PACIFIC COMMUNITIES IN

JIOJI RAVULO SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & PSYCHOLOGY OF WESTERN Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Mary Moeono-Kolio for writing support and drafting assistance, Losana Ravulo for continuous feedback on scope of report, and the Pasifika Achievement To Higher Education (PATHE) team for supporting the vision of Pasifika development across Australia and beyond.

Statistics cited within this report is from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Census of Population and Housing 2011. Appreciation is expressed for the assistance provided by the ABS Microdata Access Strategies Team.

© Jioji Ravulo 2015 University of Western Sydney ISBN 978-1-74108-359-0

PAGE 2 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Table of Contents

OVERVIEW 4 Figure 14 (QALLP) Non-School Qualification: Level of Education 13 (a) Pacific people in Australia 4 Figure 15 (HSCP) Highest Year of School Completed – (b) Previous research on Pacific people in Australia 5 based on people aged 18 or older 14 i. Social Risk & Protective Factors 6 Figure 16 (TYSTAP) Educational Institution: Attendee Status 14 ii. Cultural Perspectives 7 Figure 17 (INCP) Total Personal Income (weekly) 15 (c) Purpose of report 8 Figure 18 (HRSP) Hours Worked 15 (d) Collection of data & analysis 8 Figure 19 (INDP) Industry of Employment 15 Figure 20 (INDP) Industry of Employment – 15 KEY FINDINGS 11 Figure 21 Labour Force Status and Hours Worked (a) Demographic 11 Not Stated (LFHRP) 16 (b) Education & Training 13 Figure 22 (MTWP) Method of Travel to Work 16 (c) Employment 15 Figure 23 (DOMP) Unpaid Domestic Work: Number of Hours 17 (d) Family 18 Figure 24 (FBLF) Family Blending 18 (e) Household 22 Figure 25 (TISP) Number of Children Ever Born 18

CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS 25 Figure 26 (CHCAREP) Unpaid Child Care 18 Figure 27 (FMCF) Family Composition 19 RECOMMENDATIONS 26 Figure 28 (CDCF) Count of Dependent Children in Family 19 Figure 29 (CPRF) Count of Persons in Family 19 REFERENCES 27 Figure 30 (HCFMF) Family Household Composition 19 Figure 31 (FINF) Total Family Income (weekly) 20 FIGURES Figure 32 (LFSF) Labour Force Status of Parents/ Figure 1 Pacific population in Australia by ancestry 4 Partners in Families – 20 Figure 2 Pacific people across Australian states Figure 33 (LFSF) Labour Force Status – One parent families 20 & territories 4 Figure 34 (MDCP) Social Marital Status 21 Figure 3 Top 5 Pacific cohorts across Australian states & territories 5 Figure 35 (MV5D) Household Five Year Mobility Indicator 22 Figure 4 Pacific Youth Social Risk & Protective Factors 6 Figure 36 (MV1D) Household One Year Mobility Indicator 22 Figure 5 Shared Pacific Values, Beliefs & Ideals 7 Figure 37 (HHCD) Household Composition 22 Figure 6 Potential Intercultural Issues with Pacific Youth 8 Figure 38 (NPRD) Number of Persons Usually Resident in Dwelling 23 Figure 7 ABS Census Classifications index with Domain 9 Figure 39 (LLDD) Landlord Type 23 Figure 8 (AGE5P) Age in Five Year Groups 11 Figure 40 (SAFD) Supported Accommodation Flag 23 Figure 9 (CITP) Australian Citizenship 11 Figure 41 (TENLLD) Tenure and Landlord Type – Mortgage 23 Figure 10 (RLHP) Relationship in Household – Children 12 Figure 42 (TENLLD) Tenure and Landlord Type – Rent 23 Figure 11 (RLHP) Relationship in Household – Marriage 12 Figure 43 (NEDD) Type of Internet Connection 24 Figure 12 (RLHP) Relationship in Household – Lone Person 12 Figure 44 (VEHD) Number of Motor Vehicles 24 Figure 13 (QALFP) Non-School Qualification: Field of Study 13 Figure 45 Examples of Cultural & Societal Factors impacting Pacific communities 25

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 3 Overview

This report strives to provide a greater understanding and Figure 2: Pacific people across Australian states & territories awareness of Pacific communities in Australia. Through the compilation of data gained from the 2011 Census % of of Population and Housing conducted by the Australian State/ Bureau of Statistics, this document is the first of its kind Pacific Territory on reviewing the human geography of Pacific people State/Territory Population Population across various life domains in an Australian context. 92,028 1.3% Victoria 43,055 0.8% (a) Pacific people in Australia Queensland 102,320 2.4% Pacific people have a long association with Australia as South Australia 5,246 0.3% part of its identification within the . With the majority migrating through the evolving multicultural Western Australia 28,954 1.3% policies of the 1960’s, Australia’s Pacific population are Tasmania 1,821 0.4% now recognised as a group of 23 Pacific ancestries Northern Territory 2,827 1.3% (Figure 1) from across the Melanesian, Polynesian and Micronesian grouping of South Pacific Island states and Australian Capital Territory 2,977 0.8% territories (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011). This also TOTAL 279,228 1.3%* includes the Indigenous people of – Maori. * of Australia’s total population of 21,507,719

