Living allowances should be granted to all students regardless of their families¡¯ wealth because the educational and social benefits would outweigh the financial costs, two Australian academics have argued.

Political scientists Susan Goodwin and Ariadne Vromen say students from all socio-economic backgrounds suffer from an income support regime premised on ¡°ongoing parental dependency¡±.

Students from the poorest households must earn money to supplement living allowances well below the poverty line, while those from the ¡°squeezed middle¡± ¨C whose parental incomes render them ineligible for income support ¨C must work just as hard to ¡°compensate for the pressure¡­on family resources¡±. And the one in five students with no paid work must rely on parents ¡°providing for their children well into adulthood¡±.

Outlining their argument in a chapter of a recently published book, , Professors Goodwin and Vromen say post-school education is no longer a ¡°choice¡± for young people because the prospects of obtaining secure work without it have become increasingly remote.

ÖйúAƬ

They say?tertiary education must be acknowledged as a customary transition stage between school and ¡°regular work¡±, and the government should facilitate this by making Youth Allowance (YA) ¨C the main income support stream for students aged under 25 ¨C available from the age of 18, irrespective of parental income.

Professor Goodwin rejected the notion that this would constitute ¡°middle class welfare¡±, noting that parental income also did not affect eligibility for student loans. ¡°Using tax revenue to support young adults would be progressive rather than regressive,¡± she said. ¡°Expecting young people from upper socio-economic backgrounds to finance their studies from a pool of family resources¡­is problematic politically, because it denies their social citizenship rights. And [it is] problematic culturally because it encourages the ideal of intrafamilial transmissions of wealth and privilege.¡±

ÖйúAƬ

Professor Goodwin said it was also wrong to assume that parents were willing and able to contribute to their adult children¡¯s living and education expenses. She said a ¡°plethora¡± of exemptions to YA eligibility rules showed that there were many circumstances?in which parental financial support was ¡°absent or impossible¡±.

However, the government¡¯s appetite for income support reform is doubtful. Last year social services minister Amanda Rishworth shrugged off a National Union of Students call for similar changes, at an estimated cost of around A$11.5 billion (?6.2 billion), saying ¡°there are many competing priorities and¡­we¡¯re faced with difficult choices¡±.?

Treasurer Jim Chalmers offered a to this month¡¯s Interim Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee report, which recommended a ¡°substantial increase¡± in various welfare payments. ¡°[We] will always look to provide support where we can to those most in need, where it is responsible and affordable to do so, [but] we can¡¯t fund every good idea.¡±?

But at least three serving government backbenchers are reportedly among some 300 signatories to an calling for increases to income support.

ÖйúAƬ

Professor Vromen said she was ¡°hopeful¡± that the political climate might favour a change in income support policy, because independent politicians were in favour and the governing Labor Party had a history of expanding YA eligibility during previous stints in government.

She said the cost-of-living crisis could also fuel political pressure to ease parents¡¯ financial burden: ¡°Granting independent status to students 18 and over could be a form of relief for stretched families.¡±

Professor Goodwin said the benefits of such a reform could outweigh the costs. The current income support regime negatively impacts students¡¯ financial security, mental health, educational experience ¡°and many other aspects of their lives¡±, she said.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com