部分属实

评分: 6.0/10

Coalition
C0145

声明内容

“在疫情期间向求职机构增加了行政付款,总计3亿美元。”
原始来源: Matthew Davis

原始来源

事实核查

CoalitionCoalition Coalition 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ zài zài 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā duì duì jobactivejobactive jobactive 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě de de 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn 这一zhè yī zhè yī 核心hé xīn hé xīn 声明shēng míng shēng míng 基本jī běn jī běn 准确zhǔn què zhǔn què 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 33 3 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán 这一zhè yī zhè yī 数字shù zì shù zì 需要xū yào xū yào 仔细zǐ xì zǐ xì de de 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng 解读jiě dú jiě dú
The core claim that the Coalition government increased administrative payments to jobactive providers during the pandemic is substantially accurate, though the $300 million figure requires careful contextual interpretation.
根据gēn jù gēn jù MichaelMichael Michael WestWest West 文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 引用yǐn yòng yǐn yòng 教育jiào yù jiào yù 技能jì néng jì néng 就业jiù yè jiù yè 部副bù fù bù fù 秘书长mì shū zhǎng mì shū zhǎng NathanNathan Nathan SmythSmyth Smyth de de 说法shuō fǎ shuō fǎ jobactivejobactive jobactive 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě de de medianmedian median 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng cóng cóng 每位měi wèi měi wèi xīn xīn 客户kè hù kè hù 300300 300 美元měi yuán měi yuán 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā dào dào 391391 391 美元měi yuán měi yuán [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
According to the Michael West article citing Deputy Secretary Nathan Smyth of the Department of Education, Skills and Employment, the median administration fee for jobactive providers was increased from $300 to $391 per new client [1].
对于duì yú duì yú 2525 25 suì suì 以下yǐ xià yǐ xià de de 就业jiù yè jiù yè 准备zhǔn bèi zhǔn bèi 人员rén yuán rén yuán 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā dào dào 547547 547 美元měi yuán měi yuán [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
For job-ready people under 25, the fee increased to $547 [1].
文章wén zhāng wén zhāng chēng chēng "" " 根据gēn jù gēn jù SmythSmyth Smyth de de 数据shù jù shù jù zhè zhè 意味着yì wèi zhe yì wèi zhe 由于yóu yú yóu yú 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 由此yóu cǐ yóu cǐ 产生chǎn shēng chǎn shēng de de 大规模dà guī mó dà guī mó 失业shī yè shī yè 机构jī gòu jī gòu jiāng jiāng 获得huò dé huò dé 超过chāo guò chāo guò 33 3 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán de de xīn xīn 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng "" " [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
The article states that "based on Smyth's figures this means the agencies will get more than $300 million in new administration fees due to the pandemic and the resulting mass unemployment" [1].
MichaelMichael Michael WestWest West de de 分析fēn xī fēn xī 计算jì suàn jì suàn 如下rú xià rú xià dào dào 20202020 2020 nián nián 88 8 yuè yuè yuē yuē yǒu yǒu 813813 813 ,, , 000000 000 名新míng xīn míng xīn de de jobactivejobactive jobactive 申请者shēn qǐng zhě shēn qǐng zhě 相比xiāng bǐ xiāng bǐ 疫情yì qíng yì qíng qián qián de de 633633 633 ,, , 318318 318 rén rén [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā dào dào 平均píng jūn píng jūn 391391 391 美元měi yuán měi yuán 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ xiàng xiàng 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 机构jī gòu jī gòu 支付zhī fù zhī fù le le 超过chāo guò chāo guò 33 3 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán de de 额外é wài é wài 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
