Introduction

“Statistics are great, but they are not everything - you need the picture behind the stats.”

Clarendon Vale Neighbourhood Centre, Social Inclusion Forum

This report summarises the key findings from the consultations undertaken by the Social Inclusion Unit following the release of the A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: a discussion paper in October 2008 by the Premier, David Bartlett. The consultations involved some 52 written responses and a series of 40 community forums across Tasmania (see Table 1 for details)

The comments provided in this section provide a human face to the stories behind the statistics presented in Appendix 1 - to understand that behind every percentage point and number is a life that is failing to thrive or a personal story of daily struggle. Studies that investigate the experiences of socially excluded individuals, groups and places are critical as they provide a more comprehensive picture of the nature of exclusion.

Forums were located in neighbourhood houses across urban, rural and regional areas and supplemented by meetings with a wide variety of groups and people including those groups that are harder to reach including for example at the Risdon Prison.

The Chapter is organised around the key issues that were raised and as much as possible the summaries include and represent the voices of the organisations, specific individuals and groups involved.

IssuesPoverty

“Nothing undermines social inclusion more than financial hardship”

Central Coast Council, Consultation submission

During the Social Inclusion Unit’s consultations, people and organisations commented that a commitment to social inclusion was a commitment to ensuring that nobody will be left out and that help is available when times are difficult. The role that low incomes have in excluding people was a central theme across many submissions. Reduced finances for anyone causes problems in being able to access transport and therefore services, afford nutritious food and afford the costs for social involvement with family, friends and the broader community.

People on low incomes include those receiving Commonwealth income support payments and earning low wages from full time or part time employment. The Tasmanian Council of Social Services (TasCOSS) reports that certain groups within the community are typically low income earners, including Tasmanian Aborigines, young people, people with a disability, refugees and migrants, single parents, the elderly, and people with mental illnesses and chronic health issues and their carers.

A2.1

Anglicare adds that people experiencing income poverty are often people dependent on Centrelink benefits as their main source of income especially Health Care Card holders, single people, sole parents and people with no income. Its research reveals that unexpected expenses can have a critical impact on people living on low or fixed incomes. Low income earners often approach expensive fringe credit providers or ‘payday lenders’ in order to meet the cost of essential items, which exposes them to high fees and charges, interest rates and rigid penalty regimes.1

Anglicare’s survey of clients of emergency relief services found that single people and sole parents accounted for almost 70 per cent of respondents. The impact of the shortage of money meant sole parents:

Had been unable to pay utility bills, car registration and insurance;

Had sold something;

Sought financial help from family or friends; and/or

Did not seek health care when needed and not filled prescriptions ordered by a doctor.2

A number of organisations made correlations between health outcomes, poverty and social inclusion, which often led to discussion on what was considered as basic requirements for Tasmanians facing multiple disadvantages. In its submission TasCOSS comments that safe, secure and affordable public housing is essential to the formation of opportunities in life and without it, the impact, particularly on youth, is of particular concern.3

Not being able to meet other basic needs, such as nutritious and regular meals, was highlighted as a compounding and direct result of living on low incomes. Regular meals or ‘food security’ relates to the ability of individuals, households and communities to acquire food that is sufficient, reliable, nutritious, safe, acceptable and sustainable. Food insecurity can be a cause and effect of social exclusion and with the highest proportion of people on low incomes of all states and territories, food insecurity is a significant problem in Tasmania.

TasCOSS comments that 31.5 per cent of Tasmanians receive Commonwealth income support payments and are on low incomes. When considered with average price rises across Australia since June 2005 for basic costs, such as 15 per cent for food, 17 per cent for rent and energy costs and 41 per cent for fuel, there is often little left over, leaving people vulnerable to social exclusion.4

As mentioned, particular groups often face more disadvantage than others and these groups were the focus of some submissions. Carers Tasmania discussed the difficulties that carers have in meeting their own basic needs, after the personal resources and time given to those they care for: “Many carers in crisis present with issues of sleep deprivation, risk of homelessness, unemployment, inability to buy sufficient food or pay essential services bills and family breakdown.”5

1 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.2 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.3 Tasmanian Council of Social Services, 2009, TasCOSS response to A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: A Consultation paper, consultation submission.4 Tasmanian Council of Social Services, 2009, TasCOSS response to A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: A Consultation paper, consultation submission.5 Carers Australia - Tasmania, 2009, Social inclusion for carers in Tasmania, consultation submission.

A2.2

While the income support system was acknowledged through the consultations as not a Tasmanian Government responsibility, it was commented the Tasmanian Government should promote the issue of a review of the income support system via the Council of the Australian Governments in light of the national social inclusion agenda.6 It was also commented that “given Tasmania’s high welfare dependency ratio, it could be argued that the Australian Government’s welfare policies had had a significantly greater adverse impact in Tasmania than in the rest of Australia.7

Organisations commented that stable accommodation was a foundation on which many other issues of social exclusion could be prevented – without the security of somewhere to stay, people often found other problems occurring. This issue was highlighted by the Tasmanian Catholic Justice and Peace Commission (TCJPC) when it commented on the need to establish a ‘no exit to homelessness’ strategy for people leaving statutory, custodial care, hospital and mental health and drug and alcohol services.8

Anglicare also notes that exclusion occurs for people with serious mental illnesses, people with disabilities, humanitarian entrants and people with drug and alcohol problems when there is an inability to find affordable and appropriate housing. It also comments its research findings are that for private rental, risks of exclusion occurs due to high unaffordable rents, unsecure tenure and often poor quality properties. This leads to involuntary movements between accommodation or transitions between tenancies and often potential crisis points for low income and disadvantaged people.9 The Salvation Army reinforces point that low income earners and their housing causes exclusion to services: “Those struggling to survive below the Henderson poverty line typically cannot afford to live near amenities and services because rent is higher in these areas. This means that they rely on an ageing car or limited public transport. When you put all of these facts together, it is easy to see that life for many Tasmanians is financially difficult”.10

For the public housing system in Tasmania, Anglicare maintains that significant investment is required, including: “the provision of recurrent funding, a one-off allocation to address a maintenance backlog, retirement of Housing Tasmania’s significant debt burden and the provision of capital grants to increase supply.”11

6 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.7 Department of Treasury and Finance, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, Treasury comments on the consultation paper released on 30 Oct 2008, consultation submission.8 Tasmanian Catholic Justice and Peace Commission, 2009, A submission to the Social Inclusion Unit, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.9 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.10 Salvation Army Tasmania Division, 2009, Response to ‘A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania’, consultation submission11 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.

A2.3

Health

“There is a clear gradient in health status between the most disadvantaged and the most advantaged groups in our society with lower socio-economic status being associated with higher disability levels and higher premature death rates.”

Population Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Consultation submission

TasCOSS comments that poverty is closely linked with poorer health outcomes and that the health status of Tasmanians is significantly determined by factors such as employment, housing, access to services, income status, education and literacy, social justice and social inclusion and support. 12

It is of concern that in Tasmania while overall mortality has declined over the past decade, there appears to be a growing gap between the highest and lowest socioeconomic groups. Those at the bottom of the scale were almost 30 per cent more likely to die of a potentially avoidable death in 1995-97; in 2004-06, this gap had risen to over 50 per cent.13

Low socio-economic status, whether measured by income, educational attainment or occupation, means poorer health, a higher incidence of chronic conditions and higher levels of health care usage. Living with chronic conditions can reduce family income and prosperity, substantially leading to reduced education and other opportunities for family members: ”Those with the least resources suffer the most illness, pain, chronic disease, and reduced life expectancy…It is clear that the main drivers for health lie outside the health system, and if we are to improve the health and well-being of groups whose health status is less than optimal, we need to look at the nexus between social policy, health policy, demographic policy, environmental policy, economic policy and education policy.”14

Groups, such as Tasmanian Aboriginal communities, people with disabilities, people with mental health issues, migrants and refugees, people in prison, people on low incomes and older people have all been identified as more likely to have poorer health. Other groups can sometimes be missed in the conversation on disadvantage and exclusion. For example, young pregnant women on low incomes can be excluded as can older men in care that may have a lack of appropriate activities due to their under representation in the group receiving aged care services. The poverty and disadvantage experienced by people with disability can be exacerbated by the high cost of medications and equipment. For other groups, an Australian study found that young gay men (aged18-24) were almost four times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexual young men15 and an investigation into health–compromising and suicidal behaviours among gay and bisexual youth in Tasmania indicated a higher prevalence of suicide risk factors.16

12 Tasmanian Council of Social Services, 2009, TasCOSS response to A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: A Consultation paper, consultation submission.13 (Unpublished data) Population Health, Department of Health and Human Services, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.14 Population Health, Department of Health and Human Services, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.15 Population Health, Department of Health and Human Services, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.16 Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group, 2008, Submission to the Tasmanian Social Inclusion Strategy in response to the Social Inclusion Consultation Paper 2008, consultation submission.

A2.4

Integrated service delivery

The accessibility of services was raised as a major issue from the consultations. In regards to government service delivery, a number of submissions and comments from community forums made mention of the importance of integrating service delivery, so people can be transferred across organisation’s delivering services without information sharing or jurisdiction controls impeding the process.

Integrated service delivery was considered a particular issue for entrance and departure points for health care and other services such as housing. It was commented that people need case-management level of care to ensure referrals occurred without causing unnecessary distress or leaving people stranded without basic needs, such as food and accommodation. This issue was considered particularly important for people with a mental illness transitioning in and out of treatment.17

The importance of understanding and addressing co-morbidity issues addressed across divisions and agencies was raised by the Georgetown Council in its response that poor health generates disadvantage and its relationship to social exclusion.

“… it is hoped that the urgency of adopting a whole-of-community and whole-of-government approach to the delivery of healthcare services is not delayed for too long. There is a real problem for people experiencing multiple disadvantages in receiving coordinated delivery of services across different

areas within the same department, and between government and non-government providers.”

George Town Council, Consultation submission

The seriousness of the lack of sharing information between service delivery agencies was commented on. In particular, the need to re-tell the history of mental health issues during the process of seeking help was traumatic and led to people not pursuing further assistance – a dangerous outcome for those vulnerable to self-harm or suicide, and for others, it may simply be an example of exclusionary institutional processes.18

Tailored service delivery

Discussion on exclusionary practices in service delivery also focussed on the need for tailoring services to client groups. Examples were given that highlighted the importance of understanding the needs of particular groups in the community, and without that understanding, proper support or referral may not occur. Training of front line staff was considered important to increasing service delivery outcomes, with comments that staff should receive training on the sensitivities of delivering services regarding cultural, sexual, physical or mental health backgrounds.19

17 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.18 Eureka Clubhouse, 2009, Social inclusion forum.19 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.

A2.5

This point aligns closely with comments that services needed to be designed for flexibility to assist particularly disadvantaged groups. An example of tailoring services for people’s circumstances included the suggestion that people from remote areas should receive priority for appointments when they have travelled long distances, to prevent the likelihood of appointments being cancelled.20

When considering the accessibility of services, mobile outreach services were identified as important to providing healthcare assistance in identified all areas of high need and not just major metropolitan areas.21

Submissions also highlighted the importance of the early years as the fundamental focus for addressing disadvantage with early intervention: ‘If the focus is here, future disadvantage is likely to be reduced, whether it is intergenerational, locational or transitional.22

Education and skillsEducation is seen as a key enabler to opportunity and therefore very important to social inclusion. Education at all stages of life provides the requirements to: investigate and access key services; engage with others; further learning, through formal and informal methods; and access employment opportunities and career development to increase the economic capacity of individuals.

The importance of education and the accessibility of education, including the distribution of learning services and the tailoring of learning, was raised through a range of submissions and commented on throughout many forum discussions.

People commented that Tasmanian families and communities must be provided opportunities to create a future through education. Children must be supported at critical transition points, home to school and school to work. It is important to build relationships through sponsorship, tutoring, coaching or mentoring to enable disadvantaged children or young people to develop their academic, social, emotional and vocational skills to achieve their full potential. This includes support for essential comprehension, emotional, digital and financial literacies.23

Equally important for adults is understanding and supporting the pathway of education in life skills, to literacy, to skills development through transitional employment and further training. The issues raised at Skills Tasmania’s Equity Forum in November 2008 highlights these points and the importance of developing training to assist the most disadvantaged people in our communities. Issues raised at the forum included:

The importance of tailoring training to suit different learning styles;

The importance of fostering individual and community belief in the capacity for people to undertake training and the importance of existing skills to the workplace;

Groups of learners that did not have a social structure providing support found it a lot harder to engage and remain in training and employment; and

Learners don’t always have clear goals and require time to try out work areas of future work.

20 Flinders Island, 2009, social inclusion forum.21 Mission Australia, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.22 Hobart City Council, 2009, Response to the Tasmanian Government’s Social Inclusion Strategy Consultation Paper, consultation submission.23 The Smith Family, 2008, A submission by the Smith Family in response to the consultation paper, consultation submission.

A2.6

Possible solutions to the issues included:

Local support groups to identify and support people into and through training;

Bridging programs that take training experiences closer to the individual;

Foster work experience placements; and

Incorporate life skills training with qualification training to build more employable people.24

Other learning mechanisms were discussed, for example using the arts to make learning enjoyable and impart life skills. The Youth Network of Tasmania raised the importance of using other mediums to influence and promote learning, such as music, singing, visual art, drama, poetry and rap.25

Opportunities for education were given for particular excluded groups, highlighting the importance of education as a means of rehabilitation. For example, if prisons provided training for qualifications, people had a better chance of post-release integration into the community. Another opportunity is to maintain inmate connections with family and building literacy skills through programs such as Reading Together provided under the Department of Education’s Community Knowledge Network (CKN). The program has been extended into the Risdon prison, allowing recording of stories for playback by the children of inmate’s.

The CKN also discussed the importance of education to social inclusion and the tailoring and delivery mechanisms for education in communities. The importance of Learning Information Network Centres (LINCs), online access centres, libraries and library programs such as Bookstart are all examples of redefining accessibility to learning opportunities.

An effectively resourced education system was seen as important to delivering learning opportunities through the State’s formal education institutions. The Australian Education Union (AEU) commented on the importance of resourcing to reduce class sizes, attract highly skilled teachers and develop learning resources and support for learning within libraries.

Life Skills

Providing flexible learning opportunities was seen as crucial to connecting life skills education with more formalised education, such as literacy and numeracy and learning English as a second language. 26 It was also considered vital to assisting individuals participate in community activities and overcome other non–education related barriers to social inclusion.

Flexible learning needs to take account of the learning needs of particular groups due to the diversity of learning styles and the influences of life circumstances on accessing learning opportunities. For example, participants at the neighbourhood house forums and migrant and humanitarian entrant groups strongly recommended that community based education needed to focus on building life skills, where people develop literacy and numeracy levels by practising skills required for day to day living. Many commented that there were a range of programs being delivered by the community sector that combine practical skills, for example cooking and gardening, with literacy development.

24 Skills Tasmania, 2008, Report on the Skills Tasmania Equity Forum, consultation submission.25 Youth Network of Tasmania, 2009, A youth sector response to A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper, consultation submission.26 Neighbourhood Houses Statewide, 2008–2009, Migrant Resource Centre – Launceston and Hobart, 2009, social inclusion forums.

A2.7

Life skills were a focus for young learners, with many respondents commenting on the importance of early intervention to assist young children along the pathway of learning and increase literacy and numeracy levels and overall education outcomes. To do this though, children often need support in developing life skills as a precursor to curriculum education in the classroom.27

Other feedback commented that while extending education into the community to reach otherwise difficult to reach learners is positive, again, the method of delivery needs to take account of the barriers to learning that people face. For example, adult literacy programs would not necessarily attract participants when the programs are delivered in current/old school facilities, due to the stigma attached with the notion of adults being seen as ‘going back to school’.28

Neighbourhood houses and their clients strongly supported the connection between learning and socialising. By providing the opportunity to learn in a socialising environment, many thought there would be greater interest in community based learning for different groups in the community that faced greater disadvantage. A social environment also provided the opportunity for people to ‘look out’ for each other, talk about other issues that people may have and provide access to formal referrals for services. Views collected by southern neighbourhood houses revealed that many felt there was a need for increased support to assist youth disengaged from schools to continue learning in a socialising environment at neighbourhood houses.

Young male detainees at the Ashley Youth Detention Centre also commented on tailored learning opportunities. Many commented that further education was required to build literacy skills to secure employment as most had left school between grades eight to ten and some could not read at all due to leaving school earlier. The detainees said this resulted in a problem upon release when attempting to access government services, such as Centrelink, where forms and notices could not be read or interpreted for completion.

Being expelled from schools is an obvious barrier to learning life skills, let alone a curriculum education. Again, for detainees at Ashley, many thought that flexible learning opportunities were needed, including: smaller class sizes of up to ten people, with youth from similar backgrounds and ages; learning out of the classroom; and distance education. Female detainees had a different view, and commented that they would go back to school, not wanting to be treated differently.

Submissions and forum comments emphasised the importance of understanding that often basic life skills such as building confidence and communication capabilities were important prerequisites before undertaking other learning such as literacy and job skills development.

In his submission, a trainer commented that from experience gained delivering adult learning programs, skills and skill shortages were fairly easy to define and therefore relatively easy to address. The challenge was building confidence in individuals, so people were motivated and felt able to take on learning opportunities for job–skills training and to enter employment and be confident they could remain there.29

Organisations submitting formal responses and views from the community forums highlighted the importance of service delivery staff being able to recognise when people are at risk of/are isolated

27 Australian Education Union, 2008, Australian Education Union submission in response to A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.28 Southern midlands and central highlands community members – Oatlands, 2009, social inclusion forum.29 Adam Taylor, online consultation submission.

A2.8

and likely experiencing greater hardship. Skills development for governments, and programs and services outsourced by government to the community sector were highlighted as vital for the early recognition of exclusion and for building the capacity of organisations to recognise opportunities for strategies to promote social inclusion.

The consultation highlighted that life skills are not just important for the individual, they are also important for the broader community. Comments on the importance of education to build supportive communities were made, so we better understand how to look for the warning signs of self harm and suicide,30 and to understanding our role in responding to discrimination, harassment and abuse in the community.31

EmploymentAccess to employment, unemployment and underemployment were all raised as barriers to inclusion in Tasmania. The casualisation of the labour market was raised as an issue where there are people moving between unemployment and casual work on a very regular basis. It was also noted that casual workers do not fit the stereotype of young people and students but were a diverse mix of people who were more likely to have experienced some form of food insecurity compared with permanent employees.32

The need to support people to be job ready was raised, in particular, the importance of pre-employment training focussing on employability skills, basic knowledge and life skills, as well as workplace orientation and experience, training and mentoring.33 Transition points were also raised as focus areas for employment and support programs, in particular the transition from school to work and from joblessness to employment.34

“Lone parent families face considerably greater challenges to workforce participation than those in couple families. These parents face a variety of cumulative barriers to gainful employment including low earning capacity, poor working conditions and reduced probability of accessing training options. Meeting the costs of education, clothing, food, health and housing for their children therefore poses a huge challenge for many lone parents.”

The Smith Family, Consultation submission

The connection between education, learning social skills and job skills, and employment, were discussed extensively with attendees at a range of forums, including multicultural groups, people at the Ashley Youth Detention Centre, Risdon Prison and Eureka Clubhouse. Many submissions reiterated comments made previously that certain groups will face greater barriers to accessing work opportunities than others, often due to multiple disadvantages, such as lower education rates, health issues and a low financial capacity.

30 Department of Health and Human Services and southern neighbourhood houses, Southern neighbourhood house consultations, consultation submission.Southern midlands and central highlands community members – Oatlands, 2009, social inclusion forum.31 Advocacy Tasmania, 2008, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper, Advocacy Tasmania Inc. response, consultation submission.32 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.33 Mission Australia, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.34 Mission Australia, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.

A2.9

Transitional employment was raised as key to developing employment opportunities and pathways. For members of the Eureka Clubhouse, transitional employment was thought to be one of the most important opportunities. Members commented that it was key to getting people back into work, for developing confidence, financial independence and better life opportunities. It was commented that people with, or that have had a mental illness, have skills that can be utilised for many different roles as their backgrounds often included roles as professionals or in skilled employment. Members suggested that for employers, transitional employment would provides the opportunity to select tasks that could vary in complexity and to mentor participants through duties and responsibilities in flexible working arrangements. For the participants, gaining confidence in the workplace, developing financial independence and work-place skills were crucial to progressing new life pathways.

Humanitarian entrants also said employment was the most important factor for establishing a life in Tasmania. Financial independence was seen as the solution to participation in the broader community and vital for families to role model the possibilities for the future to a younger generation. It was also noted that without participation in employment, families were leaving Tasmania in search of better prospects in the other major cities, where there more people from similar cultural backgrounds and therefore greater chances for community support.35

Successfully gaining employment after gaining qualifications was also raised as a barrier to community participation. Humanitarian entrants gaining qualifications from certificate level through to a degree – believing that the qualification would increase employment prospects – find that many could still not secure employment. Many felt that once qualifications were gained, people just needed a chance to prove themselves.36 The view was expressed that there were likely cultural differences or a lack of appreciation of the positive aspects of cultural differences that remain a barrier to converting interviews to employment.

Unemployment due to discrimination was also highlighted for other groups: “for example prejudice and discrimination against LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, inter-sex) people can take the form of discrimination in education and employment leading to higher rates of unemployment and poverty”.37

VolunteeringThe consultations raised important views on community and volunteering, why people volunteer and why volunteering needed to be better promoted and given greater incentive. Supporting volunteering was considered a critical issue to understanding a community’s capacity to resolve issues and support its members. Volunteering was also discussed more broadly regarding the capacity of volunteering in Tasmania and the utilisation of volunteers.

People commented on the importance of belonging to communities. When we belong, we participate in collective action, we work together and we find rewards in alliances and networks. We all contribute to the social capital of our community so we can draw down and re-invest that capital in ways that add to our shared resources. People said that a socially inclusive community encourages belonging because it offers shared goals and lots of ways to participate. Volunteering was

35 Migrant Resource Centre – Launceston and Hobart, 2009, social inclusion forums.36 Migrant Resource Centre – Launceston and Hobart, 2009, social inclusion forums. 37 Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group, 2008, Submission to the Tasmanian Social Inclusion Strategy in response to the Social Inclusion Consultation Paper 2008, consultation submission.

A2.10

considered a key driver and opportunity to facilitate belonging to communities – for the volunteer and those receiving volunteered time and services.

Volunteering can be understood as a means to prevent and address social exclusion, but also as an end itself, linked to our core of citizenship. If Tasmanians are excluded from volunteering, not just the benefits that come from volunteering, they are denied the capacity to exercise their citizenship. Volunteering can contribute to inclusion by ending personal isolation, empowering the individual, valuing taking action and giving back to the community, developing skills, improving employability and active civic participation.38

Feedback during the consultations raised the threats to volunteering, particularly in relation to the costs to volunteers – volunteered services needed to be cost neutral, excluding time. This issue was discussed in relation to overcoming the declining rate of volunteers, the increasing demand for volunteers and the expectations on the volunteering sector from organisations and governments.

Neighbourhood houses frequently utilise volunteers and reiterated that the costs to volunteers was an issue. House representatives commented that funded organisations and funding providers need to take account of all the full costs of projects, programs and services to enable volunteers to be properly reimbursed for out of pocket expenses.39 Another suggestion was for the Tasmanian and Commonwealth Governments to investigate tax exemptions to create greater incentives to participate in volunteering, possibly treating volunteer costs as a tax deduction.40

There are many in the community that volunteer their time to assist those they care for. Carers Tasmania comments that carers are often disadvantaged and socially excluded due to the social and financial impact of providing care for another. Its submission also makes a financial case on the cost to the State Government of replacing carer’s services with formal care. Through research conducted for Carers Tasmania by IMC-Link2 and the University of Tasmania,41 Carers Tasmania quotes the calculated cost for such an exercise would be $1.2 billion per year. Carers Tasmania also states that projections into the future need for carers indicate that the need for informal care is expected to increase by 47-52 per cent by 2028, while the number of people available to provide care is likely to drop by around 23-24 per cent.

Carers Tasmania makes clear the groups of carers that are likely to face greater social exclusion. Groups include carers that: are young or old; live in outer regional and rural areas; sole parents; Tasmanian Aboriginals; from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds; and those caring for people with a mental illness.

Carers Tasmania also makes the distinction that for primary carers, the situation is worse, with the high workload further restricting the carer’s ability to participate in community life, employment and education. In relation to social isolation, it comments that inadequate respite services, financial restrictions and the personal impact of stress, depression, illness and injury are the most common contributors to isolation.42

38 Volunteering Tasmania Inc, 2009, Response to Consultation paper A social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.39 Gagebrook Neighbourhood House, 2008, Social inclusion forum.40 Community Transport Services Tasmania, 2009, consultation submission.41 (IMC–Link research), Carers Australia - Tasmania, 2009, Social inclusion for carers in Tasmania, consultation submission.42 Carers Australia - Tasmania, 2009, Social inclusion for carers in Tasmania, consultation submission.

A2.11

Arts, sport and recreationIn its submission, the Statewide Arts Health and Wellbeing steering committee highlighted the importance of participation in the arts to build confidence in individuals, assist communities through crises, develop social networks, create employment and encourage participation in education. The steering committee highlighted the importance of arts in early intervention and prevention, including examples of:

people collectively assisted through crises by focussing on and expressing community strengths

reaching very disadvantaged and excluded individuals through arts being a language that allows the broadest participation

community development through participation in community arts projects and involvement in civil decision making

expressive artists assisting people with a mental illness and disability and working in correction and rehabilitation centres to reduce anxiety and gain confidence and motivation.

This theme was discussed further by the then Department of Environment, Parks, Heritage and the Arts response to the consultation paper, in which it commented on the value of natural and cultural assets as an opportunity to look at new ways to address social exclusion in Tasmania, particularly for youth. It commented that by incorporating experiences with educational opportunities within Tasmanian parks, and with heritage and arts assets and programs, Tasmanian youth would:

have unique opportunities for social engagement

work on educational outcomes such as increased literacy

build life skills within their local community through relationships developed with local people

develop appreciation of Tasmanian natural and cultural assets.

The Statewide Arts Health and Wellbeing steering committee highlighted that although good work was underway, the provision of arts programs for community development and social inclusion was limited by one-off funding of programs, a lack of appropriate training and evaluation skills, facilities and limited understanding of the value of participation in the arts. The steering committee suggested that governance models that incorporated the views of the arts and community sector, spheres of government and education institutions needed to be investigated to better promote the capacity for community arts to build social inclusion.

Importantly, submissions highlighted the power of “having fun” at the local level through sport, art, recreation and culture and that opportunities for shared community experiences and the physical infrastructure to support this should be provided.43

43 Hobart City Council, 2009, Response to the Tasmanian Government’s Social Inclusion Strategy Consultation Paper, consultation submission.

A2.12

Stigma and discriminationDuring the Unit’s consultations, people commented on the damaging effect of stigma and discrimination to social inclusion. The consultation provided many examples of the need to develop respect for difference and acknowledge its place in building a more dynamic environment for communities, where we ensure that people are given the same opportunities as we expect to be given to all.

People said that a socially inclusive community provides plenty of opportunity and rewards for hard work but it also provide stability and compassion. We need to ensure we don’t judge people because of their appearances, beliefs or how they choose to live their lives. People have the right to be treated with dignity and nobody should suffer from discrimination and prejudice as it stops people reaching their potential: “It’s enabling people to be seen for what they can do rather than for what they can’t.”44

The Council on the Ageing (COTA) (Tasmania) highlighted the importance of older people living without prejudice and for the community to better value the capacity for individual contributions of older people to society. Without developing better respect, COTA argued society was not providing the encouragement for older people to re-enter employment, undertake training or address unwanted isolation.45Despite some policy reform it was noted that: “many Tasmanians living with disability are treated as outsiders. They experience discrimination because there is limited understanding of their specific needs.”46

Advocacy Tasmania’s response highlighted the importance of advocacy to help recognise the harm and limitations that discrimination, exploitation and abuse can have on people’s lives.

“Social exclusion…is also about not having power over one’s life and future; being vulnerable to the interventions and decision of others, including the state; being in a constant state of fear and confusion and feeling unsupported and ill equipped to navigate the complexities and challenges imposed by a rapidly changing, increasingly demanding and unsympathetic society and environment.”

Advocacy Tasmania, Consultation submission

Advocacy Tasmania comments that more needs to be done to affirm the value of older people and people with disabilities in the Tasmanian community, particularly in relation stigma contributing to an ‘ageism’ prejudice. Attitudes of: older people were of little value; a burden on society; slow to accept change; unable to look after themselves; slow, deaf or stupid; or child-like or sweet; meant that older people were in a circle of dependence as a vulnerable person, with an unwillingness to continue confronting a community that maintained a negative perception on their value.

44 Disability Bureau, Department of Premier and Cabinet, 2009, Submission by the Disability Bureau in relation to the Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania Consultation Paper, consultation submission.45 Council on the Ageing - Tasmania, 2008, Response to the Social inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.46 National Disability Services Tasmania, 2009, Social Inclusion Statement, consultation submission.

A2.13

It also comments that service staff need better training on assisting older people and people with disability to reduce the complexities and impost on the client for successfully navigating through and receiving services.47

The importance of roles and relationships and how they provide a pathway to acceptance, respect and autonomy was also raised regarding people with a disability.

“The essence of being included and connected in community is about relationships and roles. Having relationships is the core of social inclusion. Having people in your life who value you and look out for you; who want to spend time with you and share your interests and aspirations, prevents social isolation and contributes to good health.”

Disability Bureau, Department of Premier and CabinetConsultation submission

Through the roles we have, we develop skills and receive recognition for the contributions made to the community. Without meaningful roles, people are devalued by others; it is therefore important that people with disability are afforded the opportunity to take on roles in the community.48

The Skills Tasmania Equity Forum raised the need for cultural awareness training to be linked to service delivery organisations so that the needs of groups that face disadvantage are better understood. As mentioned, the consultations with humanitarian entrants also raised many examples of service delivery resulting in poor outcomes due to a lack of understanding of language barriers and misunderstandings on interpretation due to cultural differences.49

The TCJPC reinforces this point, commenting that there needs to be better understanding of cultural backgrounds, particularly for humanitarian entrants that have had a traumatic past: “In addition to discrimination, there is widespread ignorance about humanitarian entrants. People make offensive but unintentional assumptions about the backgrounds and lifestyles of humanitarian entrants.”50

Strategies suggested at the Skills Tasmania Equity Forum to address exclusion included the importance of overcoming employer attitudes on employing older people and tailored programs to assist people into education, attaining qualifications and trialled work participation for the very excluded – for example Tasmanian Aboriginals and people with mental illness or disability.51

Submissions noted both individual, community and structural causes of discrimination and stigmatisation. It was commented that: “The perpetuation of negative stereotypes and attitudes in the Tasmanian community continues to see mental illness associated as a highly stigmatised condition”.52

47 Advocacy Tasmania, 2008, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper, Advocacy Tasmania Inc. response, consultation submission.48 Advocacy Tasmania, 2008, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper, Advocacy Tasmania Inc. response, consultation submission.49 Migrant Resource Centre – Launceston and Hobart, 2009, social inclusion forums.50 Tasmanian Catholic Justice and Peace Commission, 2009, A submission to the Social Inclusion Unit, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.51 Skills Tasmania, 2008, Report on the Skills Tasmania Equity Forum, consultation submission.52 Mental Health Council of Tasmania, 2009,Submission: Social Inclusion Framework, consultation submission.

A2.14

“Social exclusion begins for most mental health consumers with a hospitalisation or diagnosis due to the high incidence of community stigma experienced in Tasmania…A mental health consumer may be someone in a managerial job or one of society’s leaders. The majority of mental health consumers are not highly visible.”

Tasmanian Mental Health Consumer Network and the Consumer Organisation Group, Consultation submission

Submissions highlighted the importance of targeting both the institutionalised discrimination and community prejudices that continue to underpin exclusion.53,54 Suggestions included programs including social marketing to demystify and de-stigmatise access to help and support55including mainstreaming and normalising support to reduce labelling 56as well as funding an anti-stigma campaign and support an awareness campaign across government of the importance of engaging with service users in a non-stigmatising and non-discriminatory manner57 It was noted that social marketing campaigns utilising well known public identities can be successful in improving knowledge as well as increasing acceptance in the community.58

Being sensitive to how discussion of exclusion and disadvantage impacts on communities will assist the process of engaging with communities.

“Making sure that the strengths of communities are considered along with the deficits, and being mindful about making assumptions that an identified area of disadvantage automatically equates with social exclusion.”

Hobart City Council, Consultation submission

In its response to the consultation paper, the Department of Treasury and Finance commented on the importance of understanding the language of social exclusion when engaging with communities: “It is important that Tasmania’s social inclusion strategy recognises and builds on Tasmania’s strengths, while at the same time acknowledging the need to address its weaknesses. It is also important not to stigmatise communities when highlighting their socio-economic disadvantage, as this risks being more detrimental to social inclusion than the community’s actual circumstances.”59

53 Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group, 2008, Submission to the Tasmanian Social Inclusion Strategy in response to the Social Inclusion Consultation Paper 2008, consultation submission.54 Scarlet Alliance, 2009, Social Inclusion Consultation, Tasmania, consultation submission.55 Youth Network of Tasmania, 2009, A youth sector response to A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper, consultation submission.56 Hobart City Council, 2009, Response to the Tasmanian Government’s Social Inclusion Strategy Consultation Paper, consultation submission.57 Mental Health Services, Department of Health and Human Services, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Consultation Paper, consultation submission.58 Mental Health Council of Tasmania, 2009,Submission: Social Inclusion Framework, consultation submission.59 Department of Treasury and Finance, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, Treasury comments on the consultation paper released on 30 Oct 2008, consultation submission.

A2.15

Organising social inclusion – the role of governments

State Government

The consultation paper discussed the importance of overcoming barriers to social inclusion using a whole of community approach – involving all spheres of government, community organisations and members, and business.

Communities commented that lives of individuals will be fuller and richer when governments, community organisations, business and charities work together to achieve common goals. This comment was reiterated by a number of organisations in their submissions, many focussing on engaging with communities to understand local issues; others highlighting the importance of structural changes within governments, so issues were managed without regard for intra and inter–jurisdictional controls.

The common view was for the Government to provide a framework that guides social inclusion policy and activity. One framework mentioned by a number of community organisations is to link social inclusion activity with Tasmania Together. 60 The Tasmanian Council of Social Services (TasCOSS) comments that this process would reinvigorate Tasmania Together as a whole of government and whole of community process and is especially important as it sits external to governments.

When discussing the measurement of the strategy, the Department of Treasury and Finance suggests that clearly defined and measurable targets and outcomes would be important for assessing the success or otherwise of the strategy. It commented that it was important to consider existing indicators of social cohesion.61 Although utilising existing indicators and data are important for establishing benchmarks for measurement, so is continued investigation by governments into accessing and sharing information. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) comments that through inter-government collaboration, drawing together disparate sources of information for analyses of small groups or communities is important, as is encouraging agencies to share data through the service of the ABS’s National Statistical Service.62

To balance the view on measuring progress, the Southern Tasmanian Youth Transitions Taskforce of the Southern Tasmanian Councils Authority, comments that while it is important to measure social inclusion initiatives, it should not be done at the expense of under resourcing [and not reaching] outcomes.63

Any framework developed by the State Government needs to align the efforts of agencies on social inclusion. The Georgetown Council explained the framework needs to integrate objectives for social inclusion into the development of policies, strategies and plans, commenting that there needs to be a mechanism for implementing government decisions regarding social inclusion horizontally across

60 Australian Red Cross, 2009, Response from Australian Red Cross to A social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.61 Department of Treasury and Finance, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, Treasury comments on the consultation paper released on 30 Oct 2008, consultation submission.62 Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008, consultation submission.63 Southern Tasmanian Youth Transitions Taskforce, 2009, Submission to the Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.

A2.16

the public service system. It also suggested implementing an independent body to monitor implementation and report regularly to the Premier.64

Organisations highlighted the importance of developing partnerships for delivering whole of community activity on social inclusion. Partnerships need to include practical governance arrangements for project and program implementation and for research. The Australian Red Cross suggests developing a research framework that includes partnerships with other research and community organisations to ensure that research effort is not duplicated or misdirected and to maximise benefits to the social inclusion strategy.65

A common theme from the consultations was that governments need to ensure that services and community assets are available to everybody, to provide creative solutions to issues such as isolation and de-centralisation. Government assets such as schools were seen as important community assets and infrastructure that, through increased access, could provide greater opportunities for social and community activities.

When considering partnerships and projects, the Government also needs to recognise what is working well. New projects that are established should build on the groundwork of innovation already being supported by many community organisations and business people. This approach should also promote and reward innovation and recognise excellence in achievement and leadership.66

While concentrating on the practice of partnering, organising and implementing social inclusion activity is important, so is understanding the future of social inclusion and the potential changes to factors of exclusion. Dr Roscoe Taylor, Director, Population Health, Department of Health and Human Services, comments that governments have a role in understanding, planning and preventing events at a macro level.

“Climate change, population, industrialisation, pollution, food production issues and resource depletion are likely to have an adverse impact on disadvantaged groups unless mitigatory processes are put in place. Tasmania is likely to get swept along a route of inevitability unless comprehensive, proactive planning is undertaken now. The Social Inclusion Unit can work with other agencies looking forwards and help them to imagine an equitable and inclusive future for Tasmania in the face of the global financial crisis, population pressures, resource depletion, climate change and technologies that have not yet even been dreamt of.”

Population Health, Department of Health and Human ServicesConsultation submission

64 George Town Council, 2009, A Social Inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper Response to consultation paper, consultation submission.65 Australian Red Cross, 2009, Response from Australian Red Cross to A social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.66 Carers Australia - Tasmania, 2009, Social inclusion for carers in Tasmania, consultation submission.

A2.17

Local Government

When addressing the inaugural Australian Council of Local Governments in November 2008, the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd MP, stated:

“Local Government has increasingly taken on responsibility for and designed programs, to promote social inclusion. Local Governments’ long history in the provision of community services and the understanding of the needs of identified groups is vital for the delivery of the national social inclusion agenda.”67

The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd MP

The Local Government Association of Tasmania (LGAT) comments that local government’s closeness to communities may mean it is ideally placed to take stewardship of social inclusion policy and service delivery. However it also commented that: “any debate on the role of Local Government in tackling social inclusion must first recognise the constraints of councils and identify solutions to capacity (people, skills, knowledge and understanding) and financial resourcing.” 68

There was a strong response throughout the forums that if community members worked with Local Government to ensure councils were representing community issues, then Local Government was well placed to work with other governments to address them. Councils have community development officers for assisting with local community issues and often acted as the bridging mechanism between community organisations, groups, individuals and governments to promote and implement local community development programs and services.69

The State Government also has a role in ensuring that the Tasmanian legislative framework is able to protect and support the most vulnerable members of the community. Tasmania Police commented that the most vulnerable are children and young people and that the Children, Young Persons and Families Act 1997 and the Youth Justice Act 1997 could be one administrative framework that acknowledges the nexus between child protection and youth offending. 70

Tasmania Police suggested that family and locational approaches were required to address intergenerational social exclusion in Tasmania. As mentioned under the heading Integrated Service Delivery, information sharing and privacy issues are significant structural impediments to social inclusion for individuals and groups. Overcoming these administrative barriers and any related legislation, as well as resourcing, building, assisting and adapting existing collaborative strategies, such as the Inter-Agency Support Teams, could provide localised governance strategies to addressing whole of family issues.71

67 Local Government Association of Tasmania, 2009, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania, Response to the consultation paper, consultation submission.68 Local Government Association of Tasmania, 2009, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania, Response to the consultation paper, consultation submission.69 Gagebrook Neighbourhood House, 2008, Social inclusion forum.Southern midlands and central highlands community members – Oatlands, 2009, social inclusion forum.70 Tasmania Police, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: Questions to guide feedback, consultation submission.71 Tasmania Police, 2009, A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: Questions to guide feedback, consultation submission.

A2.18

Funding modelsStructural issues in the community sector were raised many times, including that the funding models for community organisations predominantly utilised grant programs, which provided funding for short periods and required large overheads in grant research, submissions and administration. Community organisations delivering government and non-government funded services commented that the funding models led to a fragmented approach to service delivery and undermined the government and community sector’s ability to determine outcomes and extend programs across the State.72

In its submission, the Australian Red Cross suggests the social inclusion strategy involves cross-sectoral community projects designed and implemented with community organisations, funded over longer periods than the typical one to three year funding cycle and that programs are rigorously evaluated to build the evidence base further program development and expansion.73

TransportTransport was commented on in many submissions, with issues raised ranging from the importance of transport to social inclusion, the role of public and community transport, costs and the accessibility of transport.

Transport was seen as vital to connecting people with services, opportunities for training and employment, social activities and networks of support.

Many organisations considered continued investment in public transport as key to overcoming the barrier of distance. The Georgetown Council commented that adequate access to a good public transport service for all Tasmanians was important to addressing locational or place based disadvantage in Tasmania.74

The distribution of transport services from rural and urban fringe areas to urban centres also featured as an issue. Comments on scheduling and routes centred on the lack of services from fringe to metropolitan areas during working days for employment and appointments, and the reduction in services on weekends and its impact on accessing community and social events. A range of points were made on the distribution of transport services:

Kingborough Council commented that there was a lack of transport options in the local government area including buses and taxis and associated infrastructure such as park and ride facilities. It also commented that medical transport needed greater support, as many medical services are provided in Hobart; most people are expected to travel to Hobart, even though there are limited transport options across the local government area.75

72 Statewide Arts Health & Wellbeing steering Committee, 2008, Arts and Social Inclusion, An opportunity not to be missed! Partnering with Arts to deliver the Social Inclusion Strategy, consultation submission.73 Australian Red Cross, 2009, Response from Australian Red Cross to A social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.74 George Town Council, 2009, A Social Inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper Response to consultation paper, consultation submission.75 Kingborough Council, 2009, Feedback on social inclusion strategy, consultation submission.

A2.19

The Australian Education Union highlighted the importance of transport and accommodation for students from the urban fridge or remote and rural areas to ensure distance to training and teaching centres were not barriers to education.76

When discussing geographic isolation, the Dorset Youth Advisory Group commented that the availability and cost of transport made it difficult to afford other costs and get by on a day-to-day basis.77 The Latrobe Council’s youth advisory group, VOICE, similarly commented that transport was a major barrier to participation on the community.78

In relation to community transport, although older people and younger people with disability were assisted with their transport needs through the joint Australian and state government Home and Community Care program (HACC), many neighbourhood houses and community groups commented that further transport options were required for those that did not meet the criteria of the program. The majority view was for greater flexibility for transport for all age types and community groups, to assist people reach appointments and services and community activities.79

Regarding public passenger transport services, issues focussed on the scheduling, routes, accessibility and harassment that can occur on buses. Comments on scheduling and routes centred on the lack of services from fringe to metropolitan areas during working days for employment and appointments, and the reduction in services on weekends and its impact on accessing social events.80

In relation to accessibility, the Independent Living Centre’s mentioned that people can be isolated in their own homes because they cannot access equipment to access their community: “People with an impairment that limits their communication, people who require mobility equipment that is used only for community access, and people who require their own wheelchair modified vehicles are often excluded from their families and communities.”81

The Kingston Seniors Action Group (KSAG) comments that public transport was overly complex and usually bypassed as an option for older people due to difficulty in interpreting schedules and unsuitable schedules.82

Concerns of accessibility and harassment on public transport centred on: physical access for boarding and disembarking buses and harassment for people with a disability; and for older people, the adequacy of bus shelters to protect from poor weather and seating.83 Advocacy Tasmania explained that older people and people with a disability lacked confidence in public transport due to the scheduling and routes of services causing buses to be difficult to access, physical access issues due to mobility restrictions, lack of shelter from the weather and security at terminals and interchanges.

76 Australian Education Union, December 2008, Australian Education Union Submission in response to A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.77 Dorset Youth Advisory Group, 2008, Feedback on social inclusion strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.78 Voice, Latrobe Council’s youth advisory group, 2009, consultation submission.79 Social inclusion forums held around Tasmania from November 2008 – March 2009.80 Social inclusion forums held around Tasmania from November 2008 – March 2009.81 Independent Living Centre, 2009, Social Inclusion Unit Submission, consultation submission.82 Kingston Seniors Action Group, 2009, social inclusion forum.83 Kingston Seniors Action Group, 2009, social inclusion forum.

A2.20

In relation to community transport, although older people and younger people with disability were assisted with their transport needs through the joint Australian and state government Home and Community Care program (HACC), many communities and community organisations commented that further transport options were required for those that did not meet the criteria of the HACC program. The majority view was for greater flexibility for transport for all age types and community groups.84 KSAG reinforced this view, recommending that further investigation was required into transport services that had lower levels of utilisation but more flexible services.85

PlanningPlanning of urban centres was considered important for providing spaces for people to enjoy within the built environment. Although access to and within service centres, shops and dwellings is considered critical for the inclusion of people with a disability, it was also commented that civic areas needed to be designed so all people wanted to interact with city and town centres.

Design implications to increase access to city and town centres needs to consider access for older people and for people with disability – without suitable car parking space for older people to easily open a door and get out of a car,86 or a suitable number of layovers (extended parking and disembarking areas) for wheelchair fitted vans and buses for people with disability, there will continue to be institutionalised exclusionary practices.87

Due to its involvement with planning schemes, Local Government is well placed to understand the ramifications of design on the population and has been involved in initiatives such as the Healthy by Design Project, which aims to incorporate design considerations for health and wellbeing into planning decisions.88

The Launceston City Council’s response to the question of structural or institutional processes that inhibit community participation reiterated the importance of planning to build socially inclusive environments.

“…the location, form and demographic makeup of our communities is directly related to the degree of social inclusion. Decisions made about the location, tenure and affordability of housing is crucial to addressing the problem. The design of the physical environment, i.e. public spaces, buildings, etc, is essential to a community’s pride and sense of place; both are key drivers of high levels of social inclusion…Community safety and access to high quality recreational spaces are also important.”

Launceston City Council, Consultation Submission

84 Social inclusion forums held around Tasmania from November 2008 – March 2009.85 Kingston Seniors Action Group, 2009, social inclusion forum.86 Kingston Seniors Action Group, 2009, social inclusion forum.87 Community Transport Services Tasmania, 2009, social inclusion consultation.88 Local Government Association of Tasmania, 2009, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania, Response to the consultation paper, consultation submission.

A2.21

The Government has a role in partnering with councils and communities to create more liveable centres. The Hobart City Council comments:

“…critical to resolving locational disadvantage… is an asset based community development approach to urban [and] town renewal and the development of community and social spaces that includes green space, shops and wider community [use] of schools [in] out of school hours.

Hobart City Council, Consultation submission

InfrastructureMany respondents commented on the importance for investment and sharing of infrastructure to support the needs of expanding communities. The examples given during the consultation highlight that the development of communities is progressive, based on need, and that communities are at different stages of need. For example, although KSAG gave many examples of older Tasmanians involved in community life, it also highlighted the importance of cooperation on urban planning to better facilitate investment in infrastructure for events, meeting places and access for older people that others take for granted, for example access to central business districts.89

In its response, the Third Age Learning and Education Network of Tasmania (TALENT) said that a lack of transport and suitable facilities were major barriers for people aged over 65, who want to be active, independent and who are living in their own homes. TALENT offered that it was the suitability of facilities for older people that limited participation and suggested further expanding access to school facilities for community organisations as a method of attracting and supporting involvement in social and learning activities. TALENT’s response explained the appropriateness of schools for community meetings due to the distribution of school facilities in the State. Schools were more suited for older Tasmanian’s as they were designed with adequate access with close car parks and suitable corridor and door sizes, had amenities nearby and offered the possibility to community organisations to deliver lower cost services through facility sharing with the State Government.

Digital communicationsThe ability for consumers to access information is a key driver of the spread of internet infrastructure and the development of services and related technologies. Without access, people become separated from what is now a mainstream communication method for government, businesses and community organisations and therefore can become excluded, particularly in remote areas. Access to information technologies is also important as it impacts on the fundamentals of education, and with the expansion of electronic health services, an individual’s health.

