“Punished before conviction”: Is the new welfare law a national shame?
What exactly is the government’s plan regarding welfare cuts? Just two years after the devastating failure of the Voice referendum, the Federal Government appears ready to abandon Indigenous Australians. The groundwork was never properly laid, and now social security seems set to become a tool of enforcement.
New Legislation and Its Implications
The recently introduced last-minute legislation grants Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke the power to cancel an individual's social security payments if there is an outstanding warrant for their arrest related to a serious crime. Essentially, this means people can lose benefits for crimes they may not have committed.
Government’s Response
“After considering any dependents, making sure that we look after the dependents, that person can have their social security benefit cancelled the same way they would if they were waiting on remand to be tried for a serious crime.”
Plibersek emphasized on morning television that strong evidence would be required, and that cutting off benefits wouldn’t be a simple or automatic process.
Concerns and Criticism
- The policy risks punishing individuals before conviction, undermining the principle of innocent until proven guilty.
- It disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, including Indigenous communities, compounding existing social issues.
- Using social security as a policing mechanism raises ethical and human rights questions.
This approach reflects a harsh and potentially unjust government stance on welfare and law enforcement intersecting.
“If you think that's a harsh description of what happened in 2023, you weren't paying attention.”
Author’s summary: The new law risks harming vulnerable people by suspending welfare payments on mere arrest warrants, highlighting a troubling shift toward punitive social policies.