Very easy to explain, such a piddly amount is paid you can say it disappeared due to evaporation.

Runner, quite right, the time has come for all good men to stop talking about Jesus love, turning the other cheek, etc, & start marching in the street, going on strike, joining the "promise keepers", "dads4kids", going to church every week, etc, until the femanazi's stop grooming our children for abuse. Like you i found Eva's new-speak about social engineering, a bit rich coming from a gender terrorist.

She is right about the whole idea being inefficient, but wrong, on why, it is inefficient. I have seen so many white, deadbeat, single mothers on welfare, neglecting & abusing their children, creating poverty for their children to live in, despite enormous extra welfare, housing commission homes, etc. An addict, is an addict, is an addict, is an addict. They are slaves to their addiction and will use & abuse anybody, to feed their addiction, before their children, every time. BTW, they abuse cards by laundering them for cash, then go drinking again, another way is to use the card to buy something, then get a refund. Who would have thought we would see Eva Cox supporting big business over small, local business.

If there is any evidence, to support any intervention, by social workers, then the deadbeat mother, should be taken away to rehab immediately & the biological father should be given all the advantages, she was, & given an opportunity to raise his children properly.

Well, I have not bothered to read the article as you lost me when I read this line;

How many of us could justify how we spend our money to a middle level officer from Centrelink?

This is the whole point, people on benefits think it is 'their money' as if 'they have gone out and earned it'.

The truth is, all benefits are intended as a 'hand up' while one is struggling to meet their day to day expenses.

Get off your fat arse and earn some money, then, and only then, you should be given the right to spend it on what ever you like.

Just remember, it takes up to five dollars of someone else’s earnings to pay just one dollar to those who claim benefits.

Furthermore, the tax payers at large are investing in assuring that the well being of the beneficiaries is being considered and, like any investment, they deserve the right to know that their contributions are not being wasted away.

Proving yourself to centrelink.
Why see it as if it is something evil.
Any one on benefits must have a budget. Thats how you explain your self.
As far as indig; persons go i totally agree they should be subject to more regs, on what they do with payments.
We are talking about the indig; that live in camps surrounding towns.
Their first priority is for grog. Every thing else comes with what is left, if any.
I would say this is another step in trying to help the indig; to help themself.
The indig; living with whites, surrounded by these camps, would agree.

The issue as I see it reflects the everyday confusion between the nebulous quid pro quo of the social contract and the right to autonomy.

On the one hand, society says that we must all develop into viable economic participants and law abiding citizens, whilst on the other; there is a right to control how you live you life… isn’t there? Well, yes and no. Our right to autonomy is only valid where it does not interfere with another’s personal rights or societies rights.

Normally, we can choose to spend money on leisure activities such as alcohol and entertainments, and then borrow from friends and family until we are paid next. What we cannot do normally, is deny the nutrition of our dependants, so that the budget can be spent mostly or wholly on entertainments, drugs and alcohol. To do this is to breech the child’s basic rights and the expectations of the social contract!

This measure, affects so few on welfare, since most on welfare are responsible and mindful of their rights and duties to themselves and others. Protection Services can no longer be seen as a viable option, since we have learned (have we not?) that taking a neglected child from their family has detrimental impacts on that whole social network in which that family is centered.

Financial Management, as it is called, is not the only measure that will be used to address societal and individual obligations. Truancy is also a serious concern. Family payments will be stopped where a child is found to be habitually skipping school either through there own devices or because the parent is not exercising their duties to their child.

Australians want their children to be properly fed, clothed, housed and educated. Parents and principle carer’s have the autonomy and duty to ensure this happens. And now, if they do not exercise their responsibility and autonomy in this matter, the government will intercede on behalf of the child and society.

Tough Love

Eva has got her knickers in a knot about a few imaginary problems here.

The proposal is that people who neglect their children by not sending them to school regularly without reasonable excuse will have half their income quarantined until they demonstrate some improvement in their parenting. Quaranting will also apply to people who remain on unemployment benefits for long periods. There is no connection with "how ... we prove we are engaged with our community and responsible in our spending", or paying our "utilities bill" late, or whether we bought a "bargain case of booze with Christmas coming up". These furphies of Eva's are irrelevant and simply demonstrate her lack of research about what is being proposed.

The Centrelink staff will not be concerned about, or aware of, such matters, or whether "you bought heaps of fruit and veg at the local market", or whether you are "isolated". They will be concerned about whether you have been sending your child to school regularly, and whether the child is unhealthy because of neglect or even abuse.

The NT Emergency Response version of Income Management of half the welfare cheque was not simply predicated upon reducing "risks of violence to women and children": it was also aimed at reducing neglect of children and regular non-attendance at schools, training courses and jobs.

Time for Eva to wake up a bit about what has been happening in the real of world of isolated settlements, where govenments' inattention to these matters over decades was simply leaving many remote area Indigenous people to subsist by gathering unhealthy welfare funded fast fat, sugar saturated treats and other fully salted food, along with grog and dope, from their local suppliers; and to raise unhealthy children in states of ignorance, rotting out their short lives in welfare-funded cocoons, before sliding into early graves. Let's all hope we don't allow that situation to be re-imposed by the well-meaning but unthinking Eva Coxes of this world.