Phil O'Reilly: On new eligibility and obligations for emergency housing coming into effect today

A harsher eligibility criteria and new obligations for emergency housing come into effect today.  

Now anyone staying for longer than a week,  will have to make reasonable efforts to get other housing.  

Those caught not meeting responsibilities could face a 13 week stand down.  

Former welfare expert advisory group member Phil O'Reilly told Mike Hosking there's a delicate balance between people needing to be treated well in an emergency - but not milking the system.  

He says there's always going to be some losers out of that, and we can expect to hear some tragic stories.  

But he thinks the Government's on the right track by making sure emergency housing, is about emergency.  

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Changes to emergency housing take effect from today, so if
you're there for more than a week, you will be
required to do a number of things, talk to support services,
pay the emergency contribution on time, and make an effort
to move out.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
Now.

Speaker 1 (00:12):
The former Wealthare Expert Advisory Group member Phillo Riley's with
us on this film. Morning to you, morning mate. There's
hardly onerous, is it. I mean, make a bit of
an effort, is what they're saying.

Speaker 2 (00:22):
Well, really, what the government's trying to say is emergency
housing is the stab. It's an emergency and I've seen
a lot of the people saying, oh, this is dreadful,
and you'll see an increase in homelessness and show suspect Mike.
You might in the early days as people get used
to this new system, but they're looking at it over
the last few weeks. But you've got to say, you know,
emergency should just be that if have you covered every
other option available to you? Can you stay with family,

(00:44):
can you stay with friends? Is this really just a
temporary matter as this long term and so on? So
on that context, I think the policy is is a
sensible one. But to woild, I have a lot of
the people who will a lot of the usual suspects.
I feel like out of the other side really having
a go at.

Speaker 1 (00:58):
It, did we ever get to the bottom of how
many people in emergency housing are genuinely therefore emergencies for
a short term solve a problem, versus people who just
will be anywhere and they'll just milk it off the
state for as long as they can.

Speaker 2 (01:10):
You'll never know, Mike. I mean, the fact is that
you saw an explosion in this emergency housing and really
some quite tragedy, tragic outcomty. Of course, kids living in
motels for quite a long period of time, and that's
just not good good. And in fact, I see the government's
going to emphasize children. They're going to go to the
front of the queue families for children, and go to
the front of the que for emergency housing. But we
just will never know the nature of the approach because

(01:32):
what we were reclusingly seeing was that emergency wasn't necessarily emergency.
Now that doesn't mean they don't ever need, but the
question was of an emergency need. And that's the last
government that think was interested in finding those numbers and
publishing them. So it's going to be a mystery.

Speaker 1 (01:45):
Speaking which potuck in last week. So there's a thirty
three thirty four percent reduction of people in emergency housing.
They're claiming a victory. People then go, well, where are
they gone? Is it the government's job to know where
they've gone or not?

Speaker 2 (01:58):
Do you think no, well, it's not. They may while
be staying with friends, and they may all be staying
with families. They may may well have made other arrangements.
Now that doesn't necessarily mean that you won't have some
terrible circumstances going on over there the government's not aware of.
But at the end of the day, were the welfare system,
and the government's not about trying to find out where
every person is. It's trying to say, when you present

(02:19):
to us, do you have a real need? Is it
an emergency need? And therefore what will we do about that?
And can we ensure that it really is an emergency?
So that there will be a balance here to be
drawn between making sure that you really are treated well
in an emergency, but that you're not milking the system,
and that there's always going to be some losers out
of that much. There's going to be some some tragic

(02:40):
stories not out that we're going to hear, but I
think the government's on the right track here about saying
emergency should be about emergency.

Speaker 1 (02:45):
Always pleasure to Fiel, appreciate it. Have a good week. Filler.
Riley Form, a Welfare Expert Advisory Group member with us
this morning. For more from the mic Asking Breakfast, listen
live to news talks there'd be from six am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.