The Michael West analysis calculated this as follows: With approximately 813,000 new jobactive applicants by August 2020 (compared to 633,318 before the pandemic) [1], and administration fees increased to an average of $391, the government paid more than $300 million in additional administration fees to job service agencies [1].
PerPer Per CapitaCapita Capita 20202020 2020 nián nián 44 4 yuè yuè de de 报告bào gào bào gào 估计gū jì gū jì jobactivejobactive jobactive caseloadcaseload caseload 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 7070 70 万人wàn rén wàn rén jiāng jiāng 导致dǎo zhì dǎo zhì 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ xiàng xiàng 机构jī gòu jī gòu 额外é wài é wài 支付zhī fù zhī fù 2.12.1 2.1 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
Per Capita's April 2020 report estimated that a 700,000-person increase in the jobactive caseload would result in $210 million in additional government payments to agencies [2].
这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn zài zài 官方guān fāng guān fāng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 通讯tōng xùn tōng xùn 中有zhōng yǒu zhōng yǒu 记录jì lù jì lù
These payments were documented in official government communications.
20202020 2020 nián nián 66 6 yuè yuè 秘书长mì shū zhǎng mì shū zhǎng NathanNathan Nathan SmythSmyth Smyth 致信zhì xìn zhì xìn jobactivejobactive jobactive 首席shǒu xí shǒu xí 执行官zhí xíng guān zhí xíng guān 确认què rèn què rèn 由于yóu yú yóu yú COVIDCOVID COVID -- - 1919 19 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 影响yǐng xiǎng yǐng xiǎng 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng 成果chéng guǒ chéng guǒ 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng 进行jìn xíng jìn xíng le le 临时lín shí lín shí zài zài 平衡píng héng píng héng [[ [ 33 3 ]] ]
A June 2020 letter from Deputy Secretary Nathan Smyth to jobactive CEO's confirmed the temporary rebalancing of administration and outcome fees due to the COVID-19 pandemic impact [3].
文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 进一步jìn yí bù jìn yí bù 指出zhǐ chū zhǐ chū 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng měi měi 六个月liù gè yuè liù gè yuè 支付zhī fù zhī fù 一次yī cì yī cì 意味着yì wèi zhe yì wèi zhe "" " 那个nà ge nà ge 33 3 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán de de 数字shù zì shù zì zhǐ zhǐ 考虑kǎo lǜ kǎo lǜ le le xiàng xiàng xīn xīn 申请者shēn qǐng zhě shēn qǐng zhě 支付zhī fù zhī fù de de 第一笔dì yī bǐ dì yī bǐ 款项kuǎn xiàng kuǎn xiàng "" " [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
The article further notes that administration fees were paid every six months, meaning "that $300 million figure only takes into account the first tranche of payments to new applicants" [1].
考虑kǎo lǜ kǎo lǜ dào dào duì duì 现有xiàn yǒu xiàn yǒu 客户kè hù kè hù 新增xīn zēng xīn zēng 申请者shēn qǐng zhě shēn qǐng zhě de de 持续chí xù chí xù 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn 文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 保守bǎo shǒu bǎo shǒu 估计gū jì gū jì 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ xiàng xiàng 机构jī gòu jī gòu 支付zhī fù zhī fù le le "" " 超过chāo guò chāo guò 55 5 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán "" " [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
When considering ongoing payments to existing clients plus new applicants, the article conservatively estimates the government paid "more than half-a-billion dollars to agencies" [1].

