Parliamentary submission: Policy Reform overview
You are to write a submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment, advocating for Australia to reduce financial incentives that encourage fossil fuel extraction and increase investment in renewable energy infrastructure.
Please find the material below (including the attachment) to help with the assignment:
https://theconversation.com/cutting-subsidies-to-fossil-fuels-could-help-australia-meet-its-financial-climate-commitments-4026
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26111439/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2014.12.004
10.1057/jphp.2014.16
NB: The submission requires the use of a minimum of 15 peer-reviewed references.
HLPR6006 Politics & Power in Public Health Example Assessment 2 Addressed to: Senate Standing Committee for Community Affairs Title: Argument for a Universal Basic Income to reform Australia’s existing social security system Summary This parliamentary submission submitted to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs aims to put forward a case for the Australian Government to reform the current social security system and introduce a Universal Basic Income (UBI) policy that will act as the central pillar of welfare in Australia. A universal basic income is a monthly payment given to all individuals within a country that aims to meet the daily needs of individuals. It is an inclusive and secure payment which is non-conditional and has no means-test to determine eligibility. Its primary purpose is to eliminate poverty in affluent and economically prosperous countries as a means of bringing about social justice, positive health outcomes and a more equal society. Australia has experienced steady economic growth, with stable political and social environments, for the past few decades, yet one in seven Australians is still living below the poverty line. The UBI is one potential solution to this problem. Benefits of introducing a UBI include reducing poverty, reducing administrative burden and waste of administering welfare, more social justice and freedom for individuals to pursue their goals, long term significant human capital gains and reduced spending on public health and judicial services. The idea of basic income has been around for quite some time, with numerous trials being implemented in countries such as Finland and the Netherlands, and various programmes, which differ slightly from the model described in this submission, having been implemented all around the world such as Alaska, Brazil, Canada and India. What is a Universal Basic Income? The concept of a universal basic income (UBI) system has historical roots that go back to the middle of the 19th century (Van Parijs, 2000). It is a form of social security that involves a monthly payment being given to individuals that is designed to meet basic needs and maintain an adequate standard of living. It is non-conditional and granted to all individuals without a means test, meaning that no one is disqualified or ineligible based on their circumstances (De Wispelaere & Stirton, 2012; Van Parijs, 2013). The general idea of a UBI is that it provides a floor, or level of adequacy, so that no one residing permanently in a prosperous society has to live in poverty (Van Parijs, 2000) and that is also contributes to lowering income inequality (Saunders, HL PR 60 06 EX AM PL E HLPR6006 Politics & Power in Public Health Bradbury & Wong, 2016). Individuals can engage in paid work on top of this to supplement their income. The UBI contrasts strongly with the existing social security structure that is currently in place in Australia, which has a much, more paternalistic and governing approach (AIHW, 2014). Not only would a UBI serve as a tool for promoting social justice by providing individuals with both the freedom and resources to pursue their goals, but it would assist in solving current policy dilemmas around unemployment and poverty (Van Parijs, 2000). Australia’s current welfare system Australia’s current welfare system is based largely on conditional, means-tested support payments and welfare support services targeted at a wide variety of disadvantaged or marginalised groups. These payment benefits include Newstart Allowance, Youth Allowance, Rent Assistance, Parenting Payment, Family Tax Benefit and Pension Payments, amongst others (AIHW, 2015). Whilst welfare costs in Australia are lower than many other comparable OECD countries (OECD, 2014), there is concerning evidence that shows that the groups of people most likely to be living in poverty are those who are either unemployed (61.2%) or live in a household that relies on welfare payments as their primary source of income (ACOSS, 2014). This is due to the fact that most welfare payments in Australia actually fall below the poverty line, and this remains the case even when certain supplementary welfare payments such as rent assistance are added onto total household income (ACOSS, 2014; Targeted News Service, 2013). Since many recipients of welfare payments are not easily able to find sufficient work (such as single parents, people with disabilities, long term unemployed and people with criminal backgrounds), this ongoing problem cannot be solved by workforce participation initiatives alone. Having welfare allowances that do not match up with standard living costs create additional barriers for individuals to overcome in their search for suitable employment, creating added burden to these already vulnerable individuals (Spies-Butcher, 2015). One of the major problems with Australia’s current complex welfare system is that it is easy for a number of vulnerable or marginalised