What the budget means for you

Budget reports have revealed that women will be disproportionately affected by many of this year’s budget measures, including the controversial changes to Medicare payments, student loan interest and super contributions for low-income workers.

To pass these changes, the Government will need the support of the Senate – and if we can show the key balance of power Senators the devastating impact these measures will have in their electorates, we might just be able to help stop these changes in their tracks.

We know that individual stories and messages from people in their electorates can have a powerful impact on politicians. As a growing community of people who care about fairness for women, sharing our stories is a key way we can pressure our Senators to vote for a fairer budget. 

Can you tell us how these key measures will affect you, and the people you care about? We'll make sure the key decision makers receive your story before they cast their vote on these crucial issues. 

Here are some things you might want to mention:

  • Women with student loans who take time off work to have a baby, who face paying 30% more in interest on their university student loans than their male counterparts — thanks to changes to the Higher Education Loan Program (HELP),[1]
  • Women who earn up to $37,000 a year — that’s half of all working women — who will lose up to $500 a year in tax rebates on their super thanks to the abolition of the Low Income Super Contribution,[2]
  • Women, particularly older women who already facing economic inequality as a result of lower pay and superannuation over their lifetime, are likely to be disproportionately affected by changes to Medicare charges, including the GP co-payment,[3]
  • These impacts will be compounded for any women also affected by budget cuts to disability services, indigenous services, family payments, legal services or other important programs.[4][5]

 

Find out more

Can you tell us how these budget measures will impact on you and your community? 

Latest activity

Sharon , 3000  /  signed 2014-06-24 14:38:21 +1000
"I am a woman with a disability acquired in the past 8 years. I am currently unemployed due to the lack of part time management positions available to people with disabilities and age discrimination as I am over 50. I have over 25 years of profesional experience in the community and welfare sector, specialising in management and business development. Due to the proposed budget there has been a radical tightening of funding to these areas directly impacting on employment opportunities. I have high medical costs as part of my ongoing disability. I am not currently leaning on the government for any assistance but the budget will push me over my capacity to self sustain housing , medical, support, Transport and lining expenses. I cannot afford to pay more for medication. I cannot afford to pay increased transport costs both public and car expenses such as road taxes or petrol increases. I can nearly afford the mortgage repayments of my home. The current budget is physically and pshycologically exerting stress and pressure on myself and my family. I have 2 children in tertiary studies and one unemployed. I have no excess income to assist them. They are struggling to work part time and study and cover exceptionally high study costs including transport to uni, book, IT needs, and equipment for their courses (one is studying paramedics). Because the proposed budget attacks social support, health, education, transport and income support all at the one time, it has set panic and depression wild amongst my colleges and peers. Let alone within my family and support circles. Life is difficult living with a permanent disability, but we have always made the best of it. We have always looked towards the future for hope and development. Now all we talk about is bunking down for base survival. That’s what the budget means to us. A darkness descending, a bleakness biting, and more burdensome hardship."
philippa , 3065  /  signed 2014-06-16 12:14:24 +1000
"Women with student loans who take time off work to have a baby, who face paying 30% more in interest on their university student loans than their male counterparts — thanks to changes to the Higher Education Loan Program (HELP),1
Women who earn up to $37,000 a year — that’s half of all working women — who will lose up to $500 a year in tax rebates on their super thanks to the abolition of the Low Income Super Contribution,2
Women, particularly older women who already facing economic inequality as a result of lower pay and superannuation over their lifetime, are likely to be disproportionately affected by changes to Medicare charges, including the GP co-payment,3
These impacts will be compounded for any women also affected by budget cuts to disability services, indigenous services, family payments, legal services or other important programs.45
These things will affect all women except the highest earners.
Still there is no mention of equal pay for women, still male majority work is higher paid than women’s work.
Why should a bloke with a shovel earn more than a woman caring for children? Why should a carer of an at home dementia person not be entitled to a Govt. superanuation payment so at retirement age the carer would have more than often just the aged pension to survive on.
Why wasn’t negative gearing abolished in the budget?
If negative gearing was abolished the price of homes could reduce and more people especially women would have chance to set themselves up with a home for later in life.
Why aren’t men compulsorilly expected to provide for all the children they seed? Why do women who earn less than the average wage not get a bonus lesser tax rate until their earnings are equal with the average wage.
Why hash’t the Govt tried to lessen the penalty of pension reduction for nurses who try to work a shift a week after age pension age."
Renee , 3000  /  signed 2014-05-30 14:38:02 +1000
"As a young working woman with a HECs loan (who already faces the prospect of pay inequality) the changes to university loan interest will have a big impact on my financial security moving forward. And, with a lifetime of reproductive healthcare ahead of me, these GP co-payment changes will further compound a stark financial reality for me – and other women my age – in coming years. Despite working since the age of 14, it seems the security of owning my own home may soon be out of reach. And that seems trivial in the context of challenges faced by my ageing family who will faced the double burden of increased healthcare costs, and delayed pension payments. As a Victorian voter these are all issues that will be front of mind for me in my daily life, and at polling booths in future. "