Examination of Budget Estimates 2010-2011
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Community Affairs Legislation Committee Examination of Budget Estimates 2010-2011 Answers to Questions on Notice CONSOLIDATED VOLUME 3 CROSS PORTFOLIO INDIGENOUS MATTERS Documents tabled at the hearing EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS and HUMAN SERVICES PORTFOLIOS Please note that answers to questions on notice received relating to the Cross Portfolio Indigenous matters hearing for FAMILIES, HOUSING, COMMUNITY SERVICES AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO and HEALTH AND AGEING PORTFOLIO are included in the volumes for these portfolios 21 OCTOBER 2010 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATING TO THE EXAMINATION OF BUDGET EXPENDITURE FOR 2010-2011 Included in this volume are answers to written and oral questions taken on notice and tabled papers relating to the budget estimates hearing on Indigenous matters pursuant to Senate Resolution of 26 August 2008 held on 4 June 2010 * Please note that the tabling date of 30 September 2010 is the proposed tabling date Index of answers received (answers follow) Quest. Senator Tabled documents Date tabled in No. the Senate or presented out of session* XT1 FaHCSIA background to Menzies School of Medical 24.06.10 tabled by Research 'Impact of income management on store sale in FaHCSIA the Northern Territory' XT2 Advertising education/awareness: Australian wine exported 24.06.10 tabled by to the USA must have this warning on the label Senator Scullion EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS PORTFOLIO Quest. Senator DEEWR Date tabled in No. the Senate or presented out of session* CA0001_11 Siewert Unemployment rate in the broader population 28.10.10 CA0002_11 Adams Aboriginal Corporation called Ngumbu 28.10.10 HUMAN SERVICES PORTFOLIO Quest. Senator Centrelink Agency Date tabled in No. the Senate or presented out of session* CLK1 Siewert BasicsCard – list of merchants 30.09.10 i BACKGROUND The findings of the Medical Journal of Australia article The article “Impact of income management on store sales in the Northern Territory” by Menzies School of Medical Research researchers Brimblecombe et al published in a recent edition of the Medical Journal of Austraia documents the findings of a study that aims to examine the impact of income management on store purchasing patterns in relation to tobacco sales and the dietary quality of purchased food and drinks, as measured by (i) total store sales; (ii) food and beverage sales; (iii) fruit and vegetable sales; and (iv) soft drink sales. The purchasing patterns related to 10 ALPA stores, examining data before and after the introduction of income management. The Menzies paper concludes that: Income management independent of the government stimulus payment appears to have had no beneficial effect on tobacco and cigarette sales, soft drink or fruit and vegetable sales. The authors identify some limitations to the extent to which the findings can be generalised to other remote communities in the NT. The limitations relate to the use of the FOODcard in ALPA stores (which restricts purchases to essential items). They also note that 8 of the 10 stores were in ‘dry’ communities before the Intervention. However, they state that: ‘In all other respects, the stores are expected to be similar to other community stores in areas where government prescribed standards apply and where income management has taken effect’. The Menzies paper provides no substantiation of this statement. No data were gathered from non-ALPA stores. FaHCSIA Post Licensing Monitoring Report findings The authors of the Menzies paper argue that their results contradict the results of the Store Licensing Survey. FaHCSIA undertook post licensing monitoring of the impact on store managers of the rollout of stores licensing and income management. The results were compiled in the Final Stores Post Licensing Monitoring Report: 66 Stores, which was published on the FaHCSIA website in June 2009. The FaHCSIA report contained two key findings which were reported by store managers, as follows: Customer shopping habits have changed significantly in most stores, with 68.2 per cent of store operators reporting an increase in the amount of healthy food purchased. This includes items such as fruit and vegetables, as well as dairy foods and meat. Responses suggest that sales of some goods, such as cigarettes, are unchanged (73.3 per cent of operators who answered this question reported no change). 