Figure 1: Pacific population in Australia by ancestry Based on the 5 largest Pacific cohorts in Australia, the largest Samoan, Tongan and Fijian community reside in Ancestry Total New South Wales; with the largest group of Maori and Oceanian, nfd* 12,541 Cook Islanders residing in Queensland (Figure 3). Maori 128,430 Melanesian and Papuan, nfd 643 New Caledonian 204 Ni-Vanuatu 705 Papua New Guinean 15,460 Solomon Islander 1,405 Melanesian and Papuan, nec# 530 Micronesian, nfd 99 I-Kiribati 677 Nauruan 409 Micronesian, nec 138 Polynesian, nfd 2164 Cook Islander 16,193 Fijian 23,770 Niuean 3143 Samoan 55,843 Tongan 25,096 Hawaiian 333 Tahitian 722 Tokelauan 1,655 Tuvaluan 430 Polynesian, nec 443 Total 279,248 *nfd: Not Further Defined #nec: Not Elsewhere Classified

The majority of Pacific communities reside along the east coast of Australia (Figure 2), with largest cohort living in Queensland, followed by New South Wales and Victoria.

PAGE 4 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Figure 3: Top 5 Pacific cohorts across Australian states & territories Maori Samoan Tongan Fijian Cook Islanders NSW 32,193 25.1% 21,680 38.8% 14,376 57.3% 12,533 52.7% 5,100 31.5% VIC 18,367 14.3% 10,670 19.1% 3,921 15.6% 3605 15.2% 3,835 23.7% QLD 48,283 37.6% 20,542 36.8% 5,065 20.2% 5467 23.0% 5,652 34.9% SA 3,239 2.5% 335 0.6% 233 0.9% 554 2.3% 198 1.2% WA 23,063 18.0% 1,729 3.1% 663 2.6% 849 3.6% 1,198 7.4% TAS 1,075 0.8% 156 0.3% 118 0.5% 169 0.7% 50 0.3% NT 1,289 1.0% 169 0.3% 163 0.6% 277 1.2% 89 0.5% ACT 917 0.7% 562 1.0% 559 2.2% 316 1.3% 71 0.4% TOTAL 128,426 100% 55,843 100% 25,098 100% 23,770 100% 16,193 100%

Based on the statistics of Pacific people living in capital cities along the east coast of Australia, 72,223 live in Sydney, 62,540 live in Greater Brisbane, and 34,568 live in .

(b) Previous research on Pacific communities in Australia There is limited research on Pacific communities within an Australia context. Most of the research undertaken has been on the over representation of Pacific people in anti social behaviour and crime (Ravulo 2015) and their involvement in seasonal working schemes within rural settings (Maclellan & Mares 2006). Conversely, they are noted for the achievements within Sports, including Rugby League & Rugby Union (Horton 2014). i) Social risk and protective factors With specific attention on their involvement in youth offending, previous research (Ravulo 2009) on Pacific families involved in justice settings has provided an insight into the development of social risk and protective factors. Such factors were evident across three domains: individual and family, peer & community, and education, employment & training. The scope to create these framework has further supported the development of psychosocial resources, included case management models, tools and other individual, group and family work tools.

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 5 Overview – continued

Figure 4: Pacific Youth Social Risk & Protective Factors

PACIFIC YOUTH SOCIAL RISK FACTORS

INDIVIDUAL & FAMILY PEER & COMMUNITY EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT & TRAINING

• Communal negative alcohol usage • Negative involvement with police • Lack of educational resources from parents • Excessive/binge usage of alcohol and • Parents undertaking more than one • Excessive violent (physical and verbal) marijuana full-time job to maintain financial behaviour within family home and • Misinterpretation of presenting stability community behaviours by professional legal • Early school leaving (pre-Year 10) • Lack of verbal reasoning settings • Misinterpretation of presenting • Lack of access to privately owned, • Lack of rapport with non-Pacific adults behaviours by professionals in registered vehicles in community setting education • Lack of knowledge about accessing • High level of infringement notices and • Lack of training and advancement for Social Security benefits fines parents predominantly employed in • Overcrowding in family homes • First offence being of a serious low-skilled labour force • Parental low level of secondary indictable nature education • Negative peer group association • Lack of access to Proof of through organised gangs Identification • Lack of consistent attendance at court • Older sibling involved in crime due to no parental support • High-level care given by older siblings • Conflicting ideologies developed to younger siblings between Western & Pacific culture • Legal conditions that contradict family relations • Active enrolment in school during court proceedings • Inconsistent approach and access to physical and mental health care services