缺失背景

gāi gāi 声明shēng míng shēng míng jiāng jiāng 描述miáo shù miáo shù wèi wèi 孤立gū lì gū lì de de 负面fù miàn fù miàn 行为xíng wéi xíng wéi dàn dàn 缺乏quē fá quē fá 关于guān yú guān yú 为何wèi hé wèi hé 发生fā shēng fā shēng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn de de 重要zhòng yào zhòng yào 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng
The claim presents this as an isolated negative action without important context about why these payments occurred: **Why payments were increased:** During the pandemic, the unemployment caseload more than doubled from 633,318 to approximately 1.45 million by July 2020 [1].
** * ** * 为何wèi hé wèi hé 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn ** * ** * 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 失业shī yè shī yè caseloadcaseload caseload cóng cóng 633633 633 ,, , 318318 318 rén rén 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā le le 一倍yí bèi yí bèi duō duō dào dào 20202020 2020 nián nián 77 7 yuè yuè 达到dá dào dá dào yuē yuē 145145 145 万人wàn rén wàn rén [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
The government explicitly acknowledged that jobactive providers needed additional funding to manage this unprecedented surge in client numbers [3].
政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 明确míng què míng què 承认chéng rèn chéng rèn jobactivejobactive jobactive 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě 需要xū yào xū yào 额外é wài é wài 资金zī jīn zī jīn lái lái 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 这一zhè yī zhè yī 前所未有qián suǒ wèi yǒu qián suǒ wèi yǒu de de 客户kè hù kè hù 激增jī zēng jī zēng [[ [ 33 3 ]] ]
This was not a discretionary increase for profit-taking, but a structural response to mass unemployment. **Policy trade-off:** The government directed many newly unemployed people to its Online Employment Services (OES) system to "slow the referral of unemployed workers to jobactive" and manage costs [4].
zhè zhè 不是bú shì bú shì wèi wèi 谋取móu qǔ móu qǔ 利润lì rùn lì rùn de de 酌情zhuó qíng zhuó qíng 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā 而是ér shì ér shì duì duì 大规模dà guī mó dà guī mó 失业shī yè shī yè de de 结构性jié gòu xìng jié gòu xìng 回应huí yìng huí yìng
This shows the government was attempting to manage the cost blow-out of the privatized system, not carelessly expanding payments. **Nature of administration fees:** Administration fees are standard in privatized employment services systems worldwide.
** * ** * 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 权衡quán héng quán héng ** * ** * 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ jiāng jiāng 许多xǔ duō xǔ duō xīn xīn 失业shī yè shī yè 人员rén yuán rén yuán 引导yǐn dǎo yǐn dǎo zhì zhì 在线zài xiàn zài xiàn 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù OESOES OES 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng "" " 减缓jiǎn huǎn jiǎn huǎn xiàng xiàng jobactivejobactive jobactive de de 失业工人shī yè gōng rén shī yè gōng rén 转介zhuǎn jiè zhuǎn jiè "" " bìng bìng 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 成本chéng běn chéng běn [[ [ 44 4 ]] ]
These fees cover the cost of client intake, job planning, case management, and administrative overhead.
zhè zhè 表明biǎo míng biǎo míng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 试图shì tú shì tú 控制kòng zhì kòng zhì 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng de de 成本chéng běn chéng běn 膨胀péng zhàng péng zhàng ér ér fēi fēi 轻率地qīng shuài dì qīng shuài dì 扩大kuò dà kuò dà 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn
Australia's privatized jobactive model has been in place since the 1990s under both Coalition and Labor governments [1]. **Criticism applies to system design, not just Coalition actions:** The underlying issues with jobactive (such as "creaming and parking," placing clients in temporary jobs to generate outcome fees, and inadequate support for hard-to-place job seekers) were structural problems identified in 2019 Senate inquiries [1] that predated the Coalition's pandemic response [5].
** * ** * 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng de de 性质xìng zhì xìng zhì ** * ** * 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng zài zài 世界各地shì jiè gè dì shì jiè gè dì de de 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng 中是zhōng shì zhōng shì 标准biāo zhǔn biāo zhǔn 做法zuò fǎ zuò fǎ
这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng 涵盖hán gài hán gài 客户kè hù kè hù intakeintake intake 就业jiù yè jiù yè 规划guī huà guī huà 案件àn jiàn àn jiàn 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng overheadoverhead overhead de de 成本chéng běn chéng běn
澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà de de 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà jobactivejobactive jobactive 模式mó shì mó shì 19901990 1990 年代nián dài nián dài 以来yǐ lái yǐ lái zài zài CoalitionCoalition Coalition LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ xià xià 一直yì zhí yì zhí 存在cún zài cún zài [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
** * ** * 批评pī píng pī píng 适用shì yòng shì yòng 制度zhì dù zhì dù 设计shè jì shè jì ér ér fēi fēi 仅仅jǐn jǐn jǐn jǐn shì shì CoalitionCoalition Coalition de de 行为xíng wéi xíng wéi ** * ** * jobactivejobactive jobactive de de 根本gēn běn gēn běn 问题wèn tí wèn tí "" " 挑肥拣瘦tiāo féi jiǎn shòu tiāo féi jiǎn shòu 搁置gē zhì gē zhì "" " jiāng jiāng 客户kè hù kè hù 安置ān zhì ān zhì zài zài 临时lín shí lín shí 工作gōng zuò gōng zuò 中以zhōng yǐ zhōng yǐ 产生chǎn shēng chǎn shēng 成果chéng guǒ chéng guǒ 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng 以及yǐ jí yǐ jí duì duì 难以nán yǐ nán yǐ 安置ān zhì ān zhì de de 求职者qiú zhí zhě qiú zhí zhě 支持zhī chí zhī chí 不足bù zú bù zú shì shì 20192019 2019 nián nián 参议院cān yì yuàn cān yì yuàn 调查diào chá diào chá zhōng zhōng 确定què dìng què dìng de de 结构性jié gòu xìng jié gòu xìng 问题wèn tí wèn tí [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 问题wèn tí wèn tí 早于zǎo yú zǎo yú CoalitionCoalition Coalition de de 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 应对yìng duì yìng duì 措施cuò shī cuò shī [[ [ 55 5 ]] ]

