Social welfare debate

Expert calls for “sanctions for the federal states”

Protection for migrants is politically explosive. Vienna is the main focus: it has the highest payments in Austria.

(Bild: studio v-zwoelf/stock.adobe.co)

4600 euros net for a Syrian family - following the debate about social welfare in the country, Agenda Austria has now come forward with a comprehensive reform catalog.

4600 euros net for doing nothing. How nice. The case of a Syrian family with 7 children recently caused intense debate and arguments. How much social welfare is acceptable? In May, SPÖ top candidate Andreas Babler presented an even heftier bill as a model - more than 6000 euros.

The ÖVP went on the barricades after "Krone" reports. The liberal economic think tank Agenda Austria is now presenting a seven-point concept via "Krone" - for a reform of social welfare.

1. Sanctions for defaulting provinces: The long since agreed and actually mandatory social assistance must be implemented in all provinces, says economist Denes Kucsera. Burgenland, Tyrol and Vienna are in default. There is an urgent need for action, especially in the federal capital. "The minimum income is particularly attractive for many people here. The financial equalization should include a sanction clause, according to which part of the transfers will be withheld by the federal government as long as the reform is not implemented in accordance with the law."
2. Standardization: Additional entitlement to benefits such as rental assistance or family benefits should be eliminated. This would simplify the system. "The family allowance, for example, increases with the number of children; child supplements in social welfare, on the other hand, decrease. In fact, the total benefit should be adjusted according to household size."
3. Benefits in kind instead of money: According to Agenda economist Kucsera, social assistance should largely be provided in kind. This is particularly important for children: these should even be provided entirely in the form of benefits in kind. "Everyone is free to decide how many children they want to have. Society cannot be held responsible for this."
4. No more cross-financing: If federal states want to pay out higher benefits, these should be financed by local revenues in future. No cross-financing via the budget. 
5. Stricter sanctions: In social welfare, the principle of willingness to work applies. If this is lacking, an adult can already have their social assistance withdrawn. However, according to Kusera, the practice is very lenient.
6. Waiting periods: "Only those who have paid into the system full-time for five years should be entitled to the full social benefit." Federal Chancellor Karl Nehammer recently made a similar argument. Most welfare recipients are so-called top-up recipients. They receive the difference between earned income and social welfare from the state. "It is precisely for them that the incentive to work as many hours as possible would increase in order to claim the full social benefit if necessary."
7. Residence obligation: According to the agenda in Austria, persons entitled to asylum should be distributed to all federal states and be subject to a residence obligation there. See the discussion initiated by AMS boss Johannes Kopf in response to this proposal. The residency requirement could be removed by providing proof of successful integration (for example in the form of five years of uninterrupted employment).

A package that holds a lot of dynamite. The next government will probably have to deal with this. Whatever form it takes.