These days any political, social or economic problem is quickly cast as a human rights issue.
This week, for example, a parliamentary committee accused the Abbott Government of violating Australia’s international human rights obligations because it wants to limit the hand out of tax-payer funded welfare benefits.
Welfare changes included in the May Budget set stringent conditions for the payment of unemployment benefits to people under the age of 30. Failure to meet those conditions by hopeful recipients would mean no social security payments for six months.
But according to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights chaired by WA Liberal Senator Dean Smith, this is ‘incompatible with the right to social security’.
The so-called ‘right to social security’ is set out in Article 9 of the United Nation’s International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights created in 1966. The Australian government signed up to the ICESCR in 1975.
Human rights, as defined by the Covenant and applied by the Parliamentary Committee in relation to welfare, is a corruption of the true mean of the term. There is no such thing as a human right to free flowing and unrestricted welfare.
The right to social security sets out to alleviate a burden borne by individuals by imposing a duty or obligation on other individuals. It is therefore not a right at all.
Human rights, as properly understood, grant individuals specific and important freedoms so that they can pursue their own life and well-being. These rights include the right to the freedoms of speech, association, religion, and conscience, as well as important crucial rights such as the right not to be enslaved or tortured.
This is to say that human rights are intended to stop governments from acting at the expense of the well-being of its citizens. They create a space for freedom to live under the rule of law. In other words, human rights stop governments from interfering in our lives.
The parliamentary committee’s report criticizing the government for doing what it was elected to do is nonsense. The right to help yourself to the taxes of other people is no right at all.
Peter Kurti is a Research Fellow with the Religion and the Free Society program at the Centre for Independent Studies.
Home > Commentary > Opinion > Comment: Human right to the dole is nonsense
Comment: Human right to the dole is nonsense
These days any political, social or economic problem is quickly cast as a human rights issue.
This week, for example, a parliamentary committee accused the Abbott Government of violating Australia’s international human rights obligations because it wants to limit the hand out of tax-payer funded welfare benefits.
Welfare changes included in the May Budget set stringent conditions for the payment of unemployment benefits to people under the age of 30. Failure to meet those conditions by hopeful recipients would mean no social security payments for six months.
But according to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights chaired by WA Liberal Senator Dean Smith, this is ‘incompatible with the right to social security’.
The so-called ‘right to social security’ is set out in Article 9 of the United Nation’s International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights created in 1966. The Australian government signed up to the ICESCR in 1975.
Human rights, as defined by the Covenant and applied by the Parliamentary Committee in relation to welfare, is a corruption of the true mean of the term. There is no such thing as a human right to free flowing and unrestricted welfare.
The right to social security sets out to alleviate a burden borne by individuals by imposing a duty or obligation on other individuals. It is therefore not a right at all.
Human rights, as properly understood, grant individuals specific and important freedoms so that they can pursue their own life and well-being. These rights include the right to the freedoms of speech, association, religion, and conscience, as well as important crucial rights such as the right not to be enslaved or tortured.
This is to say that human rights are intended to stop governments from acting at the expense of the well-being of its citizens. They create a space for freedom to live under the rule of law. In other words, human rights stop governments from interfering in our lives.
The parliamentary committee’s report criticizing the government for doing what it was elected to do is nonsense. The right to help yourself to the taxes of other people is no right at all.
Peter Kurti is a Research Fellow with the Religion and the Free Society program at the Centre for Independent Studies.
• Subscribe
Subscribe now and stay in the loop with our giving appeals, event alerts, newsletters and research updates.
We are always pleased to hear from you. If you have any questions or feedback, please contact us here: