Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Tensions and contradictions in Australian social policy reform: compulsory Income Management and the National Disability Insurance Scheme

Tensions and contradictions in Australian social policy reform: compulsory Income Management and... This paper explores contemporary contradictions and tensions in Australian social policy principles and governmental practices that are being used to drive behavioural change, such as compulsory income management. By means of compulsory income management the Australian Government determines how certain categories of income support recipients can spend their payments through the practice of quarantining a proportion of that payment. In this process some groups in the community, particularly young unemployed people and Indigenous Australians, are being portrayed as requiring a paternalistic push in order to make responsible choices. The poverty experienced by some groups of income support recipients appears to be seen as a consequence of poor spending patterns rather than economic and social inequalities. By contrast, Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has been constructed as a person centred system of support that recognises the importance of both human agency and structural investment to expand personal choices and control. Here we look at the rationale guiding these developments to explore the tensions and contradictions in social policy more broadly, identifying what would be required if governments sought to promote greater autonomy, dignity and respect for people receiving income support payments in Australia. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian Journal of Social Issues Wiley

Tensions and contradictions in Australian social policy reform: compulsory Income Management and the National Disability Insurance Scheme

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/tensions-and-contradictions-in-australian-social-policy-reform-MQjFtU9FhD

References (39)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© Australian Social Policy Association
eISSN
1839-4655
DOI
10.1002/j.1839-4655.2016.tb01240.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This paper explores contemporary contradictions and tensions in Australian social policy principles and governmental practices that are being used to drive behavioural change, such as compulsory income management. By means of compulsory income management the Australian Government determines how certain categories of income support recipients can spend their payments through the practice of quarantining a proportion of that payment. In this process some groups in the community, particularly young unemployed people and Indigenous Australians, are being portrayed as requiring a paternalistic push in order to make responsible choices. The poverty experienced by some groups of income support recipients appears to be seen as a consequence of poor spending patterns rather than economic and social inequalities. By contrast, Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has been constructed as a person centred system of support that recognises the importance of both human agency and structural investment to expand personal choices and control. Here we look at the rationale guiding these developments to explore the tensions and contradictions in social policy more broadly, identifying what would be required if governments sought to promote greater autonomy, dignity and respect for people receiving income support payments in Australia.

Journal

Australian Journal of Social IssuesWiley

Published: Dec 1, 2016

Keywords: ; ; ; ;

There are no references for this article.