individuals to slip through the cracks, and its complexity means it has a high administrative cost in the means testing and setting and monitoring of conditions (Saunders, Bradbury & Wong, 2016). Basic income is thought to not only capture a significantly larger share of the total population of Australia, but it also captures a larger proportion of those who require welfare the most, increasing the targeting efficiency of using an UBI (De Wispelaere & Stirton, 2012). Other benefits of the policy reform are detailed below and present a strong case for welfare reform in Australia. HL PR 60 06 EX AM PL E HLPR6006 Politics & Power in Public Health Benefits of introducing a Universal Basic Income Reducing poverty Australia has experienced economic growth for the past 20 years (ACOSS, 2014), is ranked in the top ten for life expectancy amongst OECD countries (OECD, 2014) and ranked in the top third of OECD countries for 11 out of the 28 selected health and development indicators (Australian Institute of Health & Welfare, 2014). It is therefore unacceptable that with such affluence and growth, 13.9% of Australian adults and 17.7% of Australian children live below the poverty line (ACOSS, 2014). Income inequality is also rising, with Australia’s Gini coefficient (the most popular measure of income inequality) increasing in a positive manner since the early 1980’s (Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2013; Whiteford, 2013), and is higher than the OECD average (Fletcher & Guttman, 2013). Introducing a UBI would help Australia to reduce its poverty levels, which not only has significant moral and social benefits, but is also makes economic sense. Poverty, both its alleviation efforts and ongoing management, is expensive, both in the short and long term, and it often costs more to allow it to continue than to reduce it (Ivanova, 2011). The ongoing consequences of poverty include poor overall health, lower literacy levels, poor school performance and higher crime rates, all of which place a significant burden on public health, education and justice sectors (Ivanova, 2011). With poverty rates and income equality on the rise, these public and private costs are only going to increase unless the issue is better managed (Saunders, Bradbury & Wong, 2016). A UBI reduces poverty by providing all individuals with a secure, accessible and adequate living allowance, which allows them to meet basic, needs and keep them above the poverty line (De Wispelaere & Stirton, 2012; Van Parijs, 2013). There are also many groups within Australia which are at higher risk of poverty, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, single parents, people living with a disability and long term unemployed, all of which would benefit from the introduction of a UBI (ACOSS, 2014; Klein, 2016). Interestingly, the risk of poverty (18.8%) is higher amongst adults who were born in non-English speaking countries compared to those born in English speaking countries (11.4%)(ACOSS, 2014). Australia is a very multicultural society, with 8.6% of its total population being born overseas in non-English speaking countries, and the number of Australian residents born in India tripling and in China doubling in the past 10 years (ABS, 2016). This indicates that there will be an ongoing increase in poverty risk due to migration, another reason to act now to reduce Australia’s poverty rate. Reduction in long term public spending The introduction of a Universal Basic Income, whilst potentially expensive in its set- up, would lead to reduced pressure on public resources in the long term. As HL PR 60 06 EX AM PL E HLPR6006 Politics & Power in Public Health discussed earlier, poverty, when left to continue, is expensive, and there are strong links between those living below the poverty line, and poor health outcomes (Kuruvilla & Jacob, 2007; Schneiderman, Ironson & Siegel, 2005), which puts a lot of added pressure on the public health system. Increased levels of poverty and unemployment also correlate with higher levels of crime (Weatherburn, 2001), which increases the need for police and judicial services, and also acts as a barrier for individuals to enter the workforce. The security and simplicity of UBI payments works simultaneously to both reduce unemployment and poverty (Van Parijs, 1996), reduce the long term cost of addressing welfare as well as promoting economic growth and productivity gains through increasing workforce participation in the long run (Van Parijs, 2000). The simplicity and inclusivity of the basic income model also means that introducing the system would decrease the level of administrative burden and bureaucracy surrounding the delivery of many existing forms of social security in Australia (which are becoming increasingly conditional) due to the lack of means testing and requirement for ongoing monitoring (De Wispelaere & Stirton, 2013). There would also be the added benefit of the UBI being able to replace a number of existing welfare payments, further reducing the administrative burden of administering the payments, conducting complicated means tests and developing and monitoring conditions surrounding those payments (Spies-Butcher, 2015). It is also worth noting that introducing a UBI doesn’t only benefit the poor, or those close to the poverty line, it would also assist those who are at risk of losing their jobs over the next ten to fifteen years due to automation and improvements in technology, the number of which has been estimated to be five million, or 40% of the Australian workforce (Klein, 2016). Social justice and individual freedom One of the main arguments for introducing a UBI is to promote and