Today a former Labor Minister suggested that Australia would be a much nicer place if poor people just wouldn’t breed so much.
Gary Johns, who served as a Minister in the Keating Government, said that people claiming government assistance – specifically the dole – should be forced to show that they were taking contraception to receive the money they need to live on.
Oh sorry, did I say people? I meant to say, “women”. Because that is who Johns was really talking about in his column for The Australian today.
Gary Johns, a former Keating Government Minister.
Johns’ column opens:
“If a person’s sole source of income is the taxpayer, the person, as a condition of benefit, must have contraception. No contraception, no benefit.”
Under his proposal, which he insists should be seriously considered and attract bipartisan support, women would not receive any government assistance unless they can show their pill prescription to Centrelink.
“So when a person applies for a benefit you have to bring along a note from the doctor, that I have now taken the following drug, and will remain on it while I am on the dole,” Johns suggests, helpfully.
People drawing government assistance should be forced to prove they’re taking contraception, says Mr Johns.
And it gets worse.
Just to ram home exactly who he’s talking about in his opinion piece, Johns draws an exceptionally ugly link between parents drawing government assistance and the mother accused of murdering her eight children in Cairns earlier this month.
“A single mother with nine children from five fathers … better this woman had fewer children,'” he wrote in his column.
Johns eluded to the death of eight children in Cairns as part of his argument.
It’s difficult to know where to start with how ridiculously offensive this proposal is.
Even if we’ve don’t talk about the fact that people who are on income support are not there by choice.
Even if we discount the fact that Johns is targeting people with a disability, people who are injured or unwell, people who are in work but on perilously low wages – all through no fault of their own.
Even if we can overlook that his proposal consciously and offensively discriminates against people of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent and young people. Even if we discount how invasive and unethical it is to ask someone to be medicated to receive a benefit.
Top Comments
It's absolutely true that humans all have a right to free expression of their sexuality. What they don't have is a right to financial assistance from the state. Now, we in Australia have agreed that we should support people who don't support themselves, but the state is perfectly within its right to attach qualifications and requirements to this support.
The reason we support children in particular is that children cannot choose their situation. If a parent doesn't support them we cannot abide them simply doing without. It's WRONG, and the state should always strive to protect children from as much of the harm a parent's mistakes may cause as possible (of course within reason!).
But discouraging people from having kids they cannot afford under their own steam doesn't make parenting the preserve of the "rich". Australia isn't divided between the rich and the welfare-dependent. Most people take care of their children.
There's a million things to say about this story but I haven't got a week to write them all. I think that the only thing I can say in the time that I have is that many people receive no other income apart from welfare payments to support their children so in essence this is their paid work. The issue for me is that when I enter into paid work I have to be interviewed to ensure that I am qualified and suitable for the position.