Some local government councils and community members commented on the difficulty in accessing information due to the poor coverage of broadband Internet.90 Others pointed out the role of digital communications:

89 Kingston Seniors Action Group, 2009, social inclusion forum. 90 Kingborough Council, 2009, Feedback on Social Inclusion Strategy, consultation submission.Cr Don Thwaites – Kentish Council, individual consultation submission.Social inclusion forums at neighbourhood houses 2008–2009.

A2.22

“Access to computers and particularly the Internet is becoming increasingly important to people’s capacity to be socially included, particularly as government information and service delivery moves on-line.”

Anglicare Tasmania Submission

Principles“If we are to work towards an inclusive society, hopefully one without the problems of violence, anti-social behaviour and exclusion, the way society views, let alone treats, the least fortunate and [the] disadvantaged has to change for the majority, not just the enlightened few.”91

The consultation paper asked the question “What guiding principles do you think a social inclusion strategy for Tasmania should adopt?” The Launceston City Council responded by highlighting the importance of viewing social inclusion as a human right, in order to prevent stigmatising language such as ‘us and them’. The Council underlined the importance of establishing guiding principles that were values-based and that provided a philosophical guide for social inclusion projects. It also underlined the importance of a whole-of-community response, with governments, organisations and individuals involved and that these groups needed to “recognise, acknowledge, embrace and celebrate the guiding principles.”92

Red Cross Australia suggested research of other jurisdictions to understand the value of principles for social inclusion and commented on three principles it placed as important, which were:

Uniquely Tasmanian: the social inclusion strategy should reflect the particular strengths and weaknesses of Tasmania’s economy, institutions, communities and geography.

Evidence based approach: it is important that the work of the strategy has been determined by building a strong evidence base.

Engaging with volunteers: the role of volunteers is undergoing significant change with the push to professionalise community organisations and with demand on volunteering levels due to an ageing population. In developing the strategy, there is an opportunity to review how volunteering is considered and expand the engagement of volunteers in the community sector.93

91 Multicultural Council of Tasmania, 2009, MCoT response to A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper, consultation submission. 92 Launceston City Council, 2009, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania, Launceston City Council response, consultation submission.93 Australian Red Cross, 2009, Response from Australian Red Cross to A social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.

A2.23

A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania should:

Articulate a positive vision of a society without poverty – tell us where we want to go in the longer term and start investing now.

Have a long term budgetary commitment - of at least 10 state budgets

Guarantee access to essential services – such as food, housing, power, water, transport, telephones and sewerage.

Address underemployment – faced by low paid workers and those who move in and out of casual and part-time work.

Support social rights – recognise our roles as parents and carers, the value of education not focussed on industry outcomes and the value of culture and the arts.

Address climate change – and promote sustainable communities based on justice, universality, diversity and citizens’ rights.

Recognise the important role of the non-government sector – with a practical demonstration of commitment by the Government to partnership with the community sector.

Address demographic challenges faced in Tasmania – including and ageing and decreasing workforce and its implications for the community sector.

Address taxation implications – the opportunity for decent and progressive Federal and State taxation reform.

Anglicare Tasmania, Consultation submission

In summarising its recommendation for the development of a social inclusion strategy, Anglicare Tasmania comments that the purpose of the strategy has to be clearly defined, as do clear statements on who is being empowered through the strategy.

“A definition of social inclusion and a set of principles to guide policy and practice is needed but not one that supports competitive and authoritarian policy agendas such as the mutual obligation regime delivered in the name of promoting social participation. A definition of rights and responsibilities which incorporates not just personal rights and responsibilities but the responsibility of governments, service providers and the broader community to tackle social exclusion is needed.”

Anglicare Tasmania Submission

A2.24

Key findingsCommunities

Tasmanian Mental Health Consumer Network and the Consumer Organisation Group, Consultation submission

The community forums raised very practical discussion on the definition of communities, including that although communities can often be defined by the geographic area they are situated in, communities are also made by association. That is, a group that identifies themselves by its values, may not be geographically defined, but spread across or located within towns and cities, and yet still be a community. This was important for understanding and discussing the importance of transport in accessing community activities across towns and city suburbs, where community events or services were outside of suburban and town boundaries, and to understanding the impact of digital exclusion in Tasmania.

People in Tasmania, as elsewhere, demonstrated that communities needed to be flexible and based on relationships and social networks that supported people throughout their lives. Assisting and encouraging people who are excluded to become more involved in networks and their communities was considered critical to building a more inclusive society, the most deeply excluded were often not known by governments and community organisations.

It was strongly supported that even though the most disadvantaged do not present to any support services, nobody should be left out or forgotten by society. Comments given to the Unit during consultations was that for governments and communities to understand how to help its members, organisations needed to understand that some people were very isolated and would need to be found through building and extending networks of relationships to make contact and offer support.

Community strengths

What are your community’s strengths?“It’s friendly and warm, it has a heart and soul…“People still care about the community and people still help each other…“The playground, parks, bike tracks, there are friendly families and we feel pretty safe.”

Handwritten responses on questionnaires discussed at neighbourhood houses as part of the social inclusion forums

Communities highlighted the importance of feeling hopeful about the future and providing opportunities for people to take part in the stories of hope that can be told about Tasmania.

Comments came from a range of groups, some involved in depression and suicide education programs, others from outreach services involving people in activities to overcome social exclusion. They said that hope makes everybody a stakeholder in the community and for many, social inclusion is a cause for optimism and something to look forward to – it offers new opportunities for mutual

A2.25

“Without a strong voice, others will continue to speak on our behalf according to the priorities of their own agendas.”

assistance and collective action and builds on community strengths to address local issues and needs.

In its submission, TALENT reiterated the views of many others, that social inclusion was occurring every day, directly and indirectly, through the many organisations that are delivering community services in Tasmania.

Many organisations commented on the importance of maintaining and building on local networks for addressing social exclusion. Feedback given during the Unit’s social inclusion forums progressively added weight that to develop and implement local solutions to social exclusion, local people needed to be skilled, or trained, and involved in the activities at operational and management levels. In utilising local people, governments and community organisations are tapping into established networks and relationships that can foster support and utilise resources for local social inclusion projects.

Examples of the capacity of people to organise and address local issues was evidenced at a range of the forums held at neighbourhood houses around the State. The following are excerpts from the forums:

Gagebrook Community House: People support each other at Pete’s Shed, Gagebrook Community House, online centre and the library. People are proud of the community through initiatives, support and partnerships created by the Brighton Council and Brighton Alive and the work of the community. Through being involved, people are reminded of what they could do together.94

Burnie Community House: “The North West has been a disadvantaged area for a long period of time, but historically the region has strong social networks.” People commented that these informal networks should be maintained and strengthened. They wanted the community to decide what the community wants. When discussing ‘people infrastructure’ – contributors emphasised that they were ready, willing and able to build on existing networks to make an impact.95

Ravenswood Neighbourhood House: At the forum, strong community sentiment was noted such as the importance of knowing your neighbours, people working alongside one another and the importance of fostering a sense of community through the development of a community plan for Launceston. Engagement was also important “The community is ready to work with the government in a new way, come back to communities; keep listening”.96

Clarendon Vale Neighbourhood Centre: “The community works together well, and people support programs that get results.”97

Central highlands and southern midlands community members: “The community needs to be proud and feel supported. It has to support itself and not rely on governments to fix things, but it will need assistance.”98

94 Gagebrook Neighbourhood House, 2008, social inclusion forum.95 Burnie Community House, 2008, social inclusion forum.96 Ravenswood Neighbourhood House, 2008, social inclusion forum.97 Clarendon Vale Neighbourhood Centre, 2008, social inclusion forum.98 Southern midlands and central highlands community members – Oatlands, 2009, social inclusion forum.

A2.26

Advocacy Tasmania also commented on the need to understand that strategies for social inclusion need to make people want to be included: “The emphasis when creating social inclusion services is to develop strategies that remove the barriers that prevent the person from moving out into the community, while giving less attention to the creation of social inclusion services that meet the needs of the individual in their home.”99

Engaging with the communities

Communities commented that in a socially inclusive community, everyone has something to offer, therefore, power to decide over your own life and the shaping of your community should be shared and people should get a say in the things that matter to them.

This sentiment was very important when discussing government and community engagement and consultation. Many participants commented on the importance of understanding the requirements for consultation, that discussion had to include the people contributing and impacted by any strategy and that policy and projects needed to first recognise the great social inclusion work already underway across Tasmania’s communities.