来源可信度评估

** * ** * MichaelMichael Michael WestWest West MediaMedia Media ** * ** * 根据gēn jù gēn jù MediaMedia Media BiasBias Bias // / FactFact Fact CheckCheck Check MichaelMichael Michael WestWest West MediaMedia Media "" " 自称zì chēng zì chēng 无党派wú dǎng pài wú dǎng pài dàn dàn 强烈qiáng liè qiáng liè 反对fǎn duì fǎn duì 企业qǐ yè qǐ yè 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 精英jīng yīng jīng yīng de de 方式fāng shì fāng shì 框架kuāng jià kuāng jià 故事gù shì gù shì 导致dǎo zhì dǎo zhì 明显míng xiǎn míng xiǎn de de 左倾zuǒ qīng zuǒ qīng 偏见piān jiàn piān jiàn "" " [[ [ 66 6 ]] ]
**Michael West Media:** According to Media Bias/Fact Check, Michael West Media "presents itself as non-partisan but strongly frames stories against corporate and government elites, resulting in a clear left-leaning bias" [6].
gāi gāi 组织zǔ zhī zǔ zhī "" " 经常jīng cháng jīng cháng 批评pī píng pī píng 跨国公司kuà guó gōng sī kuà guó gōng sī 化石huà shí huà shí 燃料rán liào rán liào 公司gōng sī gōng sī 财富cái fù cái fù de de 政治zhèng zhì zhèng zhì 联系lián xì lián xì "" " bèi bèi 描述miáo shù miáo shù wèi wèi zài zài 编辑biān jí biān jí 立场lì chǎng lì chǎng shàng shàng 具有jù yǒu jù yǒu "" " 左派zuǒ pài zuǒ pài 偏见piān jiàn piān jiàn "" " [[ [ 66 6 ]] ]
The organization "frequently criticizes multinational corporations, fossil fuel firms, and political connections to wealth" and is described as having a "Left bias" in editorial stance [6].
MichaelMichael Michael WestWest West shì shì 一位yī wèi yī wèi 获得huò dé huò dé WalkleyWalkley Walkley jiǎng jiǎng de de 记者jì zhě jì zhě zài zài 调查diào chá diào chá 报道bào dào bào dào 方面fāng miàn fāng miàn yǒu yǒu tracktrack track recordrecord record 这为zhè wèi zhè wèi 研究yán jiū yán jiū 增添zēng tiān zēng tiān le le 可信度kě xìn dù kě xìn dù [[ [ 77 7 ]] ]
Michael West is a Walkley Award-winning journalist with a track record in investigative reporting, lending credibility to his research [7].
然而rán ér rán ér 左倾zuǒ qīng zuǒ qīng 框架kuāng jià kuāng jià 表明biǎo míng biǎo míng 文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 强调qiáng diào qiáng diào CoalitionCoalition Coalition 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè de de 负面fù miàn fù miàn 方面fāng miàn fāng miàn 同时tóng shí tóng shí 可能kě néng kě néng 淡化dàn huà dàn huà 系统性xì tǒng xìng xì tǒng xìng 问题wèn tí wèn tí huò huò 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 依据yī jù yī jù
However, the left-leaning framing suggests the article emphasizes negative aspects of Coalition policies while potentially minimizing systemic issues or policy rationales. **Per Capita:** Per Capita is an Australian think tank that focuses on inequality and social policy.
** * ** * PerPer Per CapitaCapita Capita ** * ** * PerPer Per CapitaCapita Capita shì shì 一家yī jiā yī jiā 澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà 智库zhì kù zhì kù 专注zhuān zhù zhuān zhù 平等píng děng píng děng 社会shè huì shè huì 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè
The organization has published multiple critical reports on jobactive [2].
gāi gāi 组织zǔ zhī zǔ zhī 发表fā biǎo fā biǎo le le 多份duō fèn duō fèn 关于guān yú guān yú jobactivejobactive jobactive de de 批评pī píng pī píng 报告bào gào bào gào [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
Per Capita's research appears rigorous and evidence-based, though the organization's progressive policy orientation should be noted [2]. **Government sources:** The article relies on statements from Nathan Smyth, Deputy Secretary of the Department of Education, Skills and Employment, which are official government sources with direct access to spending data [1][3].
PerPer Per CapitaCapita Capita de de 研究yán jiū yán jiū 看起来kàn qǐ lái kàn qǐ lái 严谨yán jǐn yán jǐn qiě qiě 基于jī yú jī yú 证据zhèng jù zhèng jù 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn gāi gāi 组织zǔ zhī zǔ zhī de de 进步jìn bù jìn bù 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 倾向qīng xiàng qīng xiàng 值得注意zhí de zhù yì zhí de zhù yì [[ [ 22 2 ]] ]
** * ** * 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 来源lái yuán lái yuán ** * ** * 文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 引用yǐn yòng yǐn yòng le le 教育jiào yù jiào yù 技能jì néng jì néng 就业jiù yè jiù yè 部副bù fù bù fù 秘书长mì shū zhǎng mì shū zhǎng NathanNathan Nathan SmythSmyth Smyth de de 声明shēng míng shēng míng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē shì shì 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 接触jiē chù jiē chù 支出zhī chū zhī chū 数据shù jù shù jù de de 官方guān fāng guān fāng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 来源lái yuán lái yuán [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 33 3 ]] ]
⚖️

