Income Management Policy Analysis

This assignment requires a critical analysis of income management policies in Australia. Students must examine the effectiveness of these policies, their impact on individuals and communities, and the ethical considerations surrounding them. The analysis should draw upon scholarly research and relevant evidence to provide a comprehensive and insightful evaluation.

Income Management- Policy
Analysis

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Question 1........................................................................................................................................3
Question 2........................................................................................................................................4
Question 3........................................................................................................................................5
Question 4........................................................................................................................................6
Question 5........................................................................................................................................8
Silences in income management policy.......................................................................................8
Different approach to the problem...............................................................................................8
References......................................................................................................................................10

QUESTION 1
According to Mendes (2013), income management policy can be specified as a policy in
accordance with which a percentage of welfare payments are to be expended only on the goods
which were categorized as priority quality such as clothing, education, food, housing and health
care. Provisions were available for both class of people; the one who wanted to manage their
income voluntarily and the one situations of child neglect and situation where children of welfare
recipients are not having admission in school. The two main objective of income management
policy were:
 Being assured that all the funds which were provided for welfare of student were actually
expended in that way.
 to curtail the flow of cash which was being spend on betting and substance abuse
The main problem with the policy of income management was that no substantive evidence
could be recognized regarding the attainment of significant change with the key policy along
with the behavior of people. As per Mendes, Waugh and Flynn (2013), due to same reason the
efficiency of policy were not able to be ascertained. Even no evidence regarding the change in
expenditure of food and alcohol was available. The mixed reviews from people and data which
were available were the reason due to which no single opinion regarding the policy can be
created. However, it was reported by many of the people that management of money has became
easier as well as improved. But no evidence relating same can be assessed for overall
improvement as no significant change in financial harassment as well as improvement in
financial management skills can be assessed. On the other hand report regarding worsening the
financial condition due to issues such as alcohol, betting and drugs were also submitted by the
people.
A slight improvement in the condition of running out money in case of voluntary money
management was assessed but no significant change in compulsory income management was
assessed. It could be evaluated from above discussion that rather than building management
skills and independent, the policy of income management has made people more dependent on
the welfare system. According to the words of Mendes, Waugh and Flynn (2014), the reason
behind the same was that people were following the policy without judging the same in
appropriate manner. They were assured that if they follow the policy the income is managed in

best possible way and were stressed out if the things do not work even after following the policy
sincerely.
QUESTION 2
The aim of developing assumptions is to understand the policy better by evaluating the
unexamined assumptions. These assumptions are conceptual logics which are deep seated within
the implicit problem representations. Once the problem is identified, all the underlying
assumptions and presuppositions are to be identified and evaluated. As per the words of Lovell
(2016), the main assumption taken in this regard is in the area of social disadvantage attached to
income management. This focus of developing assumptions means concentrating attention to the
various type of knowledge that strengthen the public policies related to income such as premises
based on psychological or biomedical factors like developing a wide conception of governing
that influence the judgement of experts and professionals in the field of income management.
Income management exclusively attempts to concentrate on some aspects that are cultural or
behavioral and are also connected to social disadvantage; the social disadvantage attached to
income management is limiting access income generated from harmful products by promoting
choices and behaviours that are socially responsible. This can also be initiated in other ways that
tend to address the location aspects of disadvantage. In this sense, it aims to share elements that
are in common with various current research regarding poverty and disadvantage. Some basic
assumptions in this regard are as follows-
New Paternalism
The management of income is drawn most directly on the approach of ‘new paternalism’ to the
welfare income policy. According to the views of Klein (2016), under this approach, the ruling
governments is viewed as an active participant in re-shaping behaviour of its citizens, in
particular, of those citizens who are supportive income recipients and are especially
disadvantaged. Such paternalist policy often includes secured supervision by the government of
the lives of people are poor and have become dependent on income support. This approach
denotes a shift in focus from helping the poor by income support and various other welfare
services. These assumptions control patterns of behaviour amongst people in regarding their own
interests.

Capabilities of people
This assumptions assumes that the extent that income management is supported by education
regarding financial literacy and savings incentives. The ‘capabilities approach’ emphasizes that
poverty should be viewed as ‘capability-deprivation’. According to this assumption, the freedom
in human, results when they have capabilities to make choices on how to live their life. Absence
of this freedom requires not only the provision of income but also formulating policies that are
aimed at identifying a wide range of barriers of freedom.
Assumption of locations
This assumption related to the location where the income management is most needed. As per
the views of Dee (2016), many recent researches have suggested that there are wide range of
indicators of disadvantage like huge unemployment, low income, poor housing facilities, and
poor health of people, low educational level, weak social connectedness and many criminal
convictions. All these indicators are restricted to relatively small number of geographical
locations. This concentration of social disadvantages persists over extended duration of time and
possibly become worse as time passes.
QUESTION 3
Developing support for managing income involves some basic assumptions regarding the need to
address variables other than the income adequacy factor for the purpose of overcoming social
disadvantage that is implicitly connected with income. The reasons which influence the need of
development of policy comprise the existence of social problem as well as increase in social
harmful behavior after consumption of alcohol and drugs.
The theory behind the policy
The formation of income management policy could be more appropriately assessed if the same is
connected with the main objectives for whose attainment it has been developed. The main
objective of income management policy has been specified above. They mainly emphasized on
decreasing the amount available for gambling, drugs and alcohol, reducing the hardship faced by
people through directing welfare payments to the priority needs of recipients as well as any
other dependents; decrease in amount of welfare payment subject to percentile of harassment and
abuse with the available welfare payments.

