In last year’s encyclical, Fratelli Tutti, Pope Francis spent time drawing on the well-worn parable of the Good Samaritan. He suggested its regular retelling is a function of its simplicity and its universality. We have all encountered a person suffering, and we have all had to decide what action we’ll take. Francis suggests this frames the key decision for our lives: will we be like the priest and Levite in the parable who walk by, or the Samaritan who shows compassion, and acts?
The parable expands the definition of neighbour. It urgently asks us to look to those at risk, even those we might not want to see. Today, our neighbour includes the nearly one million Australians relying on JobSeeker who risk being left at the side of the road if their payment reverts to the pre-pandemic $40 a day on 31 March. Some, like Federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, seem to be walking by. Others, like Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe, seem willing to stop and show compassion. Lowe suggests ‘a wide consensus in the community that the previous [unemployment payment] should be increased permanently.’
Maybe this consensus has formed because we recognise the problem of inequality in our society. A report from the Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) at the end of last year confirms the depth and extent of the inequity we live with. It uses pre-pandemic numbers and is the more sobering for it.
The size and spread of government payments in past 12 months has held steady, and to some extent, improved the circumstances of many on low incomes or government support. The withdrawal of that support risks returning many to payments that do not provide for basic human needs.
The ACOSS report shows that, pre-pandemic, half of those on Jobseeker were likely to be in households in poverty, and those who weren’t suffered rental stress and were stymied by a lack of financial reserves. Without the coronavirus supplement the average after-tax income of these households in the bottom 10 per cent of income earners is $592 per week. This contrasts with the $6,796 per week taken home after tax by those in the top 5 per cent. The household wealth of this top 5 per cent is five times that of even a middle-income household.
There’s no surprise in the range of incomes across households; difference is to be expected in a regulated but free