工党对比

** * ** * LaborLabor Labor 是否shì fǒu shì fǒu 做过zuò guò zuò guò 类似lèi sì lèi sì de de 事情shì qíng shì qíng
**Did Labor do something similar?** Labor established the privatized jobactive employment services system's predecessor.
** * ** *
The original "Job Network" was introduced by the Howard Coalition government in the mid-1990s [1], but the subsequent Labor government (2007-2013) under Rudd and Gillard maintained and expanded this privatized model rather than reversing it [1].
LaborLabor Labor 建立jiàn lì jiàn lì le le 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà jobactivejobactive jobactive 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng de de 前身qián shēn qián shēn
During the Global Financial Crisis (2008-2009), which also created mass unemployment, Labor's response included maintaining spending on privatized employment services [8].
最初zuì chū zuì chū de de "" " JobJob Job NetworkNetwork Network "" " yóu yóu HowardHoward Howard CoalitionCoalition Coalition 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ zài zài 19901990 1990 年代nián dài nián dài 中期zhōng qī zhōng qī 推出tuī chū tuī chū [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] dàn dàn 随后suí hòu suí hòu de de LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 20072007 2007 -- - 20132013 2013 nián nián zài zài 陆克文lù kè wén lù kè wén 吉拉德jí lā dé jí lā dé 领导lǐng dǎo lǐng dǎo xià xià 维持wéi chí wéi chí bìng bìng 扩展kuò zhǎn kuò zhǎn le le zhè zhè 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 模式mó shì mó shì ér ér fēi fēi 推翻tuī fān tuī fān [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
Labor's government provided stimulus payments and maintained the existing employment services infrastructure without dismantling the privatized provider system [8]. **Historical context:** Both Coalition and Labor governments have operated within Australia's privatized employment services framework for decades.
zài zài 全球quán qiú quán qiú 金融危机jīn róng wēi jī jīn róng wēi jī 期间qī jiān qī jiān 20082008 2008 -- - 20092009 2009 nián nián zhè zhè 造成zào chéng zào chéng le le 大规模dà guī mó dà guī mó 失业shī yè shī yè LaborLabor Labor de de 应对yìng duì yìng duì 措施cuò shī cuò shī 包括bāo kuò bāo kuò 维持wéi chí wéi chí duì duì 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù de de 支出zhī chū zhī chū [[ [ 88 8 ]] ]
The fundamental issue—relying on for-profit providers with administrative payments tied to client numbers—is not unique to the Coalition.
LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 提供tí gōng tí gōng le le 刺激cì jī cì jī 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn bìng bìng 维持wéi chí wéi chí le le 现有xiàn yǒu xiàn yǒu de de 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 基础设施jī chǔ shè shī jī chǔ shè shī ér ér 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu dismantledismantle dismantle 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng [[ [ 88 8 ]] ]
Labor created this system and maintained it throughout their time in government [1]. **No direct Labor equivalent during pandemic:** Labor was not in government during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022), so there is no direct comparable response to evaluate.
** * ** * 历史背景lì shǐ bèi jǐng lì shǐ bèi jǐng ** * ** * CoalitionCoalition Coalition LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 几十年jǐ shí nián jǐ shí nián lái lái dōu dōu zài zài 澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà de de 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 框架kuāng jià kuāng jià nèi nèi 运作yùn zuò yùn zuò
However, Labor's track record suggests they likely would have faced similar cost pressures if managing a comparable unemployment surge within the same privatized system.
根本gēn běn gēn běn 问题wèn tí wèn tí 依赖yī lài yī lài 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn 客户kè hù kè hù 数量shù liàng shù liàng 挂钩guà gōu guà gōu de de 营利性yíng lì xìng yíng lì xìng 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě 并非bìng fēi bìng fēi CoalitionCoalition Coalition 独有dú yǒu dú yǒu
LaborLabor Labor 创建chuàng jiàn chuàng jiàn le le zhè zhè 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng bìng bìng zài zài 执政zhí zhèng zhí zhèng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 维持wéi chí wéi chí le le [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
** * ** * 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē de de LaborLabor Labor equivalentequivalent equivalent ** * ** * LaborLabor Labor zài zài COVIDCOVID COVID -- - 1919 19 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 20202020 2020 -- - 20222022 2022 nián nián zài zài 执政zhí zhèng zhí zhèng 因此yīn cǐ yīn cǐ 没有méi yǒu méi yǒu 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 可比kě bǐ kě bǐ de de 对策duì cè duì cè lái lái 评估píng gū píng gū
然而rán ér rán ér LaborLabor Labor de de 记录jì lù jì lù 表明biǎo míng biǎo míng 如果rú guǒ rú guǒ zài zài 同一tóng yī tóng yī 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng nèi nèi 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 可比kě bǐ kě bǐ de de 失业shī yè shī yè 激增jī zēng jī zēng 他们tā men tā men hěn hěn 可能kě néng kě néng 面临miàn lín miàn lín 类似lèi sì lèi sì de de 压力yā lì yā lì
🌐

