Comments on: No fairy floss, no show, for NT kids under income management

By: Chrissie

Chrissie — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:23:00 +0000

What most people seem to leave out of this issue is the fact that these people are on welfare payments. This means that for whatever reason, they are not gainfully employed. What about the rest of Australian families who are also welfare recipients. If the ‘show’ is not in their budget, they don’t get to go either! I spent many years raising my 6 children on a low to moderate income and there was never even any consideration that we would slope off to spend our meagre income on the trivialities of the annual show! Fairy floss & exhorbitant show rides were not considered as important as school fees, decent lunches and bills! Please put the issue of income management into perspective. Many of these recipients have access to CDEP alternative or other income through employment, none of which are income managed! I do however agree with a review to the IM in regard to people who do not have the responsibility of children or who can show they are not in need of IM due to past handling of their welfare payments. It’s not a matter of being mean-spirited, it is simply about budgeting no matter whether you are on welfare or not!
Many indigenous welfare recipients find it difficult at the best of times to make ends meet, why would they even want to make it more difficult by spending their money on ridiculous things such as show bags, which by the way are never reasonably priced!

By: Bob Durnan

Bob Durnan — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:24:36 +0000

no worries Chris … I see no problem with this at all … particularly if it helps you and other Crikeyistas to evaluate IM on its merits rather than through the prism of dogma, habitual cynicism, self righteous condescension and arrogant superiority … I have quite a few friends and acquaintances on IM, and the longer they are on it, the more keen they seem to be about it, for a variety of reasons.
yours sincerely
mean old Bob, the Conservative Putz

By: Chris Graham

Chris Graham — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:22:47 +0000

I’ve got a better idea Bob. Why don’t you sign up for a few months of IM… you mean-spirited, conservative putz.

By: Bob Durnan

Bob Durnan — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:46:24 +0000

Sophie says ‘But George told Crikey that “… not many people know about going to get the cheque, they haven’t got the message about it, there’s been no promotion.”’

It is surprising that George is not aware that everybody on IM already knows about this procedure, because this is the normal procedure they have been following for at least 15 months since the IM roll-out was introduced to all communities.

Unless you are using your Basic Card credit at your approved stores, then you have to ask the Centrelink worker to arrange a cheque. Maybe George is not on IM, & doesn’t understand the detail of how it works. Either that, or he’s not thinking straight.

Most people don’t have to go to the big Centrelink offices in the towns to do this, as there are now Centrelink workers in all the communities, and other special Centrelink staff who are trained to help with these things and who are continually travelling around the communities to help people as well.

But regardless of this, it’s even more surprising that Sophie didn’t think to ask: why would families miss out anyway, when the 50% of welfare which they do receive in cash, and any non-welfare income any of them receive, can be used - without any bother - to pay for the entry fees, which, as she noted, are not exorbitant?

Admittedly, some people are not very well organised, but most people seem to have no trouble figuring these things out except when the Crikey journalist comes along. Or is somebody with an axe to grind prompting this “poor bugger me” response?

I have no doubt that there will be many IM recipients at the Darwin Show, just as there were at the Alice Springs Show, and that they will have (on average) more cash available to spend on the kids at the Show than used to be the case before the 50% quarantine of welfare was introduced.

By: Jon Hunt

Jon Hunt — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 07:54:25 +0000

Regrettably, a different government but seemingly the same.

By: jungarrayi

jungarrayi — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 04:34:19 +0000

I quote from the Review of the NTER by Peter Yu et.al. which at a couple of million was a bargain compared to the obscene amounts being wasted by the Government supposedly to protect Aboriginal children:
“Recommendations on Welfare reform and employment:
Income Management:
-The current blanket application of compulsory income management in the Northern Territory cease.”
Jenny Macklin and FaCSIAH have chosen to ignore this unambiguous recommendation and signalled their intension to continue it (and even roll it out to other States).
For Income Management(IM) (initially called “income quarantining”) to be able to continue after the reinstatement of the (suspended under the NTER) Racial Discrimination Act, requires a bit of fancy legal semantic footwork… IM has to be dressed up as a “Special Measure” and the authorities have embarked on a farcical “consultation” process and a propaganda barrage (“The little children are getting fresh healthy food at last” etc.). As someone living on a “Prescribed Area” where Centrelink recipients are being Income Managed I can assure you that there is nothing “Special” about it. Even pensioners that have no dependent children and never had an alcoholic drink in their lives are being subjected to the demeaning need to go to the Centrelink office to spend long waiting times to have some young person that doesn’t speak a word of the Pensioner’s first language “interview” them to help them “manage” their income.
The last budget included over $100 million for the administration of IM. I calculate the total amount being Income managed is less than the cost of administering it.
Talk about closing the “Gap”… how about the “dignity Gap”?

By: Jim Reiher

Jim Reiher — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 03:54:38 +0000

Tragically, this comes as no surprise. Just another example of the ongoing same pattern towards our indigenous population.