Australia’s social security system has long been characterised by suspicion, surveillance, and punishment, though it reached a low watermark during the devastating Robodebt scandal. In this context, universal basic income (UBI) might serve as a powerful antidote to this harmful legacy, particularly for the women who bear the brunt of our current system’s failures. Unlike Australia’s current targeted and activity-tested social security arrangements, a UBI consists of a periodic cash payment unconditionally delivered to all on an individual basis, without means-test or work requirement.
Drawing on in-depth interviews with 26 diverse Australian women—most with direct experience navigating Centrelink—I explored how UBI’s core principles of universality, unconditionality, and liveable payments could fundamentally transform the relationship between citizens and the state. The findings reveal not just policy preferences, but a profound yearning for dignity and trust that our current social security system systematically denies.
The gendered reality of Australian social security
In Australia, women represent 64% of social security recipients across all payment types and, for some payment types such as Parenting Payments, more than 90% of recipients. This stems from their continued responsibility for unpaid care, their higher likelihood of part-time or casual employment, and persistent gender pay gaps that leave many requiring additional economic support. This also makes women disproportionately vulnerable to the system’s punitive features.
Under Robodebt, women faced particular harm. Their higher representation in casual and part-time work made them more susceptible to the income-averaging errors that generated false debts. Crucially, women’s generally lower economic resources also meant they were less equipped to fight erroneous debts or absorb the financial shock associated with them.
The study participants’ experiences illuminate how current policies compound these vulnerabilities. For instance, the “couple rule”, which treats cohabiting partners as a unified financial unit, creates gendered power imbalances that particularly disadvantage women by forcing financial dependency on higher-earning partners. As this (and other) research reveals, this rule can trap women in abusive relationships, with one participant, Holly (pseudonym), explaining how “Because of my partner’s income, my [social security] payments were reduced to $90 a fortnight” while living with an abusive partner: “I had no money … That’s [$90 per fortnight] all I had to live on. There’s not really any room there for squirrelling anything away to leave.” This policy framework assumes income sharing between partners while ignoring power dynamics and economic abuse, undermining women’s economic independence and safety.
UBI as a trust-building alternative
The women interviewed saw UBI’s universality as its most transformative feature. Unlike means-tested payments that cast recipients as potentially fraudulent, UBI would signal government trust in citizens as a starting principle. This represents a fundamental philosophical shift from suspicion to respect—one that participants believed could rebuild the social contract damaged by Robodebt. This would mean “Actually having trust in the government and that society gave a shit about me,” explained Bindi (pseudonym), a self-described conspiracy theorist whose faith in institutions was shattered by her social security experiences. The universal nature of UBI, she suggested, could demonstrate “that my environment cared about me and wanted me to thrive.”
This trust-building potential extends beyond individual recipients. By removing the “deserving, undeserving categorisation” (Emma, pseudonym) that stigmatises current welfare recipients, UBI could strengthen social cohesion more broadly. Several participants suggested that reduced stigma might even encourage voluntary community engagement as recipients feel valued rather than vilified.
Freedom from bureaucratic control
The unconditional nature of UBI emerged as equally important in participants’ reflections. Current mutual obligation requirements—demanding job search activities, training participation, or work-for-the-dole programs—were seen as counterproductive constraints that prevented rather than promoted economic advancement.
Tracy (pseudonym), a published author and entrepreneur, exemplified this paradox. She found mutual obligations actively hindered her efforts to rebuild her business, which would ultimately increase her market income. “I just need those mutual obligations off my back for a while so I can build it up,” she explained, highlighting how punitive conditionality can trap people in poverty rather than supporting genuine pathways out.
The removal of conditions would also eliminate the constant threat of payment suspension—a fear that dominated many participants’ daily lives. Holly described the anxiety of knowing that any glitch in Centrelink’s IT systems could instantly plunge her into crisis, creating “a pretty big weight” that a UBI would lift. As she put it, “Those [Centrelink] IT systems are… held together by gum and a couple of crushed hopes and dreams.”
Economic security and human dignity
Perhaps most fundamentally, participants valued UBI’s potential to provide genuine economic security. The study’s hypothetical UBI of $1,203 per fortnight—set at the poverty line—would represent a substantial improvement for those surviving on JobSeeker Payment, which sits at 63% of the poverty line.
For many participants, this wasn’t about luxury but basic dignity. Holly spoke of saving, affording medical expenses, and “eating a balanced diet”—fundamental needs that current payment rates make impossible. The stability of knowing this income couldn’t be arbitrarily suspended would enable longer-term planning and reduce chronic stress characterising life on Australian social security.
UBI’s individual payments would also offer an escape from the issue of the couple rule, with all individuals receiving the income individually. As Jules (pseudonym) noted, UBI could provide “a greater level of autonomy, agency, and safety because it enables financial security that isn’t tied to a partner.”
The trust paradox
Despite participants’ enthusiasm for UBI’s potential, there is also a crucial paradox: while trust represents UBI’s greatest promise, entrenched distrust of welfare recipients remains its biggest implementation barrier. The same ideological forces that produced Robodebt—suspicion of “dole bludgers” and fear of moral hazard—continue to dominate Australian political discourse around social security.
This creates a chicken-and-egg problem. Although UBI could rebuild trust between citizens and government, implementing it requires the very trust that current policies have systematically eroded.
Incremental pathways forward
Although full UBI implementation remains politically unlikely in the near term, several incremental reforms could nevertheless capture UBI’s benefits. These include:
- reassessing or abolishing the couple rule to improve women’s financial autonomy
- removing mutual obligations and activity testing requirements
- increasing payment rates to at least the poverty line
- expanding eligibility to reduce administrative burdens and stigma
- shifting income assessment to the tax system, which operates on trust rather than suspicion.
These changes would represent significant steps toward the dignity and security that UBI promises, while potentially building the political foundation for more comprehensive reform.
Lessons for post-Robodebt reform
As Australia grapples with Robodebt’s legacy and the Royal Commission’s damning findings, the women’s stories featured in this research offer valuable insights into how policy design shapes not just economic outcomes but social trust itself. The women interviewed for this study remind us that behind every statistic about poverty and inequality are human beings seeking nothing more radical than respect, security, and the chance to flourish.
Their vision of UBI as a “gift” that demonstrates societal care challenges us to imagine a social security system built on hope rather than fear, trust rather than suspicion. Whether through UBI or more incremental reforms, the path forward requires recognising that true economic security strengthens rather than weakens the social fabric—a lesson that Australia’s current approach has yet to learn.
Recent Comments