平衡视角

** * ** * 批评pī píng pī píng shì shì 有效yǒu xiào yǒu xiào de de dàn dàn 完整wán zhěng wán zhěng ** * ** *
**The criticism is valid but incomplete:** The article correctly identifies that jobactive providers received substantial additional payments during the pandemic, funded by taxpayers.
文章wén zhāng wén zhāng 正确zhèng què zhèng què 指出zhǐ chū zhǐ chū jobactivejobactive jobactive 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě zài zài 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 获得huò dé huò dé le le 大量dà liàng dà liàng 额外é wài é wài 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn yóu yóu 纳税人nà shuì rén nà shuì rén 资助zī zhù zī zhù
Administration fees are a form of government spending that could reasonably be criticized as: (a) enriching private providers while jobseekers struggle, (b) creating perverse incentives in a system where providers profit from client volume, and (c) potentially inefficient compared to alternative employment service models.
行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng shì shì 一种yī zhǒng yī zhǒng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 支出zhī chū zhī chū 可以kě yǐ kě yǐ 合理hé lǐ hé lǐ 批评pī píng pī píng wèi wèi (( ( aa a )) ) zài zài 求职者qiú zhí zhě qiú zhí zhě 挣扎zhēng zhá zhēng zhá 时使shí shǐ shí shǐ 私人sī rén sī rén 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě 致富zhì fù zhì fù (( ( bb b )) ) zài zài 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě cóng cóng 客户kè hù kè hù 数量shù liàng shù liàng zhōng zhōng 获利huò lì huò lì de de 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng zhōng zhōng 制造zhì zào zhì zào perverseperverse perverse incentivesincentives incentives 以及yǐ jí yǐ jí (( ( cc c )) ) 替代tì dài tì dài 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 模式mó shì mó shì 相比xiāng bǐ xiāng bǐ 可能kě néng kě néng 效率xiào lǜ xiào lǜ 低下dī xià dī xià
Per Capita and other critics argue the $300+ million could have been better spent on direct support to unemployed people, vocational training, or reformed employment services [4].
PerPer Per CapitaCapita Capita 其他qí tā qí tā 批评者pī píng zhě pī píng zhě 认为rèn wéi rèn wéi 33 3 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán 以上yǐ shàng yǐ shàng běn běn 可以kě yǐ kě yǐ 更好gèng hǎo gèng hǎo 用于yòng yú yòng yú 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 支持zhī chí zhī chí 失业shī yè shī yè 人员rén yuán rén yuán 职业培训zhí yè péi xùn zhí yè péi xùn huò huò 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé de de 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù [[ [ 44 4 ]] ]
This is a legitimate policy position. **However, the government's perspective:** The Coalition government faced an unprecedented crisis: unemployment that more than doubled in weeks.
这是zhè shì zhè shì 一个yí gè yí gè 合法hé fǎ hé fǎ de de 政策zhèng cè zhèng cè 立场lì chǎng lì chǎng
Jobactive providers needed immediate funding to handle the surge in clients.
** * ** * 然而rán ér rán ér cóng cóng 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ de de 角度jiǎo dù jiǎo dù 来看lái kàn lái kàn ** * ** *
Simply stopping administration payments would have meant employment services could not function—job interviews couldn't be conducted, job plans couldn't be written, and support services would collapse.
CoalitionCoalition Coalition 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 面临miàn lín miàn lín 前所未有qián suǒ wèi yǒu qián suǒ wèi yǒu de de 危机wēi jī wēi jī 失业率shī yè lǜ shī yè lǜ zài zài 几周jǐ zhōu jǐ zhōu nèi nèi 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā le le 一倍yí bèi yí bèi duō duō
The government also attempted to manage costs by directing newly unemployed to Online Employment Services [4], showing some effort to contain costs.
JobactiveJobactive Jobactive 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě 需要xū yào xū yào 立即lì jí lì jí 获得huò dé huò dé 资金zī jīn zī jīn lái lái 处理chǔ lǐ chǔ lǐ 激增jī zēng jī zēng de de 客户kè hù kè hù
And the government had trialed the New Employment Services Model (NESM) to reduce reliance on jobactive providers [1]. **The deeper systemic issue:** The criticism of "$300 million in pandemic payments" is really a criticism of Australia's privatized employment services model itself.
