1. Income Management trail in the Council of Greater Shepparton LGA Financial Counselling Australia Conference 16 May 2012 David Tennant - CEO

2. Why Shepparton? Indicative statistics City of Greater Shepparton (mix of census and other data) Population64,000 (approx) Unemployment rate8.7% Proportion of 15-64 year olds receiving income support 18.7% Proportion of unemployed people receiving benefits 12 months & over 66.5% One parent families16.5%

3. Welfare reform as part of the national jobs agenda No one can doubt having a job provides ‘insulation’ against poverty and disadvantage; But are mandatory programs with penalties for non- compliance the answer to long-term disengagement or exclusion? Specifically is mandatory Income Management really useful? Based on the experience of transitional preparations in one of the 5 new Income Management trial sites, here are a few key concerns…

4. Proper evaluation of Income Management is long overdue: The evaluation of IM to date has failed to establish effective baselines from which to analyse impacts The number of evaluation participants has been insufficient to provide an effective sample Genuine concerns about mandatory IM have been largely ignored, to the detriment of proper analysis, which includes the potential benefits of voluntary participation

5. Effective local engagement for ‘place-based’ solutions The Social Inclusion Board identified a series of principles for place-based initiatives In Shepparton those principles have not been followed If advice is provided about significant blocks during local engagement there must be genuine consideration and real capacity to tackle those blocks There is a world of difference between a place based solution and a standard policy delivered in a variety of places

6. Does the commonwealth really want to be the financial services ‘default’ for low income and disadvantaged consumers? IM requires the commonwealth to not only ‘manage’ personal accounts, but also to provide the payment platform, via the basics card Is this a good idea? -it undermines the development of market options for low income people -exposes people using the Basics card to unnecessary stigma and the danger of major system outage More importantly, is the Commonwealth able and willing to be the ‘default’ provider to the extent required if IM is rolled out more broadly?