PACIFIC YOUTH SOCIAL PROTECTIVE FACTORS

INDIVIDUAL & FAMILY PEER & COMMUNITY EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT & TRAINING

• Cultural inclusiveness within family • Active involvement in sporting • Positive association and awareness of home commitments educational institutions for both young • Enhanced understanding of Western • Genuine involvement in spiritual and person & parents systems (education, health, legal, faith-based activities • Access to vocational training courses community) for both young person • Enhanced relationship with police who for both young person and parents and parents appreciate Pacific culture • Consistent attendance at School • Development of verbal communication • Enhanced relationship with teachers • Access to support and training skills who appreciate Pacific culture materials in assisting educational • Positive attitudes towards life long • Participation in cultural activities placement learning across community • Continuation of schooling beyond • Strong sense of community middle years participation reinforced by Pacific • Focus and desire during adolescence relatives also living in Australia to undertake vocational interest ii) Cultural perspectives Additional empirical research by Ravulo (2009) has also provided a framework to create an overview of shared Pacific cultural values and beliefs (Figure 5), further underpinned by a review of possible differences that Pacific communities may experience through their interaction with dominant Western culture evident in an Australian context (Figure 6). This particular work has formed the development of Pacific cultural awareness programs (Ravulo 2014) implemented across the (NRL) and the Australian Rugby Union (ARU) through the Rugby Union Players Association (RUPA) who experience a high volume of Pacific representation across both codes.

PAGE 6 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Figure 5: Shared Pacific Values, Beliefs & Ideals

What are shared Pacific values, beliefs and ideals? From time spent ethnographically observing Pacific culture and how it manifests in behaviour across the community, a trend towards five specific topic areas that summarise cultural values, beliefs, and ideals is evident. These are: family, spirituality, food, recreation/sport, and the visual and performing arts. Predominantly, each area individually and collectively promotes the concept of community. In essence, there is a strong pattern to social cohesiveness made evident through an emphasis on people living together.

How does each value and belief impact on behaviour? Family • A collective of individuals conforming to an overall family identity. Self-identity based on family reputation and standing in community. • Close ties to ancestral heritage and locations promoted by ongoing reference and contact with villages and family living across Pacific region.

Spirituality • Includes church-based faiths (predominantly Christian). Fellowship with one another key aspect. • Cultural characteristics: ancestral beliefs and worship practices. Traditional forms of spirituality based on village rituals, superstitions, and practices.

Food • Culmination of an array of dishes, with mainly natural-based ingredients: seafood, beef, pork, chicken, duck, coconut, breadfruit, taro, bananas, etc. • Celebration of resources, and an important time to bring people together in sharing company and consumables.

Recreation/Sport • An ability to develop and exercise teamwork, and expression of competitive physical fitness and abilities. • Close relationship with warrior heritage with an ability to represent region. • Other people, including family, will gather to watch and support.

Visual and Performing Arts (Woodwork/Music/Dance/Storytelling) • Expression of specific cultural and family identity; popular form for portraying and appreciating rich and diverse cultural heritage. • Certain acts/carvings/stories will emanate from particular region or people group. • Reiterates and personifies connection to land and sense of belonging.

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 7 Overview – continued

Figure 6: Potential Intercultural Issues with Pacific Youth

How does this potentially create intercultural issues for Pacific youth? Education • In Western society, knowledge is power. In Pacific culture, a strong family/community is power. • Therefore, lack of emphasis is placed on supporting education placement through resources and in home assistance. • Issues with teachers perpetuated by young person’s lack of appreciation of goals across learning environment and school participation. Employment and Career Aspirations • Employment is generally sought at a younger age (from 15 years), decreasing retention rates for senior high school. • Focus is on supporting family unit, rather than an individual desire to secure a possible career. • Decreases positive attitudes towards life-long learning whilst perpetuating a cycle of long term low-skilled employment. Financial • Monies earned by young person may be pooled by parents, as this works with supporting family expenditure and the greater good. • Remittances are sent back to relatives in the Islands, supporting their wellbeing. • Other financial commitment may also include community fundraising, church activities, and general celebratory gifts. Personal and Social Skills • Negative reinforcement key characteristic to general discipline. As such, one is expected to do what is right, rather than be rewarded for positive behaviour. • Respect for parents and elders is automatic and expected. • When in trouble, young people are given physical hidings or verbal reprimands. During this process, young people do not actively discuss issues, or develop solutions to alter behaviour. • Young people may not develop critical thinking and the interpersonal communication skills associated with expressing thoughts, feelings, and opinions. • Strong regional association may lead to gang membership and subsequent anti-social activities. Alcohol and Other Drugs • Consumption generally revolves around social activities, previously seen in traditional usage of substances during communal gatherings. • Pacific youth may undertake alcohol use in public places across the community, for example in and reserves. • This may lead to drink walking and further anti-social behaviours. Health • Mental Health is perceived as spiritual issues, determined by one’s relationship with others and corresponding curses. Natural remedies or traditional methods are applied, limiting access to mental health specialists across community. • Sexual Health and practice is confined to the sanctity of marriage, and not discussed amongst families and community. This may limit awareness of risk-taking behaviours and associated health implications.

