Families face losing their welfare if their children skip school (1 Viewer)

[chicky_pie]

Families face losing their welfare for three months if their children continually skip school, under legislation to be introduced to Federal Parliament this week.

Under the Federal Government's proposed scheme, regular school attendance will become a condition for receiving all welfare except the Family Tax Benefit.

If the legislation is passed a pilot scheme at eight schools will begin next year.

This morning Prime Minister Kevin Rudd told Radio National's Fran Kelly that the Government made no apologies for the hardline approach.

Mr Rudd says his Government's priority is making sure that all children go to school.

"We think this conditionality - that if individual families are in receipt of income support payments the regular attendance at school by their kids is a necessary precondition - is the right way to go," he said.

"We need, in order to compete with the rest of the world, to boost our current school retention rate from 75 per cent to 90 per cent by 2020, [but] we have real problems of school non-attendance in Indigenous communities and also school non-attendance on the part of certain other kids as well.

"You've got to take a hardline approach."

Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard says the bill is aimed at sending a message to parents about their responsibility to ensure children go to school.

"We need to deal with this problem," she said.

"I mean it has a dreadful effect on children if they are only intermittently in school.

"All the research from around the world would tell us that if kids don't get a decent education then that is setting them up for a lifetime of failure. We want to break that cycle."

Federal Opposition frontbencher Tony Abbott has accused the Government of double standards.

Mr Abbott supports the idea but says it is ludicrous not to also stop payments to people on unemployment benefits who do not actively seek work.

"Why punish the kids for their parents' mistakes when you don't punish job seekers, or so-called job seekers, who don't have a work ethic," he said.

"Now I really think Kevin Rudd's got to be consistent on this, and at the moment what we're seeing I think are just populist gestures from a Prime Minister who's all spin and no substance."

Welfare authorities have criticised the plan.

Australian Council of Social Service president Lin Hatfield Dodds says there are various reasons why students do not go to school.

She says withholding welfare payments is unlikely to fix the causes of family dysfunction.

"[One issue] is chaos in families' lives," she said.

"Is there anybody around in the morning to help the child get to school?

"If there isn't, and if the family for whatever reason is in a high degree of chaos, then it's unlikely that turning off the income tap to a degree for 12 weeks is going to make any difference in that regard."

Ms Hatfield Dodds says there is no evidence that such a plan would help reduce truancy rates.

"As far as we're aware in the community sector there isn't really any evidence either in Australia or from overseas that involuntary income management actually works on any dimension," she said.

"It's difficult to see how it is going to address the causes of the crisis and chaos in family lives that result in this kind of experience for children."

She says the Government should instead make support programs available to more families.

"So if there's an issue with the parenting, let's wrap some parenting support programs around. If there's alcohol, other drugs, violence - if those things are an issue in the family's life in the adult's life - then let's try and go to the core of those issues.

"With all of these programs there is a strong evidence base for and we know they actually work we know they get results.

"The problem is out there in the community, particularly in areas that are locationally disadvantaged, is that those programs are simply not available to people."


http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2008/08/25/2345138.htm?section=australia

Finally, a awesome idea...from Kevin Rudd.

 

[zstar]

They should really scrap welfare for most people.

 

[Graney]

Administrative nightmare.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

maybe, but it has the potential to make sutpid ppl suffer
so i approve

 

[autumbabe1991]

it would release society of a great, unneeded burden...
so i suppose....?

 

[Captain Gh3y]

it would release society of a great, unneeded burden...

especially if they starved to death from no welfare :angry:

 

[jb_nc]

$17 million per gold medal.

 

[Riet]

White fella trying to black man into one of them.

 

[IronMaiden]

Mr Rudd is all for those working class families.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Mr Rudd is all for those working class families.

there's working class families, and then there's scum

 

[emytaylor164]

I do agree with the above statements well alot of them anyway, but I think that each individual case would need to be looked at, i know parents who have struggled to keep there kids in school and all they do is jig

 

[kaz1]

Great idea.

 

[banco55]

Mr Rudd is all for those working class families.