The government was having aim of developing stability in the lives of people. According to the
opinion of Parsons and et.al (2017), the same was necessarily required to resolve the social
problem faced by people. It was a belief of government that restricting the spending relating to
socially harmful products will result into decreasing rate of socially harmful behaviors. Another
assumption which was behind the development of income management policy was that people
required to be address the factors which are necessary for overcoming social disadvantage.
Attempt to address behavioral aspects
A belief existed that income management policy will explicitly attempt to make learn people
relating to behavioral or cultural aspects. The same would be relating to social disadvantage
through decrease the rate of spending available for harmful products. It was expected that the
same would lead to promote socially responsible choices and behaviours. The formation of this
policy was required to reconstruct the existing citizen behavior; specifically to those who are
specifically disadvantaged.
Need of new approach
The formation of policy was required for transmitting the behavior and attitude from parents to
children in providing explanation relating to intergenerational welfare reliance and poverty more
generally. The main objective behind same was to develop trust upon the welfare system. Income
management was required to be supported by education, financial literacy and other common
element to take appropriate decision relating to spending of available income. As per the opinion
of Montalban (2016), the belief that availability of policy relating to income management will
provide the same advantage to general public and the same leads to its formation.
QUESTION 4
Technically, the factor of sameness contradict the ‘differences’ and diversity that exists between
people who are disabled. However, this sameness requires them to realize that ‘others’ are same
as the able-bodied. In contrast with this, ‘difference’, is seen as providing scope for identifying
the ‘differences’ that exists in people with disability along with their disadvantaged position and
providing them with ‘special’ or redistributive treatment that will be based on providing equal
access to income. However, this kind of redistributive treatment is complex because reinforcing
these ‘differences’ of disabled people from the able-bodied norm is a problematic task. Both the

factors- sameness and difference treat disabled with special policies. With this policy, the power
to transform disability into power and privilege will be lost. Although both sameness and
difference are loaded with problems, they become useful lens for analyzing and understanding
the PCW category and their evolvement and governance. This policy can be used for suggesting
that PCW people were previously governed through difference, and now being governed through
sameness as a result of the Welfare in the Work reforms.
In accordance with Rowley, Lawn and Coveney (2015), this means that like the other
unemployed, people with PCW have to search and maintain their employment and sustain the
obligations of their contract. They will be subjected to penalty if any failure occurs in this regard.
It is also argued, that sameness sometimes fails to deliver equality to PCW people as it sustains
the rights and duties of able-body ones as the standard through which people are regulated in
NSA. This implies that current systems of privileged people and those of disadvantaged ones are
ignored. This also neglects the needs of needs of people with a PCW as they differ in various
senses from the able bodied norm and the structural barriers of these people’s experience in
relation to employment, continue to be unaddressed. There are not sufficient scholarships on the
mechanical income management of people with a PCW under the measures of New Income
Management, specifically under the measure of long-term payment of recipient.
This problem emphasizes the importance of evaluating policy intersections and their connections
with governance. The author of the book WPR- Bacchi suggests that policies are generally
situated within a network of related policies and are needed to be considered as part of analysis.
In recognition of this, the researcher of the income management will have to analyse various
policy documents in this regard for understanding the people with PCW and their governance in
modern reforms. They also have to analyse the income support system for such people along
with their relation to changes that occur in the system of disability care and support. This
analysis comprises of the SSOLA (Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment) and
Welfare Reform and Reinstatement of the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA) Act 2010, which are
basic legislations of New Income Management reforms. This trend which is focused on moving
more people with disability into employment through various welfare reforms has become more
consistent with time (Fisher and et.al, 2015). Recently, the budget measures of 2014-15 of the
government of Federal Abbott Liberal National Coalition proclaimed many further changes to