(c) Purpose of report This report provides a bigger picture on social trends of Pacific communities living in Australia. By gaining a better understand from the statistical evidence provided by the Australian census data, policy makers, researchers, educators and community based practitioners may be able to create responses that understand the attributes of the Pacific diaspora residing in Australia; and the respective challenges and successes experienced.

It is anticipated that from this initial report, the creation of monographs detailing the specific trends of Pacific cohorts across various areas in Australia may be developed. For example, an overview of Pacific people residing in ; and how they may differ from comparative regional data.

More so, with the establishment of this study, it is foreseeable to create ongoing reports on Pacific trends in Australia through the comparison of data collated from future Census information collected by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Such reporting will show whether trends are changing within this cohort, and whether systemic approaches, underpinned by service models and provision, is catering for such communities.

This reports also strives to encourage the possibility to map trends across other emerging diverse community groups in Australia, and how they too may compare with the overall general Australian population trends. In turn, promoting a better scope and understanding of how diversity shapes who we are as a nation.

(d) Collection of data and analysis The Australian Census data is a rich source of information; designed to assist an ability to effectively respond to its population; through the development of core infrastructure and systems that underpin the overall functioning of a good, and healthy society. Exploring the vast array of differences that characterise a nation is also an important part of collecting such data.

PAGE 8 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA This report outlines the similarities, and differences between the Australian General population, referred in Section 2 as AUS GEN, and the Australian Pacific population, referred to as AUS PAC. As noted above, according to the Census 2011 data, Australia’s overall population was 21,507,719, and the Pacific population was sitting at 279,228. Therefore, the two separate data sets are used to compare against each other, and to recognise whether certain trends occur within the Pacific community with a wider Australian context. The data was collected via the use of TableBuilder Pro; mapped across 5 domains, and 47 classifications (Figure 7). Further information on each category can be located via the Australian Bureau of Statistic online Census Dictionary. After accessing the data tables, percentages were drawn up based on the general Australian population, and the Pacific population, which is then presented as key findings. Trends were then subjected to a further review on whether certain cultural factors from Pacific communities impact on such findings, and/or whether societal factors may also influence certain interactions across each nominated life domain (further discussed in Section 3 – Summary).

Figure 7: ABS Census Classifications index with Domain DOMAIN MNEMONIC DESCRIPTION Demographic AGE5P Age in Five Year Groups SEXP Sex CITP Australian Citizenship RLHP Relationship in Household AUSTRALIA Australian Population Education QALFP Non-School Qualification: Field of Study TYSTAP Educational Institution: Attendee Status TYPP Type of Education Institution Attending HSCP Highest Year of School Completed QALLP Non-School Qualification: Level of Education STUP Full-Time / Part-Time Student Status Employment HRSP Hours Worked INCP Total Personal Income (weekly) INDP Industry of Employment INDP 2 DIGIT (CONST) Industry of Employment – Construction INDP 2 DIGIT (MANUF) Industry of Employment – LFHRP Labour Force Status and Hours Worked Not Stated MTWP Method of Travel to Work EMTP Employment Type DOMP Unpaid Domestic Work: Number of Hours Family CHCAREP Unpaid Child Care TISP Number of Children Ever Born CTPP Child Type MSTP Registered Marital Status MDCP Social Marital Status CACF Count of All Children in Family CDCF Count of Dependant Children in Family CPRF Count of Persons in Family FBLF Family Blending FINF Total Family Income (weekly) FMCF Family Composition HCFMF Family Household Composition (Family) LFSF Labour Force Status of Parents/Partners in Families SSCF Same-Sex Couple Indicator

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 9 Overview – continued

DOMAIN MNEMONIC DESCRIPTION Household BEDD Number of Bedrooms in Private Dwelling HHCD Household Composition LLDD Landlord Type MRERD Mortgage Repayments (monthly) Ranges MV1D Household One Year Mobility Indicator MV5D Household Five Year Mobility Indicator NEDD Type of Internet Connection NPDD Type of Non-Private Dwelling NPRD Number of Persons Usually Resident in Dwelling RNTRD Rent (weekly) Ranges SAFD Supported Accommodation Flag TENLLD Tenure and Landlord Type VEHD Number of Motor Vehicles

PAGE 10 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Key Findings

(a) Demographic Figure 9: (CITP) Australian Citizenship The Pacific population make up 1% of the total Australian population. The Pacific community in Australia is a rapidly 3.1% growing and youthful population. The majority of the Pacific population range 0 – 24 years, whereas the majority of the Not stated general Australian population range from 25 – 49 years 6.0% of age. In Figure 8, this table shows that Pacific people in Australia have a lower life expectancy in comparison to the general population and could indicate that our Pacific population are not living to an older age. This is 45.8% evident in the significant decline in the 70 plus age group Not Australian for Pacific people. Recent data suggests the average life 9.1% expectancy in Australia is 82.1 years, but for Indigenous , it is 10.6 years lower than the national average (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2014). 51.0% Figure 8: (AGE5P) Age in Five Year Groups Australian 12 84.9%

10 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

AUS PAC AUS GEN 8 As noted in the data (Figure 9), 45.8% of Pacific people residing in Australia are not citizens; this in turn greatly impacts on 6 access to Centrelink benefits. In 2001, a change to Centrelink’s eligibility policies lead to New Zealand citizens no longer being eligible for benefits until they resided in Australia for 2 years. 4 Approximately two years after this change was introduced, an additional requirement was implemented that made NZ citizen ineligible for benefits until they became Australian citizens. 2 Therefore, if near to 50% of the Pacific population are not eligible for benefits, the onus is on seeking employment to 0 support Pacific families. This may in turn lead to decreasing aspirations to pursue further education & training including access to HECS / FEE HELP. Therefore, cultural pressures to 5-9 years 0-4 years ensure that the family system is supported and stable may 45-49 years 50-54 years 55-59 years 60-64 years 65-69 years 70-74 years 75-79 years 80-84 years 85-89 years 90-94 years 95-99 years 10-14 years 15-19 years 20-24 years 25-29 years 30-34 years 35-39 years 40-44 years take precedent over one’s personal desire or ambition. This is AUS PAC AUS GEN further exacerbated by societal pressures within Australia; such 100 years and over as the cost of living i.e. housing affordability, transport cost, etc. It is also important to note that 50+ age group who would have been in Australia during the 1970’s and 80’s are more likely to be Australian citizen or permanent residents, as it was much easier for the Pacific families in Australia to gain citizenship or permanent residency (Klapdor et al. 2009). Also, during this period a child born in Australia was automatically granted citizenship or permanent residency based on the permanent resident status of at least one parent (Department of Immigration and Border Protection 2014).

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 11 Figure 10: (RLHP) Relationship in Household – Children Pacific people in Australia also have a higher rate of de facto relationships than that of the general Australian population (Figure 11). This statistic is particularly interesting as Pacific cultures are inherently more conservative due 1.8% to dominant religious beliefs in Pacific communities. The higher rate of Pacific de facto relationship could be due to Step child younger generations having families younger. Furthermore, under 15 0.9% the expectation to marry and host a traditional wedding may discourage some people from marrying and thus 45.8% choose to remain in a de facto relationship. This trend could indicate a shift towards younger Pacific generations pursuing a financially stable future as opposed to keeping cultural expectations. Pacific households are more likely 27.6% to be made up of more than one family and are therefore less likely to be in a lone person household in comparison Natural to the general Australian population (Figure 12). or adopted child under 15 16.9% Figure 12: (RLHP) Relationship in Household – Lone Person

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

AUS PAC AUS GEN 8.8% A third of Pacific families have a natural or adopted child under the age of 15 at 27.6% of the Pacific population (Figure 10); this is in stark comparison to Australia’s general population in which only 16.9% have a natural or adopted child under the age of 15. Pacific families also have a slightly higher rate for non-dependant adopted or natural children. 3.4% Figure 11: (RLHP) Relationship in Household – Marriage 40

35 35.6%

30 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

AUS GEN AUS PAC 25

23.7% In the Pacific community, there is a greater pressure for Pacific 20 adults to work as a means to provide for their families, as they are more likely to have a higher number of dependants. 15 This may also reiterate the pressure for older children to take up employment rather than pursue higher education. 10 10.4% 5 6.9%

0 Husband, Wife or De facto marriage Partner in a registered marraige AUS GEN AUS PAC

PAGE 12 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA (b) Education Figure 14: (HSCP) Highest Year of School Completed – based on Access to quality to education is key to the improvement people aged 18 or older of a family’s life. Educational achievement is linked with 38.4% multiple positive outcomes, such as higher incomes, greater employment opportunities and therefore a 33.3% better standard of living (Davis & Robinson 2013).

Figure 13: (QALFP) Non-School Qualification: Field of Study Field of study not stated Field of study inadequately described 17.2% Mixed Field Programmes 14.4% Food, Hospitality and Personal Services3.4% 10.6% Creative Arts 7.8% 5.1% Society and Culture 3.8% 4.7% 2.4% Management 0.7% and Commerce 0.6% Education Year 12 or Year 11 or Year 10 or Year 9 or Year 8 Did not go equivalent equivalent equivalent equivalent or below to school Health , Environmental and Related Studies 8.8% AUS GEN AUS PAC Architecture and Building Engineering and Related Technologies Over half of the general Australian population is not studying at Information Technology 54.9%, in comparison to almost 3/4 of the Pacific population Natural and who are not studying at 72.7%. The highest cohort of Pacific Physical Sciences people that are engaged in tertiary education is between the 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% ages of 15 – 24 years. Interestingly, Pacific communities have AUS GEN AUS PAC higher rates of their communities engaged in pre-school, primary and high school. In Figure 14, 10.6% of the Pacific For the Pacific community in Australia, the most popular population are going on to year 11 in comparison to the field of study is Management & Commerce, followed by 7.8% general population. This could denote that the general Society & Culture and engineering & related technologies. Australian population were taking up a trade through an Interestingly, Pacific people studying creative arts are apprenticeship of traineeship pathway at year 10, while Pacific relatively low, considering the cultural connection to the communities were committing to finishing year 12; but may visual and performing arts evident across this community exit at year 11. Pacific people have a slightly lower percentage group. However, this could be due to Pacific people not of those in year 12 at 33.3%, in comparison to 38.4% of the seeing creative arts as employment or a career path. general population. This could be attributed to Pacific people As Pacific families are more likely to be larger than the being more likely to leave after year 11 to seek employment to general Australian population, business and financial career support their families due to cultural and societal pressures. aspirations could be associated with the desire to help family in a field that is generally promised with a higher income in comparison to the humanities and creative arts (Figure 13).

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 13 Figure 15: (QALLP) Non-School Qualification: Level of Education Figure 16: (TYSTAP) Educational Institution: Attendee Status AUS GEN AUS PAC 14.6% 2.3% University 12.6% 4.3% 35.6% 10.9% 2.3% TAFE & Voc Education 2.2%

7.7% 9.3% 6.5% Secondary School 6.2%

4.4% 4.3% 3.8% 13.1% Infants/Primary School 2.9% 8.2% 1.4% 1.1% 1.1% 0.7% 0.5% 2.3% Pre-school 1.5% escribed Bachelor not stated inadequately Degree Level Degree Level Postgraduate and Graduate Certificate Level Certificate Level AUS PAC AUS GEN Graduate Diploma Level of education Level of education and Diploma Level Advanced Diploma

Close to three times of the general Australian population have a bachelor’s degree or above, in comparison to the Pacific population who are predominantly undertaking certificate level education (Figure 15). This trend in Pacific people taking up certificate level could also be attributed to Pacific communities being more likely to wanting some form of trade qualification to practically support the ability to seek employment; rather than undertake an undergraduate degree.

It is evident that Pacific communities have an established level of those who are engaged in education within early childhood, primary and secondary levels (Figure 16); however Pacific communities are less likely to go onto University studies in comparison to the general population. Despite the stereotype, Pacific people are still achieving across educational levels, which suggest that it is not a matter of academic ability; but perhaps a lack of sufficient means, motivation and understanding on how to access higher education and training.

PAGE 14 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA (c) Employment Pacific communities have a higher percentage of This section provides data on areas relating to work in people in construction, manufacturing jobs, postal, Australia. In terms of income, we see a decrease for Pacific transport & warehousing. However, in comparison to people when they start to earn more than $1250 (Figure the general Australian populations (3.4%), only half the 17). This may be attributed to the type of employment rates of Pacific people are in professional, scientific Pacific communities are likely to take up. More than double and technical services Industry (1.5%) (Figure 19). of the general Australian population earn $2000+ or more in comparison to Pacific people. However, Pacific people Figure 19: (INDP) Industry of Employment work the same amount of hours as the general Australian 8.0% population but due to the type employment Pacific 7.0% communities are in, they are earning less (Figure 18). 6.0%

Figure 17: (INCP) Total Personal Income (weekly) 5.0% 4.0% Not stated 3.0% $2,000 or more ($104,000 or more) 2.0% $1,500-$1,999 ($78,000-$103,999) 1.0% $1,250-$1,499 ($65,000-$77,999)3.4% 0.0% $1,000-$1,249

($52,000-$64,999) Mining $800-$999 Trade

($41,600-$51,999) Construction Manufacturing Other Services

$600-$799 Wholesale Trade ($31,200-$41,599) Education and Training $400-$599 Inadequately described ($20,800-$31,199)

$300-$399 Arts and Recreation Services Public Administration and Safety Public Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Agriculture,

($15,600-$20,799) Financial and Insurance Services Health Care and Social Assistance Health Care and Social

8.8% Warehousing Postal and Transport, Accommodation and Food Services

$200-$299 Administrative and Support Services

($10,400-$15,599) Hiring and Real Estate Services Rental, Electricity, Gas, Water and Waste Services Waste and Water Gas, Electricity,

$1-$199 ($1-$10,399) Telecommunications Information Media and AUS GEN AUS PAC Services Technical Scientific and Professional, Nil income

Negative income Similarly, only 1.5% of the Pacific communities are in education & teaching in comparison to the general Australian population 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 3.7%, which is more than double the rate of Pacific. AUS PAC AUS GEN Figure 20: (INDP) Industry of Employment – Construction Figure 18: (HRSP) Hours Worked 70.0% 25

60.0% 57.3% 50.8% 20 50.0% 3.4% 40.0%

15 30.3% 30.0% 28.6%

10 20.0% 16.3% 8.8% 9.8% 10.0% 4.2% 5 2.6% 0.0% Construction, Building Heavy and Construction nfd Construction Civil Engineering Services Construction 0 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 71-80 81-90 91-99 AUS GEN AUS PAC hours hours hours hours hours hours hours hours hours hours hours

AUS GEN AUS PAC

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 15 In the construction industry (Figure 20), close to double the Figure 22: (MTWP) Method of Travel to Work number of Pacific people are in heavy & civil engineering at 15.2% 16.29% in comparison to the general Australian population at Car, as passenger 9.8%. Pacific communities are also less likely to work part-time 7.0% (11%) when compared to the general Australian population 67.4% Car, as driver (14.2%). This suggests that Pacific communities tend to prefer 78.6% full-time employment; evident in 3.3% (almost double the Australian population) who are unemployed but seeking this 0.4% level of paid work. This is further supported by the notion that Taxi 0.3% Pacific families are characteristically bigger and therefore more 0.3% likely to have more dependent family members (Figure 21). Tram 0.3% 0.1% Figure 21: Labour Force Status and Hours Worked Not Stated (LFHRP) 0.1% 1.1% 5.8% Labour force Bus status not stated 4.5% 3.9% 18.7% Not in the 6.1% 29.6% 26.6% Train labour force 5.0% 29.6% 1.6% Unemployed, looking 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% for part-time work 1.1% 3.3% Unemployed, looking AUS PAC AUS GEN for full-time work 1.7% 1.6% Pacific communities are more likely to be unemployed at Employed, hours of work not stated 1.0% nearly double the unemployment rate of the general Australian 1.7% population. In comparison, Pacific communities are less likely Employed, away 1.9% to own or manage a business. Similarly, the Pacific people from work are less likely to undertake unpaid hours within employment. 11.0% Employed, worked Since Pacific people are more inclined to take up lower-skilled part-time 14.2% jobs with lower income, there could be less of a chance 29.6% that they will take up unpaid hours (Figure 23); particularly Employed, worked when taking into consideration the cost and availability of full-time 29.6% resources to travel to and from work, and the expectation to 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% also be available to look after a higher number of dependants AUS PAC AUS GEN within the family household. Additionally, work places may not need Pacific people to undertake unpaid hours due to the shift work nature of this type of employment. In regards to transport, Pacific people have a higher percentage of being a passenger in a car, than being the driver. A higher rate of reliance on public transport (bus & train) is also evident for Pacific people in comparison to the general Australian population (Figure 22). This may also be an extra strain on seeking suitable forms of employment, as it may limit areas where paid work opportunities can be sought due to access to reliable transport, alongside ability to consistently pay for this respective cost.

PAGE 16 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Figure 23: (DOMP) Unpaid Domestic Work: Number of Hours 17.9% Nil hours 17.4%

17.6% Less than 5 hours 18.1%

16.7% 5 to 14 hours 20.7%

6.4% 15 to 29 hours 9.6% 6.4% 30 hours or more 8.1% 3.6% Not stated 6.9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

AUS GEN AUS PAC

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 17 (d) Family In reference to childcare, we see that Pacific families have a higher rate of childcare responsibility, as well as a Figure 24: (FBLF) Family Blending higher rate of Pacific people looking after other children (Figure 26). This is likely due to Pacific communities having Not applicable more children, and the notion within Pacific cultures, communal sharing of childcare responsibilities.

Other couple family with other children only Figure 26: (CHCAREP) Unpaid Child Care 60.0% Blended family with other children present

Step family with 50.0% other children present

Intact family with other children present 40.0%

Blended family with no other children present 30.0% Step family with no other children present 20.0% Intact family with no other children present

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 10.0%

AUS PAC AUS GEN 0.0% In comparison to the general population, Pacific communities Did not provide Cared for own Cared for other Cared for own Not stated child care child/children child/children child/children are more likely to have intact families with and without children and other (Figure 24). However, Pacific families are also dominant in child/children blended families at 5.1% and step families at 3.4%. Pacific AUS GEN AUS PAC families also have more children than that of the general Australian percentage; this is evident when looking at the In contrast to the general Australian population, couples 4 – 11 children categories in which Pacific families dominate with children under 15 (no dependent students, and (Figure 25). From the ‘Three children in family’ to ‘Six or more non-dependent children) are quite high, even in the one- children in family’, we see that Pacific also dominate in those parent categories (Figure 27). We do however see a categories against the general Australian population. This once relatively higher amount of Pacific families with children again reinforces that Pacific families are significantly larger. under 15, but are not dependent students. This could be due to a higher number of Pacific families with younger Figure 25: (TISP) Number of Children Ever Born children who are not Infants/Primary school age. 40.0%