简单jiǎn dān jiǎn dān 停止tíng zhǐ tíng zhǐ 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn jiāng jiāng 意味着yì wèi zhe yì wèi zhe 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 无法wú fǎ wú fǎ 运作yùn zuò yùn zuò 无法wú fǎ wú fǎ 进行jìn xíng jìn xíng 求职qiú zhí qiú zhí 面试miàn shì miàn shì 无法wú fǎ wú fǎ 撰写zhuàn xiě zhuàn xiě 就业jiù yè jiù yè 计划jì huà jì huà 支持zhī chí zhī chí 服务fú wù fú wù jiāng jiāng 崩溃bēng kuì bēng kuì
A government-run employment service would not generate these private profits.
政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ hái hái 试图shì tú shì tú 通过tōng guò tōng guò jiāng jiāng xīn xīn 失业者shī yè zhě shī yè zhě 引导yǐn dǎo yǐn dǎo zhì zhì 在线zài xiàn zài xiàn 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù lái lái 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 成本chéng běn chéng běn [[ [ 44 4 ]] ] 显示xiǎn shì xiǎn shì chū chū 控制kòng zhì kòng zhì 成本chéng běn chéng běn de de 一些yī xiē yī xiē 努力nǔ lì nǔ lì
Per Capita's reports consistently recommend moving away from the privatized jobactive model [1][4].
而且ér qiě ér qiě 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 已经yǐ jīng yǐ jīng 试行shì xíng shì xíng le le xīn xīn 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 模式mó shì mó shì NESMNESM NESM 减少jiǎn shǎo jiǎn shǎo duì duì jobactivejobactive jobactive 提供者tí gōng zhě tí gōng zhě de de 依赖yī lài yī lài [[ [ 11 1 ]] ]
This is not a partisan issue—both Coalition and Labor governments have operated within this system, though both have proposed reforms. **Key context:** This is/is not unique to the Coalition - Australia has operated a privatized employment services system since 1994 under both Coalition and Labor governments.
** * ** * gèng gèng 深层shēn céng shēn céng de de 系统性xì tǒng xìng xì tǒng xìng 问题wèn tí wèn tí ** * ** *
Labor created it, Coalition maintained it.
duì duì "" " 33 3 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn "" " de de 批评pī píng pī píng 实际上shí jì shàng shí jì shàng shì shì duì duì 澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 模式mó shì mó shì 本身běn shēn běn shēn de de 批评pī píng pī píng
The cost blow-out during the pandemic was a direct consequence of this system design, not unique Coalition mismanagement.
政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 运营yùn yíng yùn yíng de de 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 不会bú huì bú huì 产生chǎn shēng chǎn shēng 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 私人sī rén sī rén 利润lì rùn lì rùn
The valid criticism is of the system itself, not of emergency pandemic funding.
PerPer Per CapitaCapita Capita de de 报告bào gào bào gào 一直yì zhí yì zhí 建议jiàn yì jiàn yì 摆脱bǎi tuō bǎi tuō 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà jobactivejobactive jobactive 模式mó shì mó shì [[ [ 11 1 ]] ] [[ [ 44 4 ]] ]
zhè zhè 不是bú shì bú shì 一个yí gè yí gè 党派dǎng pài dǎng pài 问题wèn tí wèn tí CoalitionCoalition Coalition LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ dōu dōu zài zài zhè zhè 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng nèi nèi 运作yùn zuò yùn zuò 尽管jǐn guǎn jǐn guǎn 两者liǎng zhě liǎng zhě dōu dōu 提出tí chū tí chū le le 改革gǎi gé gǎi gé 建议jiàn yì jiàn yì
** * ** * 关键guān jiàn guān jiàn 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng ** * ** * zhè zhè 并非bìng fēi bìng fēi CoalitionCoalition Coalition 独有dú yǒu dú yǒu 19941994 1994 nián nián 以来yǐ lái yǐ lái 澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà zài zài CoalitionCoalition Coalition LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ xià xià 一直yì zhí yì zhí 运作yùn zuò yùn zuò 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng
LaborLabor Labor 创建chuàng jiàn chuàng jiàn le le CoalitionCoalition Coalition 维持wéi chí wéi chí le le
疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān de de 成本chéng běn chéng běn 膨胀péng zhàng péng zhàng shì shì zhè zhè 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng 设计shè jì shè jì de de 直接zhí jiē zhí jiē 后果hòu guǒ hòu guǒ ér ér fēi fēi CoalitionCoalition Coalition 独有dú yǒu dú yǒu de de 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 不善bù shàn bù shàn
有效yǒu xiào yǒu xiào de de 批评pī píng pī píng shì shì 针对zhēn duì zhēn duì 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng 本身běn shēn běn shēn ér ér fēi fēi 紧急jǐn jí jǐn jí 疫情yì qíng yì qíng fundingfunding funding

