How two best friends got MARRIED to exploit Centrelink loophole, become full-time climate activists
>
A young Aussie has revealed how they decided to marry their best friend so they could exploit a loophole in the Centrelink and become full-time climate activists.
In an anonymous piece written Thursday for youth website Pedestrian, the young author revealed that the two friends – who are not in a relationship – have lived out of a car and are struggling to get by without government support.
The author claimed they could not access Centrelink payments as independents because they are both under 22 years of age, when people are automatically considered independent.
For that reason, the author said, they entered into a strict business marriage.
“For us, getting married meant being able to be full-time climate activists who hopefully can afford food and live off our car,” the anonymous Aussie wrote.
However, according to Centrelink, young people under the age of 22 can prove their independence by working more than a certain number of hours per week.
The piece forgot to mention whether the newlyweds were working, or if they are even able to work full-time.
A young Australian has revealed how she and her best friend got married in the trunk of their car to access Centrelink payments (shared above)
The couple of youth activists walked out in the back of their car without any ceremony, their platonic marriage was strictly business, even their parents don’t know (above, a share)
The writer explained that the two friends filled out the marriage forms from their trunk, officially walking away by the light of their laptop.
The author revealed that the couple will continue their marriage until they are both 22 years old and can apply for separate Centrelink payments.
‘I didn’t want to get married. Neither does Hannah. But we knew we wouldn’t be able to make ends meet if we didn’t,” the anonymous boy wrote.
Neither of the two best friends told their parents about the situation.
The piece did not mention why the couple had not informed their families.
Nor was it explained why they could not be released as self-employed by their parents, which would make them eligible for payments under the age of 22.
The author did not specifically state why she needed access to the Centrelink (above) payments, or why her parents would not sign any documents allowing them to be independent in the eyes of the Australian welfare system
The author said the friends had discovered a “crack in the system” that allowed underprivileged people to claim their lives independently.
“As it stands, young, vulnerable people cannot get the necessary benefits. Strangers and people from domestically abusive families who can’t just ask their parents to sign a form allowing them to become independent have a particularly bad time,” the author wrote.
“I was luckier than most. Hannah and I were both in the same situation and the same age. Neither of us were really interested in the idea of marriage as a goal in life, so we were happy to use our proverbial wedding badge for as long as needed.’
The piece received mixed reactions on social media.
On Twitter, publisher Jim Malo wrote: “These two are full-time climate activists, and they married each other to get Jobseeker. A huge decision that no one should have to make to gain access to welfare.’
Supporters supported the pair, with one saying they weren’t exploiting Centrelink.
“They are married which is the main qualifying factor and they have to complete the job seeker’s tasks to keep their payments,” the Twitter user wrote.
Another user wrote: ‘My kid and his girlfriend have been considering this. Neither wants to get married, but may be the only option. It’s crazy that at age 18 they are not considered independent as FTB (family tax benefit) & parental child support stops at 18…’.
“I don’t blame them (to be honest). I think we’re going to marry more people platonically to access things that wouldn’t otherwise be available to them. Very smart. People shouldn’t jump through hoops for this kind of thing, but you do what you have to do to survive,” wrote another.
However, there were critics of the new pair, with one person replying: ‘The real loophole is that they are not job seekers, they are plodders. Why not write a sequel to the loophole they find to dodge (Work For the Dole)?’
“How about getting a job and being an activist part-time?” asked another user.