The Turnbull government should raise the dole from $250 a week to $300, according to one of the big four accountancy firms.

KPMG, which is more often associated with tax planning for the wealthy than welfare advocacy, believes the $38-a-day Newstart allowance is "inadequate" and should be increased.

The surprising recommendation is contained in the multinational audit firm's plan to reduce Australia's structural deficit by $12 billion, released Thursday.

It also found that too much money is spent in Australia on prolonging life rather than focusing on a comfortable death for the elderly.

"Due to political rhetoric, payments for those who are unemployed have fallen behind other payments, to the point that it is commonly recognised that Newstart is inadequate, and significantly so," the Solving the Structural Deficit report states.

The Abbott government tried and failed to make the young unemployed wait six months before receiving Newstart.

But even the Business Council of Australia has said the meagre payment is a barrier to employment and KPMG believes dole payments should be sufficient to "allow for one to actively seek employment".

"The low level of Newstart is encouraging the unemployed to seek higher income support in the form of disability payments. This is both psychologically damaging for the individuals and costly for government. The differential between the disability payment and Newstart needs to be substantially reduced although it need not be eliminated," KPMG found.

Social Services Minister Christian Porter said the government was giving no consideration to increasing base payments for the unemployed.

"A $50 increase in the base rate of Newstart was estimated by ACOSS [Australian Council of Social Services] to have the astonishing cost of nearly $6 billion over four years . This Government doesn't believe in more taxing for the sake of more welfare spending, nor in borrowing more money to expand welfare expenditure. And where savings can be found inside the welfare system, the priority has been for expenditure in important areas such as childcare and budget repair rather than across the board increases in base payments," he said.

There are more than 725,000 people claiming Newstart, fewer than the 825,000 people who claim the Disability Support Benefit.

The Newstart payment is currently set at $263.80 a week - or less than the $271 nightly allowance MPs and senators receive when they stay in Canberra.

This week it was reported that the Human Services Department had found nearly one in 10 Newstart recipients were using doctors' certificates to sidestep requirements to attend job interviews.

KPMG found Newstart effectively locks some people into sticking with jobs rather than moving around the jobs market.

"The low level of Newstart has the effect of locking people into jobs for fear that they could not survive on Newstart and cannot risk moving jobs. There may even be dimensions here in the start-up and small business sector. The very low safety net may act as a disincentive to take risks," the report found.

Greens Senator Rachel Siewert has a bill before Parliament that would increase Newstart by $50.

She said KPMG was right in its finding that political rhetoric had prevented the payment from going up.

"The demonisation of our vulnerable Australian's seeking income support by the Government has ramped up blatantly in the lead up to the budget. I dread to think what they have in store for these people on income support who need our support," she said.

Broadly, KPMG recommended a series of streamlining measures to the welfare and health systems to address the long-term deficit.

"It is clear that based on our current policy settings, government expenditure will increase faster than revenue projections. What we are doing now, and have been doing for almost a decade is simply not sustainable," it found.

"The entire political spectrum – spanning government and business leaders - needs to be concerned about, and agree to act on this."

KPMG found too much public money goes into keeping people alive.

"The last month of many people's lives is spent receiving treatments that do not ultimately improve the quality of the person's death, nor meaningfully prolong their lives. This can include quite expensive interventions, such as admission to an intensive care unit and surgical procedures. The focus in many end-of-life journeys needs to be much more on comfort, care and palliation rather than intrusive, and ultimately, ineffectual intervention," the report said.

The report said dying people and their families need to discuss with healthcare providers what their wishes are before receiving too many "unnecessary interventions".

"Health staff can be disinclined for medico-legal reasons to be perceived as not "doing everything possible" to prolong life, with family members also often worried that if they do not push for everything possible to be done it will appear that they are unloving of their ill relative. The further down a pathway of aggressive treatment, the harder it is for health care providers and relatives to pull back or reverse treatment decisions. Yet many studies have shown that approximately 70 per cent of people would prefer to die at home if they had a terminal illness."

Follow us on Twitter