“Community assistance has to engage with the communities and this is best done through employing or funding locals. Sending in bureaucrats from Hobart to help the community frustrates people and is not effective as they don't speak the same language. The community can help select a person for the job, and ask Government to fund particular projects to make it happen. If training is required, then invest in the community – train community members to do it. Many non-government organisations that deliver local services are well respected for being able engage with the community.”

Social inclusion forum for southern midlands and central highlands community members, Oatlands

In responding to the question of how to build opportunities for people to participate in the cultural and economic life of communities, a youth advisory group for the Latrobe Council commented that asking youth in the area was first and foremost the most important factor for any decision making process. It also advised that the healthy development for young people had to include having positive connections to others in society.

In its submission, the Southern Tasmanian Youth Transitions Taskforce commented on the importance of recognising and building on work already done and currently underway in the youth sector and advised that wherever possible, the social inclusion strategy should work with existing structures and avoid establishing new structures with new consultative frameworks, as: “There is a fine line between helpful consultation and consultation which is time wasting.”

The Launceston City Council’s submission included comment on governance structures to implement social inclusion projects, including that structures: need to ensure community voices are listened to and analysed for the development of strategies; encourage community responsibility, so

99 Advocacy Tasmania, 2008, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: A consultation paper, Advocacy Tasmania Inc. response, consultation submission.

A2.27

communities own the process; and move from service delivery to increasing the community’s resilience and capacity to respond to disadvantage before crisis points are reached.100

Red Cross Australia reiterated the importance of local engagement on the work of the social inclusion strategy, involving neighbourhoods, workplaces and local institutions such as schools and churches.

Summary on communities

“people want to have a say and be listened to and be an active part of the solutions.”

Youth Network of Tasmania, Consultation submission

A consistent message from the consultation was the need to put ‘communities in control’101 by providing a voice for people at the local level in determining the priorities for assistance and the way in which it is delivered.102 This involved government assistance to invest in the capacity of communities and individuals to participate in the civic life of the State as well as a commitment from government to listen. It was commented that it is only with real dialogue about the reality of some people’s lives on the fringes of the community and authentic consultation that people themselves acquire control over their lives and contribute to finding solutions to the problems affecting them.103

Common themes

One of the strongest themes arising from the Unit’s consultation was the need to support people to greater social inclusion by providing them with opportunities to (a) develop a strong voice and (b) have their voices heard.104

The submissions and the summaries of the consultations also leave a number of clear impressions:

1. the level of effort that many Tasmanians went to provide well thought out views on social inclusion

2. the often very debilitating and chronic impact of social exclusion

3. the overwhelming breadth of and complexity of issues that are seen to be related to social inclusion

4. the sense of injustice that many individuals and groups feel associated with social exclusion

5. a modicum of agreement on some of the key pathways forward.

There are a range of views that are consistent across the consultations:

100 Launceston City Council, 2009, A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania, Launceston City Council response, consultation submission.101 Community sector forum, 2009, social inclusion forum.102 Anglicare Tasmania, 2009, Response to Social Inclusion Unit: A social inclusion strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, consultation submission.103 National Disability Services Tasmania, 2009, Social Inclusion Statement, consultation submission.104 Tasmanian Mental Health Consumer Network and the Consumer Organisation Group Submission, 2009, A social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania, consultation submission.

A2.28

Some issues are universal – There are some consistent issues that go across all locations and groups. These include the importance of having basic needs met, transport, volunteering, access to health, education and employment.

Respect and dignity for all people – Stigma and discrimination ruins lives as it erodes confidence and capacity. Tasmanian communities and people are diverse and difference can be celebrated.

A strengths based approach is needed – Use talents and interests to build success. Empowering approaches that help people to achieve valued roles. A move from welfare to assets and strengths is required.

Involve people in being part of their own solution – Importance of integrating the citizen voice and individual participation. Support people to greater social inclusion by providing them with opportunities to develop a strong voice and have their voices heard.

Relationships are important – Trust and long term networks of support in communities are critical to social inclusion. Maintaining connections with family and community and valuing positive relationships is essential.

A one size fits all approach won’t work – Ask communities what their priorities and needs are – work with communities to tailor policies from the bottom up. Community designed and driven strategies are required that acknowledge urban, rural and regional differences and Tasmania’s decentralised population.

Prevention is better than seeking a cure – Employment based programs, neighbourhood renewal, investment in the capacity of non-government organisations and the provision of quality childcare in neighbourhoods of social disadvantage can provide early help and opportunity that make a difference in a person’s options and change their life course.

Social inclusion is everybody’s responsibility – Social inclusion is the responsibility of the individual, the community and the supportive structures of our communities, including governments, community service organisations and businesses.

A2.29

Table 1 – Consultation Submissions to the Social Inclusion ConsultationThere was a high level of interest in A social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania: a consultation paper, the Government received 52 formal submissions from community organisations, councils, government agencies and individuals. Submissions received from organisations were:

Advocacy Tasmania Launceston City CouncilAnglicare Tasmania Local Government Association TasmaniaArts Access Australia Mental Health CouncilAustralian Bureau of Statistics Mental Health ServicesAustralian Education Union Mission Australia Australian Red Cross Multicultural Council of TasmaniaCarers Australia - Tasmania National Disability ServicesCentral Coast Council Northern Midlands CouncilCentrelink Phoenix HouseClarence City Council Salvation ArmyCommunity Conference Facilitators Scarlet AllianceCommunity Knowledge Network - Department of Education

Sharon Stewart (on behalf of Southern Neighbourhood Houses)

Council of the Ageing (Tasmania) submitted by Eileen Levett

Skills Tasmania Equity Forum

Department of Education Southern Tasmanian Youth Transitions Taskforce

Department of Environment, Parks, Heritage and the Arts

Statewide Arts Health & Wellbeing steering committee

Department of Treasury and Finance TALENT Third Age Learning & Education Network of Tasmania

DHHS Health Promotion - Mersey TasCOSS DHHS Population Health Tasmania Police

Disability Bureau - Department of Premier and Cabinet

Tasmanian Catholic Justice and Peace Commission

Dorset Youth Advisory Group, The Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group

George Town Council Tasmanian Mental Health Consumer Network

Hobart City Council The Smith FamilyIndependent Living Centre Tasmania VOICE (Latrobe Council Youth Advisory

GroupKentish Council Volunteering TasmaniaKingborough Council Youth Network of TasmaniaKingston Seniors Action Group (KSAG)

A2.30

From November 2008 to March 2009 the Social Inclusion Unit held forums with Local Government, communities, community sector organisations and interest groups around Tasmania on the priorities for the development of a social inclusion strategy. Forums were conducted with:

Neighbourhood Houses from around the State, consisting of:

Zeehan Neighbourhood Centre Gagebrook Community CentreBurnie Community House Geeveston Community CentreEastern Shore Community House Clarendon Vale Neighbourhood CentreGeorge Town Neighbourhood House West Moonah Community HouseRavenswood Neighbourhood House Risdon Vale Neighbourhood CentreSt Helens Neighbourhood House Dunalley Neighbourhood House

Eureka Clubhouse: a member–run site for socialising for people with mental health or intellectual disability

nominated social inclusion contact officers from councils

nominated social inclusion contact officers from State Government agencies

nominated social inclusion contact officers from Australian Government agencies

targeted workshops with TasCOSS members in the North and South. The northern session was attended by approximately 50 people and the southern session was attended by approximately 70 people

members from multicultural communities in Launceston and Hobart, representing over 15 communities

representatives from the Central Highlands and Southern Midlands local government areas

members of the Tasmanian Aboriginal community on the Flinders and Cape Barron islands

the individual organisations of:

Aboriginal Education Unit Multicultural Liaison Officer NetworkTasmanian Women’s Council Tasmanian Youth ForumPremier’s Disability Advisory Council Youth Network of TasmaniaMinisterial Disability Advisory Council Youth on community service ordersNational Disability Services Community Conference facilitatorsPositive Ageing Advisory Committee Ashley Youth Detention Centre at ExtonNational Seniors Tasmania Policy Group Risdon Prison (women and men)Council of the Aging Brand TasmaniaKingston Seniors Action Group Volunteering TasmaniaMulticultural Council of Tasmania Scarlet Alliance

A5.31