters of Laws Degree from the Australian National University and has in excess of a decade employment experience within the Australian and ACT Public Service. The opinions he expresses are his own.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by David Heckendorf

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 14 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy