ACOSS and UNSW Media Release
The number of people living in poverty in Australia has increased to 1 in 7, according to a new ACOSS and UNSW report released today at the start of Anti-Poverty Week.
Using the most recent figures, researchers found 3.7 million people – 14.2% of the population – were living in poverty in 2022–23.
That marked an increase from 12.4% of the population – or 1 in 8 people – in 2020-21.
The study found the poverty rate for children is 1 in 6, equalling 757,000 children.
“This research shows that 1 in 7 people are now living in poverty. This is unacceptable in one of the wealthiest countries in the world,” said Dr Yuvisthi Naidoo, Senior Research Fellow at UNSW’s Social Policy Research Centre.
“The number of people living in poverty decreased in 2020 due to the temporary effective doubling of JobSeeker through the Covid supplement – but has since sharply risen to be now above pre-pandemic levels, with the removal of the Covid payments and dramatic rising housing costs.
“The steep increase in rents in recent years has had a particularly severe impact on people with the lowest incomes.”
The report found that from June 2021 to June 2023, the median advertised rent for units rose 40% in Sydney, 34% in Melbourne and 41% in Brisbane.
ACOSS CEO Dr Cassandra Goldie AO said the findings showed much greater action is needed to tackle poverty.
“While the Albanese Government has taken some steps to reduce poverty, such as supporting minimum wage increases, and small income support increases, it must do so much more to turn this trend around,” said Dr Goldie.
“The Government must fix woefully inadequate income support payments, set targets and boost social housing and commit to full employment. It should also adopt time-linked targets for poverty reduction to hold us all to account.”
The report, Poverty In Australia 2025: Overview, by the ACOSS and UNSW Sydney-led Poverty and Inequality Partnership, used the latest available data from the HILDA survey.
The research found the poverty line, based on 50% of median household after-tax income, is $584 a week for a single adult and $1,226 a week for a couple with two children.
People in households below the poverty line had household incomes averaging $390 per week below the line. Families with children in poverty were on average $464 below the poverty line.
Sharon Calister, CEO of Mission Australia, said: “More people in Australia are now living in poverty, and this confirms what our frontline staff see every day: individuals and families are being pushed to the brink by soaring housing and living costs, combined with inadequate income support. Far too many are at risk of or experiencing homelessness as a result.
“Poverty and homelessness are deeply interconnected. Without adequate income support and access to safe, affordable homes, people can’t meet basic needs or plan for the future. We urgently need real increases to income support payments, greater investment in social and affordable housing, and early intervention services that keep people safely housed.”
Acting CEO of Jesuit Social Services, Michael Livingstone, said: “This report shows that the rate of people living in poverty decreased during the pandemic, but has since risen above pre-pandemic levels. When the JobSeeker payment was temporarily doubled, our participants told us they no longer had to decide between buying warm clothes in winter or essential medication – they could finally afford both. Everybody deserves to live a dignified life, and we urge our political leaders to urgently lift income support to support this.”
Read the report at: https://bit.ly/povertyoverview2025
Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN
Dear Reader,
Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.
Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.
Join our community of truth-seekers. Donate via PayPal or credit card via the button below, or bank transfer [BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969] and help us keep shining a light.
With gratitude,
The AIMN Team
If you think that Albanese is going to take any interest in addressing these pressing issues, you are sadly mistaken.
For anyone in Government to pontificate to anyone about what they are ‘worth’ as a functioning unit of civil society is an absolute joke!
It’s a lack of political will on both sides of the isle for many, many decades and it’s our taxes that fund their belligerence.
Is “adequate income support and access to safe affordable homes” really the answer to poverty?
The causes of poverty are as varied as those suffering it, there are far more reasons for poverty than the lack of money or housing. Sorry, but money does not fix every thing and never has.
jonangel.
Its the system,
Gaza dies, we pay for the bombs. Nothing left for our own on the rationale.
jonangel:
Poverty is, by definition, having insufficient financial means to properly cover basic living expenses. So, yeah, stable housing and money do fix that.
Or were you attempting a subtle “avocado toast” gibe?
jonangel
I’m running around saying “Poverty is a choice of government”, I’d hate to think I’d got that wrong, so I’m interested in exploring what you’ve said there.
First, doesn’t “adequate income support and access to safe affordable homes” cherrypick what the CEO of Mission Australia said? Doesn’t, in the light of then going on to say it isn’t the answer to poverty, that misrepresent what Sharon said?
Second, what are some of these “far more reasons for poverty” that can’t be fixed with “money or housing”?
Of course money can’t fix everything, no argument there, it can’t bring back to life the half a million Palestinians murdered in a genocide in which Labor acted as an enabler.
To add insult to injury,our treasurer has performed a double back flip, with pike,on the proposed super tax.All those living below the poverty line can breathe a sigh of relief.
It’s become increasingly difficult to find anything good about this so called’Labor’ government.Weak as piss.
“Poverty is by definition”, who’s definition? One can be financially rich but still very poor.
In answer to your question; physicals or mental ill health, lack of social acceptance, the list is endless.
One can be financially rich but still very poor.
Did you even read the article? They are not talking about “poverty of spirit” or anything of that nature. This is quite clearly about financial stressors.
jonangel
You say ‘“Poverty is by definition”, who’s definition? One can be financially rich but still very poor.’
Are you seriously suggesting that the approaching 4 million Australians referred to in this article as living in poverty includes “financially rich but still very poor” Australians? Do you honestly believe they came to Anthony Albanese’s name and said ‘chalk up another one,’ do you?
Was questioning what was meant by poverty just an attempt to distract?
Since you didn’t answer the questions about cherrypicking and misrepresentation, can I take it that you did cherrypick Sharon’s statement in such a way that it distorted her meaning? If so, was that to suit your argument?
You say “physicals or mental ill health, lack of social acceptance” in answer to reasons for living in poverty that can’t be fixed by money or housing. Can you be more specific?
Just which people with “physicals or mental ill health” should be left to live in homelessness and poverty because money and housing can’t fix their problems?
Just which people with a “lack of social acceptance” should be left to live in homelessness and poverty because money and housing can’t fix their problems? I hope not those with aggressive, obnoxious personalities as that would put me (so I’m told)in deep shit if my savings were stolen, or I had an horrific accident of some kind.
I presume about Sudanese people and their massive famine?
Wrong I did not say “Poverty is by definition” I quoted Leefe. As for mental and physical health, they in fact have a lot todo with a persons ability to handle their finances.
Yes, I read the article, but tell us, have you ever thought this through?
jonangel
How about naming the person when addressing comments to a particular person, to avoid ‘”Wrong I did not say “Poverty is by definition” I quoted Leefe.’ in future?
Since you avoided the question of cherrypicking and misrepresenting Sharon for a second time can I take it that it was done to set a strawman argument against Sharon, her agency and the other agencies dealing with people living in poverty?
You say in relation to which people with “physical and mental health” should be left homeless and living in poverty “As for mental and physical health, they in fact have a lot todo with a persons ability to handle their finances.” Can you be more specific?
Are you saying that it those persons with “physical and mental health” that can’t handle their finances that should be left homeless and living in poverty because money and housing can’t fix that problem?
How about all of us with a “lack of social acceptance”, does your avoidance of specifying which ones of us should be left homeless and living in poverty mean you’re referring to all of us?
“Are you saying”, what sort of question is that? I would have thought what I said was very clear, so I’ll ask,do you disagree with any of the points I’ve made and if so how?
These numbers are for Labor’s first year in office, when everyone was screaming from the rafters people are having trouble putting food on the table, do something. Labor’s response was to say ‘we hear you, our leader was raised in commission housing by a single mum’ on a loop.
Labor’s cost of living measures, which amounted to govt. handouts to landlords and energy retailers, didn’t come into legislation until midway through the next year 2024.
ACOSS, Mission Australia and the Jesuits Social Services deal with, not hundreds of thousands but as it turns out millions of homeless and impoverish people; they know what they are talking about and they are saying with one voice that millions of Australians are still suffering, still living in poverty. This in a wealthy nation whose leader has said twice “no one will be left behind”.
Labor are pulling a three card trick, they are doing enough to argue that they are addressing the problem, whilst all the time failing to solve the problem. As Denis Hay has shown on numerous occassions the government has the means to solve this problem, this is just a government choice to leave people in poverty.
Before the 2025 election the only figures we had at our disposal were from the last year of the Morrison government 2021; putting the figure at 300 000 people (there’s a discreprancy between 12% and 300 000 ??) So those of us concerned about poverty could only bandy 300 000 about when the actual figure was in the millions; convenient bit of luck for Labor.
At the figure being in the millions and with Labor’s neoliberal extremist ideology there is a danger of Australia being taken into the same situation US citizens face – a mass of people so desperate to put food on the table they’ll not only take any pissy poorly paid job the corporate elites toss out there but two or three of these jobs.
jonangel
You say “I would have thought what I said was very clear,..” when referring to the like of “In answer to your question; physicals or mental ill health, lack of social acceptance, the list is endless.”
You jest. Clear as mud.
No one twisted your arm to come out with “..; physicals or mental ill health, lack of social acceptance,..” but I note how studiously you’ve avoided narrowing down just which people you refer to with “lack of social acceptance” as well as putting up a strawman argument in the first place; why is that?
So far you seemed to have narrowed the people you called “physicals or mental ill health”s to those who can’t handle their own finances, but even then you’ve left enough wriggle room a truck could be driven through it, with a muddled claim of supposed fact “they in fact have a lot todo with….” That’s not clarity, that’s obfuscation.
I’m disappointed jonangel, I was hoping to test out “Poverty is choice of government”, but how do you do that with someone who won’t even clarify exactly what they meant in the first place.
Perhaps when you’ve clarified in your own mind exactly which people you believe should be left homeless and living in poverty because their problem can’t be fixed with money and housing we can discuss this again.
Firstly the issue while complex is clear in my mind, right from my first post on this matter. You on the other hand appear to see everything in the terms of more money and more houses!! Sorry, that is not the answer, but I’ll ask, how much money and how many houses do you want?
Oh well. Always look on the bright side. With all this increase of the population living below the poverty line, now estimated to be 3.7 million Australians, Albo can claim he is making progress in closing the gap between aboriginals and non-aboriginals in Australia.
jonangel:
If money and housing are not the answer, what is? You said the matter is clear in your mind, so spell out your solutions for us.