the employment eligibility of DSP. In accordance with the words of Corr and Carey (2017),
these changes comprise of compulsory activities which are work-oriented on DSP recipients who
are 35 years and under and have a capacity to work at least 8 hours/week.
QUESTION 5
Silences in income management policy
Income management policy restricts the spending of money on alcohol, drugs and betting but did
not emphasize the manner in which it affects the society. Even though no appropriate evidence
regarding the success of application of policy is attained; no effective measures have been taken
to ascertain the reason behind the same. The emphasis on financial harassment is made but
silence regarding harassment exists in the policy. Assessment of other reasons which encourage
spending of non-social activities should be ascertained so that efficient control on this spending
can be made. No specification regarding these issues has been provided in the policy regarding
the same. Thus, the same has affected the effective implementation of the policy. Moreover, no
provision relating assessment or checking is available in policy regarding its effective application
(Arden, Manathunga and Bottrell, 2017). Due to same reason it cannot be ascertained whether
any significant change due to same has occurred or not.
As the policy is implemented as an operational process by tailoring the program as per the needs
of individual; but has not emphasized all the variants which affects the society. In accordance
with the views of Lancaster, Seear and Treloar (2015), this policy is not restricted to all the
individuals as the voluntary scheme is also available. As mixed report regarding the results of
effectiveness of policy exists it could not be assessed that whether success has been attained in
same or not. The main emphasis has been made on the manner in which people could deal with
the daily issues of managing money expenditure and decrease the rate of expenditure of non-
social or harmful spending. However, no emphasis has been made on other indirect variants
which affect the income management.
Different approach to the problem
The other outcomes which have been analyzed after assessing the income management policies
are that the policy had not build independence as well individual capability of managing income.
Thus, the specified aspect requires to be focused in order to enable people manage the available
funds with them in more appropriate manner. A fact which cannot be denied that policy has

made life of many people easier through relieving them with the methods of managing funds. It
was accepted by most of the people that managing funds has become easier with the acceptance
of provision of polices (van Toorn and Dowse, 2016).
Another approach which is required to be assessed regarding this policy is that emphasis has
been made on management of income but the other variants which indirectly affect it were not
accessed. The policy should be provided along with assistance regarding managing the funds so
that public could know the reason behind provision of the policy. This will make people
independent and will allow them to make decision relating to their income in more appropriate
manner. Moreover, they will not just follow the provision but will be able to assess the reason
behind the same. The prospective of amending the manner of thinking of people is also required
to be reconstructed in order to attain the objective of the policy. In accordance with the opinion
of Pereira (2014), it will allow people to assess the manner of spending and restrict expenditure
relating to non-social activities. Appropriate importance to morality nature should also be
provided so that people could be encourage to not to spend on activities such as alcohol, betting
etc. Other variants which are required to be assessed are focusing on individual financial
management capacity.

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Arden, M., Manathunga, C. and Bottrell, D., 2017. Identity Construction Through Australian
University Student Mobility Program. Student Culture and Identity in Higher Education, p.1.
Corr, L. and Carey, G., 2017. Investigating the institutional norms and values of the Productivity
Commission: The 2011 and 2015 childcare inquiries. Australian Journal of Public
Administration, 76(2), pp.147-159.
Dee, M., 2013. Welfare surveillance, income management and new paternalism in
Australia. Surveillance & Society, 11(3), p.272.
Fisher, M., Baum, F., MacDougall, C., Newman, L. and McDermott, D., 2015. A qualitative
methodological framework to assess uptake of evidence on social determinants of health in
health policy. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 11(4), pp.491-
507.
Klein, E., 2016. Neoliberal subjectivities and the behavioural focus on income
management. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 51(4), pp.503-523.
Lancaster, K., Seear, K. and Treloar, C., 2015. Laws prohibiting peer distribution of injecting
equipment in Australia: A critical analysis of their effects. International Journal of Drug
Policy, 26(12), pp.1198-1206.
Lovell, M.E., 2016. The normalisation of income management in Australia: analysis of the
parliamentary debates of 2007 and 2009–10. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 51(4), pp.433-
448.
Mendes, P., 2013. Compulsory income management: a critical examination of the emergence of
conditional welfare in Australia. Australian Social Work, 66(4), pp.495-510.
Mendes, P., Waugh, J. and Flynn, C., 2013. A community development critique of compulsory
income management in Australia.
Mendes, P., Waugh, J. and Flynn, C., 2014. Income management in Australia: A critical
examination of the evidence. International Journal of Social Welfare, 23(4), pp.362-372.
Montalban, M., 2017. A critical analysis of the Australian Defence Force policy on maternal
health care. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health.
Parsons, K., Katz, I., Macvean, M., Spada-Rinaldis, S. and Shackleton, F., 2016. Alternatives to
Income Management.
Pereira, R.B., 2014. Using critical policy analysis in occupational science research: exploring
Bacchi's methodology. Journal of Occupational Science, 21(4), pp.389-402.

Rowley, D., Lawn, S.J. and Coveney, J.D., 2015. Two heads are better than one: Australian
tobacco control experts.
van Toorn, G. and Dowse, L., 2016. Policy claims and problem frames: a cross-case comparison
of evidence-based policy in an Australian context. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research,
Debate and Practice, 12(1), pp.9-24.