部分属实

6.0

/ 10

gāi gāi 声明shēng míng shēng míng zài zài 事实上shì shí shàng shì shí shàng 准确zhǔn què zhǔn què CoalitionCoalition Coalition zài zài 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 增加zēng jiā zēng jiā le le duì duì 求职qiú zhí qiú zhí 机构jī gòu jī gòu de de 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn 33 3 亿美元yì měi yuán yì měi yuán de de 数字shù zì shù zì 得到dé dào dé dào 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 声明shēng míng shēng míng 独立dú lì dú lì 分析fēn xī fēn xī de de 支持zhī chí zhī chí
The claim is factually accurate that the Coalition increased administrative payments to job finding agencies during the pandemic, and the $300 million figure is supported by government statements and independent analysis.
然而rán ér rán ér gāi gāi 声明shēng míng shēng míng jiāng jiāng 描述miáo shù miáo shù wèi wèi 孤立gū lì gū lì de de 负面fù miàn fù miàn 决定jué dìng jué dìng 缺乏quē fá quē fá 重要zhòng yào zhòng yào 背景bèi jǐng bèi jǐng (( ( 11 1 )) ) 这些zhè xiē zhè xiē 付款fù kuǎn fù kuǎn shì shì duì duì 失业shī yè shī yè caseloadcaseload caseload cóng cóng 63.363.3 63.3 万人wàn rén wàn rén 激增jī zēng jī zēng zhì zhì 145145 145 万人wàn rén wàn rén de de 前所未有qián suǒ wèi yǒu qián suǒ wèi yǒu de de 回应huí yìng huí yìng (( ( 22 2 )) ) 行政xíng zhèng xíng zhèng 费用fèi yòng fèi yòng shì shì 早于zǎo yú zǎo yú CoalitionCoalition Coalition de de 澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 模式mó shì mó shì de de 结构性jié gòu xìng jié gòu xìng 组成部分zǔ chéng bù fèn zǔ chéng bù fèn (( ( 33 3 )) ) CoalitionCoalition Coalition LaborLabor Labor 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ dōu dōu zài zài zhè zhè 系统xì tǒng xì tǒng nèi nèi 运作yùn zuò yùn zuò 以及yǐ jí yǐ jí (( ( 44 4 )) ) 政府zhèng fǔ zhèng fǔ 试图shì tú shì tú 通过tōng guò tōng guò jiāng jiāng 客户kè hù kè hù 引导yǐn dǎo yǐn dǎo zhì zhì 在线zài xiàn zài xiàn 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù lái lái 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 成本chéng běn chéng běn
However, the claim presents this as an isolated negative decision without important context: (1) the payments were responses to unprecedented unemployment surging from 633k to 1.45 million clients, (2) administration fees are structural to Australia's privatized employment services model that predates the Coalition, (3) both Coalition and Labor governments have operated within this system, and (4) the government attempted to manage costs by directing clients to Online Employment Services.
这一zhè yī zhè yī 批评pī píng pī píng 更好gèng hǎo gèng hǎo 地被dì bèi dì bèi 理解lǐ jiě lǐ jiě wèi wèi duì duì 澳大利亚ào dà lì yà ào dà lì yà 私有化sī yǒu huà sī yǒu huà 就业jiù yè jiù yè 服务fú wù fú wù 模式mó shì mó shì de de 一般性yì bān xìng yì bān xìng 批评pī píng pī píng ér ér fēi fēi CoalitionCoalition Coalition zài zài 疫情yì qíng yì qíng 期间qī jiān qī jiān 特有tè yǒu tè yǒu de de 管理guǎn lǐ guǎn lǐ 不善bù shàn bù shàn
The criticism is better understood as a critique of Australia's privatized employment services model generally, not Coalition-specific mismanagement during the pandemic.

📚 来源与引用 (8)

  1. 1
    Pandemic goldmine for private unemployment agencies as Coalition boosts payments

    Pandemic goldmine for private unemployment agencies as Coalition boosts payments

    Half a billion dollars just for signing up people without jobs. Money for jam for the private job service agencies.

    Michael West
  2. 2
    At What Cost? Getting Back to Jobactive

    At What Cost? Getting Back to Jobactive

    This is the third paper in Per Capita’s series examining the operation and effectiveness of Australia’s employment services system, known as jobactive, in the context of the profound labour market disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Per Capita
  3. 3
    PDF

    Temporary change to jobactive payment model - Letter from Deputy Secretary Nathan Smyth

    Nesa Com • PDF Document
    Original link no longer available
  4. 4
    Redesigning Employment Services after COVID-19

    Redesigning Employment Services after COVID-19

    This discussion paper recommends that the government undertake a consultation to gather views on the options to adapt employment services to meet the needs of the post COVID-19 unemployment scenario.

    Per Capita
  5. 5
    PDF

    Jobactive failing those it is intended to serve

    Parlinfo Aph Gov • PDF Document
  6. 6
    Michael West Media - Bias and Credibility

    Michael West Media - Bias and Credibility

    LEFT BIAS These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation.  They may

    Media Bias/Fact Check
  7. 7
    en.wikipedia.org

    Michael West (journalist)

    En Wikipedia

  8. 8
    Government support for business, December quarter 2020

    Government support for business, December quarter 2020

    Australian Bureau of Statistics

评分方法

1-3: 不实

事实错误或恶意捏造。

4-6: 部分属实

有一定真实性,但缺乏背景或有所偏颇。

7-9: 基本属实

仅有微小的技术性或措辞问题。

10: 准确

完全经过验证且客观公正。

方法论: 评分通过交叉参照政府官方记录、独立事实核查机构和原始文件确定。