1 The validity of the outcome measures used in the paper The effectiveness of income management cannot be assessed by simply looking at whether fruit and vegetable sales have increased. Income management is designed to achieve a range of outcomes, including increasing the amount of money spent on priority needs, improving food security, reducing harassment for money and improved money management. Together, the outcomes sought through income management are intended to improve the well-being of children and families, increase self-reliance and build stronger families and more resilient communities. The Menzies study does not itself provide a comprehensive assessment on the effectiveness of income management since it considers outcome measures which are not valid tests of the overall impact of income management, i.e. trends in (i) total store sales; (ii) total food and beverage sales; (iii) fruit and vegetable sales (iv) soft drink sales (v) tobacco sales Accuracy of dates used for the start of income management The authors do not list the stores chosen for their study in their paper and were unwilling to provide us this information upon our request. However, we have a good idea of the stores chosen. When we tried to match the actual income management start dates against these stores we found discrepancies with some of the dates used for this study. It would seem that the switch-on dates used in the study in some cases may be earlier than the actual switch-on dates – for example at least one ALPA store had a switch-on date in July, but the Menzies paper does not identify any stores as having July switch-on dates. Also, only one store had a switch-on date in March but the paper identifies two stores as switching on in March. Using earlier switch-on dates would be likely to reduce the measured impact of income management on the available data. The discrepancy in the dates brings into serious doubt the validity of their regression analysis. What does the data in the paper say about sales of fruit and vegetables, soft drinks and tobacco? The paper by Brimblecombe et al focuses on whether fruit and vegetable sales have increased as a result of the introduction of income management. However, there is some doubt over the paper’s analysis and conclusions. Even if you focus purely on fruit and vegetable sales the question is not whether sales increased after income management was established: it is rather whether there is a causal link between the introduction of income management and fruit and vegetable sales The paper does provide clear evidence of a significant increase in fruit and vegetable sales following the introduction of income management. The paper argues that this increase is a result of the economic stimulus payment not income management. FaHCSIA has looked at the data provided in the Menzies paper and come to some different conclusions. Table One is produced from FaHCSIA analysis of the information provided in the Menzies paper. It shows sales in the pre and post intervention period. It is important to note that the post intervention period discussed in the Menzies paper is not the entire period after which income management was introduced but rather the period selected by the authors as the ‘post intervention period’. This period excludes three months around the time of the economic stimulus payments and the first 4-6 months of income management. 2 While the choice of dates by the authors is questionable it is not critical for the analysis provided below. Table One actually shows a statistically significant increase in fruit in vegetable sales measured in both dollars and volume. For example there was a 45% increase in per capita sales of fruit and vegetables measured in kilograms. There was also a 39% increase in fruit and vegetable sales measured in dollars. The estimates in dollars should be treated with some caution as sales in dollar terms could increase simply because of price rises. This is a factor that the authors ignore throughout their paper. Table One also shows that there was a statistically significant increase in food and drink sales from the pre to post intervention period. Table One: Post-intervention and Pre-intervention monthly mean sales (including confidence intervals) Pre-intervention Post-intervention Change Per Capita Monthly mean Per Capita Monthly mean Outcome measures (CI)1 (CI) (%) Total store sales ($) 458.11 583.75 (435.72-480.50) (546.61-620.89) 27.43 Food and drink sales ($) 265.98 355.61 (252.36-279.61) (333.22-378.01) 33.70 Tobacco sales ($) 83.60 93.77 (79.01-88.18) (86.09-101.45) 12.17 Fruit and vegetable sales ($) 16.86 23.48 (16.10-17.61) (22.05-24.91) 39.26 Fruit and vegetable turnover 3.15 4.57 Kg) (3.01-3.29) (4.28-4.86) 45.08 Soft drink sales ($) 34.01 38.20 (32.28-35.73) (35.27-41.12) 12.32 soft drink turnover (ml) 8.07 8.86 (7.65-8.48) (8.17-9.56) 9.79 Mean CPI – Australia 100.0 105.7 5.7 Mean CPI – Darwin 100.0 106.4 6.4 Note - CPI mean values for Post-intervention covers only February to September 2009. October 2008 CPI adjustment has been excluded from the calculations. The share of store sales accounted for by fruit and vegetables also grew over the period considered by the Menzies paper. The total value of store sales grew by 27% compared to an increase of 39% in fruit and vegetable sales.