Suchergebnisse

The Family Income Supplement (FIS) is a particularly interesting aspect of UK social security provisions for families. It represents one of the few examples in the world of a social security payment designed specifically to assist low wage-earners in employment, albeit at modest levels. The introduction of FIS to help tackle the problem of family poverty represented an important departure from the philosophy behind the UK social security system as, for the first time, a cash benefit was to be paid to those in full-time employment but whose income was below a certain amount. Prior to FIS, persons in full-time employment were ineligible for any benefits aimed at reducing family poverty e.g. supplementary benefits (SB).
It was opposed by the Labour Party, the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) and many academics because it utilizes a means test. This opposition is most clearly stated in literature published by CPAG. For instance, Frank Field, secretary of that organization, recently wrote: 'From the word go, the CPAG has campaigned for family allowance increases for both those in and out of work, and since 1969 every action of the poverty lobby has been aimed at underminin public confidence in means-tested benefits.'

SUMMARY: Social protection systems reflect each country's history, culture and social values, as well as its economic capacity. But, once first established, they can be very hard to redesign as expectations are locked in, and the scale of the systems makes major change a difficult and risky management challenge. This paper describes alternative designs of social security systems and how each addresses the two core objectives of poverty alleviation and income maintenance. Drawing on the 'pillars' typology or framework, the paper describes how different systems are being adjusted to meet changing demographic profiles and economic pressures. It focuses in particular on Australia, which has always emphasised 'foundation pillar' programmes aimed at poverty alleviation and has only recently given emphasis to income maintenance. In doing so, it has chosen a very different approach involving mandated contributions into mostly fully funded schemes where individuals rather than the government and future generations of taxpayers bear most of the risks. Australia has also restructured its schemes for public sector employees. What possible lessons are there for countries at the early stages of design and implementation of a social security system?

SUMMARY: Social protection systems reflect each country's history, culture and social values, as well as its economic capacity. But, once first established, they can be very hard to redesign as expectations are locked in, and the scale of the systems makes major change a difficult and risky management challenge. This paper describes alternative designs of social security systems and how each addresses the two core objectives of poverty alleviation and income maintenance. Drawing on the 'pillars' typology or framework, the paper describes how different systems are being adjusted to meet changing demographic profiles and economic pressures. It focuses in particular on Australia, which has always emphasised 'foundation pillar' programmes aimed at poverty alleviation and has only recently given emphasis to income maintenance. In doing so, it has chosen a very different approach involving mandated contributions into mostly fully funded schemes where individuals rather than the government and future generations of taxpayers bear most of the risks. Australia has also restructured its schemes for public sector employees. What possible lessons are there for countries at the early stages of design and implementation of a social security system?

SUMMARYSocial protection systems reflect each country's history, culture and social values, as well as its economic capacity. But, once first established, they can be very hard to redesign as expectations are locked in, and the scale of the systems makes major change a difficult and risky management challenge. This paper describes alternative designs of social security systems and how each addresses the two core objectives of poverty alleviation and income maintenance. Drawing on the 'pillars' typology or framework, the paper describes how different systems are being adjusted to meet changing demographic profiles and economic pressures. It focuses in particular on Australia, which has always emphasised 'foundation pillar' programmes aimed at poverty alleviation and has only recently given emphasis to income maintenance. In doing so, it has chosen a very different approach involving mandated contributions into mostly fully funded schemes where individuals rather than the government and future generations of taxpayers bear most of the risks. Australia has also restructured its schemes for public sector employees. What possible lessons are there for countries at the early stages of design and implementation of a social security system? Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The past two decades have witnessed the application of new forms of conditionality to Australian social security policy. This paper argues that a distinctive feature has been the attempt to link receipt of government benefits to parental behaviour in order to address concerns about the welfare of children. With a view to providing a framework that can help to inform debates regarding the merits of these new forms of conditionality, this paper outlines the historical antecedents and philosophical framework of new conditionality. The paper also examines three pertinent Australian social security initiatives: the Maternity Immunisation Allowance, the Improving School Enrolment and Attendance through Welfare Reform Measure, and Compulsory Income Management. The paper concludes with some consideration of the potential pitfalls of new conditionality.

AbstractThis article uses longitudinal data to estimate the short‐ and medium‐term economic effects of divorce in the USA, the UK, Switzerland, Korea, Germany and Australia during the first decade of the 21st century. Based on the data collected during the 2000s, in all of the countries studied, divorce had, on average, negative effects on the equivalised household incomes of women. However, the extent and duration of the negative effects of divorce differed markedly between countries. In all of the countries, the effects of divorce on the equivalised household income of men were smaller than for women. Although, using the available data, it is not possible to definitely explain the differences between countries, the analysis presented in this article has demonstrated that the average economic effects of divorce, particularly for women, are heavily influenced by the social security system, the labour market, family models and the family law system of each country. While the social security system and institutional arrangements such as child support and spousal maintenance do influence women's post‐divorce economic outcomes, what is most important in explaining cross‐country differences is women's labour market earnings and the extent to which re‐partnering occurs.