Key pandemic policy innovations relevant to minimising housing market disruption and homelessness in Australia
This table shows the key policy innovations that were introduced in Australia at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to minimise the impact on housing and homelessness. Items 5-8 are the focus of the Poverty and Inequality Partnership report Covid-19: Rental housing and homelessness impacts - an initial analysis
Changes in employment, hours and wages by percentage from March to June 2020
The spread of COVID-19 and the government-ordered lockdowns to contain it had a sudden and profound impact on employment and earnings in Australia. This graph shows that, in just the three months from March to May 2020, paid hours worked declined by 10% and employment fell by 6%, whilst wages paid were reduced by 8.3%. In June, there was a modest recovery in paid working hours and wages as lockdowns easied, but unemployment and underemployment continued to rise. The unemployment rate stood at 7.4% in June 2020.
Size of private rental sector, Australia, 1994-2018
This graph shows that, in 2009-10, households renting from a private landlord made up around 23.7% of all households. In 2017-18, they constituted 27.1%.
Social security rate structure
This graph shows the structure of social security payments in 2017-18, the year of the income survey on which the data in this website is based. These are not current payment rates.
Profile of poverty by gender of household reference person
This graph shows the household types of people in poverty by gender of household reference person. It shows that shows that among people in poverty in older single-person households (65 years and over), women greatly outnumber men (comprising 6% of all people in poverty when the 50% of median income poverty line is used, and 8% using the 60% median income poverty line; compared with 3% who are older single men - 4% using the 60% median income poverty line). However, among people in poverty in older couple households, more are found in households with a male main earner (comprising 6% of all people in poverty according to the 50% median income poverty line and 7% according to the 60% median income poverty line, compared with 2% in older couple households with a female main earner according to both poverty lines), reflecting the predominance of couples with a male main earner in that age group.
Rate of poverty by gender of household reference person (% of all people)
This graph shows the rate of poverty according to the gender of the household reference person by household type. It shows that the rate of poverty in sole parent families where the main earner is female is 37% using the 50% median income poverty line, and 50% using the 60% median income poverty line. This is over twice that of sole parent families where the main earner is male (at 18% using the 50% median income poverty line and 21% using the 60% median income poverty line). It also shows that couple-with-children households where the main earner is female have a rate of poverty far higher than those in which the main earner is male (16% female and 10% male according to the 50% median income poverty line; and 21% female and 16% male according to the 60% median income poverty line). The graph shows that the differences in poverty rates among households with male and female main earners are not as stark for households without children as for those with children.
Housing costs of lowest 20% compared with middle 20%, among people aged <65 and 65+ (in $2017-18 per week)
This graph shows trends in average weekly housing costs for people of different ages in the lowest and middle 20% of households by income (adjusted for family size). Note that these amounts are adjusted downwards for household size, so they are much lower than average housing costs – for example – for a family of four people. It shows that housing costs grew strongly from 2005-06 to 2017-18, especially among the lowest 20% of working-age households by income. From 2005-06 to 2017-18, average housing costs for the lowest 20% of working-age households (under 65 years) grew more than twice as fast as those of the middle 20% (by 42% compared 15%). Among the lowest 20% of working age households, average housing costs rose from $103pw to $146pw. Average housing costs for the middle 20% rose from $166pw to $191pw. Possible contributing factors for this disparity include higher rent increases for low-income households of working age and rapid growth in the share of renters among that group.…
Comparison of poverty lines with pension and Newstart payments for singles and couples without children (in $2017-18 per annum)
Social security policies clearly have an impact on poverty, for better or for worse. Because most major income support payments are below the poverty line, in order to escape poverty people need to supplement or replace them with private income from other sources. This graph compares trends in maximum pension and Newstart Allowance rates and poverty lines from 1999-00 to 2017-2018. It shows that while Newstart Allowance for singles was consistently well below the poverty line, it was above the line for couples up until 2004. This reflects an historical legacy: unlike payments for singles, unemployment payments for couples were tied to the pension rate until 1998. In contrast, pension rates for both singles and couples have closely tracked poverty lines. One reason for this is that pensions are indexed in line with both movements in prices and wages (whichever is larger). The impact of the $32pw increase in the single pension rate in 2009 is clearly visible, lifting that payment close…
Comparison of poverty rates measured before and after housing costs
This graph allows us to gauge the impact of trends in housing costs on poverty. The difference in poverty rates measured using these two poverty lines shrunk from 3.5 percentage points in 1999 to 2.1 percentage points in 2007. This suggests that the increase in poverty during that period was mainly due to greater disparities between low and middle-incomes, rather than changes in housing costs. After 2007, this pattern was reversed. The difference in poverty rates measured using the two poverty lines grew from 2.1 percentage points in 2007 to 4.7 percentage points in 2017. This suggests that the stabilisation of poverty rates after 2007 when housing costs were deducted from incomes (red line - top) was mainly due to increasing disparities in the housing costs of low and middle income households. As shown by the blue (lower) line, poverty declined over this period when measured before deducting housing costs. So, increasing disparities in housing costs played a major role in keeping…
