it seems to be an attitude thing, that tax office customers are deemed to be "clients" but not necessarily centrelink's, where the adjectives tend to be more derogatory. The levels of cheating from welfare clients tend to be below 1% but it seems more like 10% the way the bureaucrats there make sure you're not entitled to any more than absolutely necessary. But tax return 'cheating' isn't really seen as such, just claiming what is owed you to the max and creative accounting, knowing that most people are never audited anyway, but not so with centrelink.

in a more just society, the govt would go after high wealth individuals who rip off every taxpayer in the land - and usually get away with it, and give the benefit of the doubt to the indigent and disabled. The day pigs will fly.

Howards regime made Centrelink into the worst of authoritarian and bureaucratic government departments. It was done deliberately to dissuade those who can provide for themselves from claiming anything, even if they were eligible. This was apparently more palatable (and hideable) than introducing means tests that might have reduced the payments going to a few of "howards battlers", even if a lot of them never claimed them.

A lot of people who may be eligible for a payment dont need it and certainly wont do Centrelinks monkey tricks for a pittance of an allowance. If you are desperate you will find what benefits are applicable to you and Centrelink will (eventually) help you. If you are desperate you will degrade yourself before Centrelink and submit to their humiliations and intrusions. If you dont really need the money the indignity of Centrelinks processes will be enough to put you off.

Ruddys missus made a motza out of the privitised CES and so its no suprise that this government hasnt changed anything. They too live in fear of the pampered middle classes and the media and opposition running a scare campaign were anyone to get less. They are actually building on Howards campaign of humiliate and embarass by introducing the new "everyone gets quarantined payments" which will shame every "poor" person every time they shop with the new humiliation card. Why dont they just brand them with a big "povo" tattoo on their foreheads.

I think it is deplorable that the weakest and poorest amongst us have to go through this instead of introducing an equitable system of means testing. There is too much middle class welfare for those who dont need it. Means test benefits properly and consistently and make dealing with Centrelink less of the torture it is today for those who have no choice but to deal with them

Dear Mikk,
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Renew your mind and then just maybe you will see the big picture. Knowledge empowers people to make life changing choices. People perish from lack of knowledge. It is not the governments job to give handouts for it is much better to give a help up. Success costs for there is always a price to pay.

each and every politican, serving or pensioned off, gets every last cent of their entitlements.

How are their entilements funded?

A simple factor would be to deny or make it far too difficult for average australians to get payments that they are entitled too.

Teach a man to fish, is like allowing politicans to get their snouts into the public trough.

So there is one rule for the ruling class, even though they are our publicly elected representatives.

And another rule for the voters.

Mikk makes some good points on this issue as usual.

Having dealt extensively with those facing hardship it is true that many are not aware of some of the benefits or assistance available to them. Many do not know until the seek help from another body, usually charitable or another government agency, that they may be entitled to assistance.

There is a difference between encouraging welfare and ensuring welfare get to those who need it.

You can teach a man to fish but if he has a mental illness or a physical disability it may not be quite so easy.

I would recommend not blaming Centre Link staff, rather bad and sloppy policy development by bureaucracy.
As an advocate, I have found most staff are equally frustrated by a system failing to deliver. Problems caused by lack of or poor policy development, delegation, staff shortage, lack of on-going staff training, including insufficient and appropriate resources and backup.
The system appears to support a culture that the most vulnerable are more likely to be treated badly.
I cite from one of many cases, where a sole parent with three disabled children regularly has the pension stopped, usually at 12 weeks.
As the mother is the fulltime Carer, she has an exemption from applying for work. Most people understand that disabled with ADHD/Autistic spectrum conditions, requires the parent/s to be on duty 24/7. This applies regardless of whether disabled children or adults, with the same problems.
The problems are even more acerbated as when the youngest child turns 6 year old, the system requires the parent to register as looking for work, despite the exemption.
Now I ask you, is this reasonable treatment in a society where it believes everyone is entitled to a fair go? If the government had to take over the care and responsibility of these children on a day-to-day basis, the cost to the taxpayer would be phenomenal. These parents are not paid to look after their children, except to have enough to help feed and clothe them and provide some of the other things that give quality to their lives.
There is very little support for these parents, who dedicate their lives to looking after their children. The only support normally is from parent/s in the same position and this obviously will be limited as children with these problems live a strict regimented life and do not easily accept new conditions. I have seen and heard parents being abused for the behaviour of their children by people who have little understanding or compassion.
continued

The example also includes the potential impact of the flow-on for this family.
Centre Link requires a form, sent to the client every 12 weeks to be completed and returned. However, time constraints between receiving and returning the form is so short that the deadlines are frequently missed. Sometimes, the form is not even sent until after the pension has been stopped.
The problem may be computer based, (well I hope it is not human), automatically cutting off payments. When contacting Centre Link, it is manually fixed, but the family has to wait a further two-4 days or even until the next pension date, before the backdated pensions are paid. This means that they may not have the funds to buy food, clothing or pay accounts.
Often, some of these parents contact me for assistance.
The flow-on impact results in late payment of e.g. rent, power water, gas, etc., incurring late bank and other fines or even threats of eviction. In one case I speak, why, if the client has an exemption must she still fill out a form stating whether she is searching for work, etc?
In this case, the mother is likely to be a fulltime Carer for one or more, for most of her life, hence does not need the extra stress created by unthinking and uncompassionate bureaucracy adding to her day-to-day issues.
This is a regular issue and while sometimes the system does get it right, it is more often wrong.
We need better policy development that treats a country's citizens with compassion, respect and tolerance. “But for the grace of God” anyone of us could be in this situation, including the well off.
continued

Richie
While I appreciate the importance of teaching skills to live independently I am a little confused as to how Centrelink can be seen to do this.
For eg the 20 minutes of a doctors time to complete a form (that was completed 3 months ago) for an individual who has a permanent disability? The time would be better spent seeing someone who is actually sick, when the facts have already been documented in great detail.

If the intention was to support independence why are there no Centrelink offices in the CBD? For those of us who work and have children with a disability or other reasons to have ongoing contact with Centrelink this means a half day off work every time we need to submit anything to them. Why? I can apply for and receive a passport more easily than comply with Centrelink's paperwork requirements for a child whose birth certificate has been on file for 16 years.

If my child with a disability is supposed to be supported in her independence, Centrelink would not tell us the only option for her payment to continue after she becomes an adult (at 16) is for her to provide new proof of identity. That would be fine if the ID did not have to be presented at a Centrelink office - not certified copy, not shown at a Post Office. Taken to Centrelink. Who are suburbs away, (no wheelchair accessible transport) and only open during the week when she is at or travelling to and from school.

The ID she actually has that they will accept if she posts it to them? Medicare card and student card. Guess what? She's disabled and she goes to school - she needs them.

When someone has a disability they are vulnerable - because everything is more complex and takes more steps, more planning, more information, more money. Surely you are not saying that dealing with Centrelink and their inability to make it simple is teaching the disabled a valuable life lesson?