I believe the phrase is "working families" and if they are on welfare they are not working families.

Anyway in practice this will be a rule that's never actually enforced by the bureaucracy.

 

[Kwayera]

I actually think this is a good idea. I have a friend that used to do assisted tutoring work with some Islander kids; their parents didn't care about their education, so they didn't either, she said. Maybe this will help change that apathy, even if it's sort of a twisting of the arm behind the back sort of thing.

I hate all forms of welfare except for aged/disability/veterans pensions.

 

[spiny norman]

This is pretty fucked.

 

[TacoTerrorist]

This is the greatest idea ever.

 

[TacoTerrorist]

^ Why?

 

[bigboyjames]

How is it a good idea?

- Parents can't really "force" their children to go to school. I remember I used to jig school and I am pretty sure that my parents couldn't have done anything about it (my parents aren't on welfare).
- Forcing a child to go to school does nothing if that child doesn't have the heart to learn. The child would probably block out the information anyway and not do the required work
- What about parents who child jigs and isn't on welfare?
- What about people on welfare who now don't want to have kids for the risk or losing their welfare payments
- Also there may be certain reasonable reasons where a child doesn't want to go to school e.g. bullying, mental illness etc. where forcing a child will not help the situation and other solutions such as councelling sounds like a better option.

listen, cut off of welfare payments are only used in extreme cases. and are just in trial periods in NT

 

[TacoTerrorist]

How is it a good idea?

Because it will give a lot of extra motivation for kids to go to school, due to them not wanting their parents to miss out on welfare which they too rely on.

- Parents can't really "force" their children to go to school. I remember I used to jig school and I am pretty sure that my parents couldn't have done anything about it (my parents aren't on welfare).

Yes, they can't physically force their children to go to school, but no child is stupid enough to not rock up to school knowing their parents will not get welfare as a result. The parents will take ever measure to ensure their child goes to school.

- Forcing a child to go to school does nothing if that child doesn't have the heart to learn. The child would probably block out the information anyway and not do the required work

School, in the final two years doesn't teach you shit. It's more a competition than a learning environment. Even still, I'd rather have my children at school, potentially learning something or at least garnering a will to compete than bumming around town with their shitty haircuts and mundane personalities doing nothing but be obnoxious.

- What about parents who child jigs and isn't on welfare?

I don't know how to address that problem, but this idea isn't. The majority of kids who skip school often are from lower class areas. This is just from my experience, and I'm sure there are others who also share this knowledge.

- What about people on welfare who now don't want to have kids for the risk or losing their welfare payments

That shouldn't be a concern, considering that if it didn't work the scheme would be dropped.

- Also there may be certain reasonable reasons where a child doesn't want to go to school e.g. bullying, mental illness etc. where forcing a child will not help the situation and other solutions such as councelling sounds like a better option.

Well I assume things like that would be considered.

The only problem I see is with the administration side of it all. Although it could hopefully create more jobs.

 

[spiny norman]

Because it will give a lot of extra motivation for kids to go to school, due to them not wanting their parents to miss out on welfare which they too rely on.

Awesome. Starve them into going to school.

Yes, they can't physically force their children to go to school, but no child is stupid enough to not rock up to school knowing their parents will not get welfare as a result. The parents will take ever measure to ensure their child goes to school.

You'd be surprised at a child's ability to only think small picture. And what should the parents' ensuring their kids do get to school enfringe on them actually, you know, trying to find work?

School, in the final two years doesn't teach you shit. It's more a competition than a learning environment. Even still, I'd rather have my children at school, potentially learning something or at least garnering a will to compete than bumming around town with their shitty haircuts and mundane personalities doing nothing but be obnoxious.

Oh, if it's what you'd rather I suppose it's for the best we legislate it then.

I don't know how to address that problem, but this idea isn't. The majority of kids who skip school often are from lower class areas. This is just from my experience, and I'm sure there are others who also share this knowledge.

Historically the poor have always performed at their best when threatened with absolute destitude.

The only problem I see is with the administration side of it all. Although it could hopefully create more jobs.

Hopefully, I love bureaucracy.