Since May 2022 (when Labor took office), the base rate of JobSeeker for a single person has indeed increased by $135 per fortnight, representing a 21% increase [1].
This is confirmed by the Department of Social Services, which states: "Since May 2022, the base rate of JobSeeker for a single person has increased by $135 per fortnight, which is an increase of 21 per cent since Labor was elected" [1].
The government also extended the higher rate to single recipients with 0-14 hours per week capacity to work, providing an additional $54.90 per fortnight from September 2024 [2].
The government claims JobSeeker recipients are between $3,374 and $5,038 per year better off as a result of indexation and Labor's changes over the past three years [2].
缺失背景
然而 rán ér , , 该 gāi 表述 biǎo shù 遗漏 yí lòu 了 le 几个 jǐ gè 关键 guān jiàn 的 de 背景 bèi jǐng 因素 yīn sù : :
However, the claim omits several critical contextual factors:
**1.
Payment mechanism—Indexation, not substantive policy change:** Most of the increase is automatic indexation linked to the Consumer Price Index (inflation).
According to budget analysis, this means "the nominal payment amount increases... [but is] primarily designed to maintain purchasing power rather than provide real increases above inflation" [3].
The Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee recommended increasing JobSeeker to 90% of the aged pension (approximately $1,004.67 per fortnight for singles), more than $200 above current rates [4].
**4.
Comparatively low by international standards:** Australia remains "near the bottom of OECD advanced economic nations when it comes to the adequacy of out-of-work payments" [4].
Limited actual beneficiaries:** During 2024, of the more than one million people relying on JobSeeker, **only 4,700 received an increase in their base rate** [3].
The government has cleverly calculated the cumulative impact of CPI indexation from May 2022 and framed it as "Labor's achievement," when in reality:
1. **Most increase is mechanical indexation:** The $135 represents cost-of-living adjustments linked to inflation, not discretionary policy decisions.
When someone's salary is indexed to inflation, we don't claim credit for "increasing wages"—we recognize this as maintaining purchasing power [3].
2. **Real purchasing power problem:** While nominal payments increased by $135, **real wages for unemployed Australians remain severely constrained**.
当 dāng 某人 mǒu rén 的 de 工资 gōng zī 与 yǔ 通胀 tōng zhàng 挂钩 guà gōu 时 shí , , 我们 wǒ men 不会 bú huì 声称 shēng chēng " " 增加 zēng jiā 了 le 工资 gōng zī " " 的 de 功劳 gōng láo — — — — 我们 wǒ men 认识 rèn shí 到 dào 这 zhè 是 shì 维持 wéi chí 购买力 gòu mǎi lì [ [ 3 3 ] ] 。 。
Housing costs, energy, and food inflation have outpaced general CPI, meaning JobSeeker recipients are experiencing deteriorating living standards [5].
Single private renters in capital cities would need a 45% increase to cover basic housing costs [5].
3. **The claim distracts from inadequacy:** The 21% nominal increase sounds substantial, but disguises the reality that JobSeeker recipients are experiencing increasing material deprivation.
One in two JobSeeker recipients experience multiple material deprivation (inability to afford basic necessities), compared to one in twelve Australians overall [5].
Approximately 14 times more JobSeeker recipients lack a substantial meal at least once a day compared to the general population [5].
4. **Narrow beneficiary pool:** By framing this as a universal achievement, the government obscures the fact that 99.5% of JobSeeker recipients saw only indexation (inflation adjustment), not actual payment increases from new government policy [3].
5. **Economic case ignored:** Research shows a return of $1.24 for every dollar invested in increasing JobSeeker [5], yet the government opted not to pursue genuine increases beyond indexation.
Technically accurate but frames automatic inflation adjustment as a policy achievement, obscuring continued inadequacy of payments and abandonment of election commitments to substantially increase JobSeeker.
Technically accurate but frames automatic inflation adjustment as a policy achievement, obscuring continued inadequacy of payments and abandonment of election commitments to substantially increase JobSeeker.