35.0%

30.0%

25.0%

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0% 1 child 2 children 3 children 4 children 5 children 6 children 7 children 8 children 9 children 10 children 11 children 12 children 13 children 14 children 15 children No children

AUS GEN AUS PAC

PAGE 18 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Figure 27: (FMCF) Family Composition Figure 29: (CPRF) Count of Persons in Family Couple family with children under 15, dependent students and non-dependent children Six or more persons in family Couple family with children under 15, dependent students and no non-dependent children Couple family with children Five persons in family under 15, no dependent students and with non-dependent children Couple family with children under 15, no dependent students and no non-dependent children Four persons in family One parent family with children under 15, dependent students and non-dependent children One parent family with children under 15, dependent students Three persons in family and no non-dependent children One parent family with children under 15, no dependent students and with non-dependent children One parent family with children Two persons in family under 15, no dependent students and no non-dependent children 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

AUS GEN AUS PAC AUS PAC AUS GEN

Interestingly, as Pacific families are generally larger, we find dependant children being closer in age to each other Figure 30: (HCFMF) Family Household Composition (Figure 28). Once again, this may create a level of caring Three or more family responsibility for parents to maintain, with the support household: Other family Three or more family of other extended family members who may assist with household: One parent family childcare and other related child rearing practices. Three or more family household: Couple family with children Three or more family household: Figure 28: (CDCF) Count of Dependent Children in Family Couple family with no children Two family household: 18.0% Other family 16.0% Two family household: One parent family 14.0% Two family household: Couple family with children 12.0% Two family household: Couple family with no children 10.0% One family household: Other family 8.0% One family household: One parent family 6.0% One family household: Couple family with children 4.0% One family household: Couple family with no children 2.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

0.0% AUS PAC AUS GEN dependent child dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children dependent children One dependent child Couple family with: No Couple family with: One parent family with: Couple family with: Two Couple family with: Couple family with: Five Couple family with: Couple family with: One Couple family with: Couple family with: Four Couple family with: more dependent children Couple family with: Three Couple family with: One parent family with: No One parent family with: One parent family with: Two One parent family with: One parent family with: Five One parent family with: One parent family with: Four One parent family with: One parent family with: Six or One parent family with: One parent family with: Three One parent family with:

AUS GEN AUS PAC Six or more Couple family with:

When comparing the ‘count of persons in family’, Pacific families are four times more likely to have six or more persons in a family at 20.6% in comparison to the general Australian population at 5.2% (Figure 29).

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 19 In Figure 30, the ‘One family household: One couple with no Figure 32: (LFSF) Labour Force Status of Parents/Partners in children’ category is relatively lower for the Pacific population Families – Unemployment at 8.6% in contrast to the general Australian population 3.0 (18.7%). We see the differences spread highly among other categories for Pacific. We also see that in the ‘two family 2.5 household with children categories’ and the ‘three or more family household categories’, the Pacific population are 2.0 three times higher than the general Australian household composition. With regard to the two or more family households for the Pacific population, this could be attributed to extended 1.5 family staying within another family’s household. It is important to note that while Pacific families are culturally inclined to 1.0 have more than one family in one household, access to affordable housing in Australia also plays a significant role 0.5 as to the possible reason why more than one Pacific family may need to live in one household. Furthermore, because 0.0 the Pacific population are more likely to use public housing (as further discussed in Section 5) this also offers a sense of community for a population that is inherently communal, and relies on kinship ties beyond the nuclear family structure. Couple family: One Couple family: force status not stated work, other unemployed work, unemployed, other labour unemployed, full-time, other unemployed full-time,

Figure 31: (FINF) Total Family Income (weekly) other not in the labour force part-time, other unemployed part-time, Couple family: One employed Couple family: One employed Couple family: Couple family: One away from Couple family: One parent family: Unemployed One parent family: Couple family: Both unemployed Couple family:

14.0% One unemployed, Couple family: AUS GEN AUS PAC 12.0% However, we also see a high rate of families where one 10.0% parents works either in part time and full time, and the other is unemployed. This could be due to the high 8.0% number of families opting for childcare at home, coupled with their inability to find full-time employment, and the 6.0% affordability to place children in paid care (Figure 33).

4.0% Figure 33: (LFSF) Labour Force Status – One parent families 2.0% One parent family: Labour force status not stated 0.0%

One parent family:

$1-$199 Not in the labour force Nil income $200-$299 $300-$399 $400-$599 $600-$799 $800-$999 $1,000-$1,249 $1,250-$1,499 $1,500-$1,999 $2,000-$2,499 $2,500-$2,999 $3,000-$3,499 $3,500-$3,999 $4,000-$4,999 $5,000 or more Negative income

Partial income stated One parent family: Unemployed All incomes not stated AUS GEN AUS PAC

When comparing ‘total weekly family income’, the data One parent family: presented shows that Pacific families earn relatively on par Employed, away from work with the general Australian population with only a slightly lower weekly family income (Figure 31). However, it is One parent family: important to acknowledge that Pacific households have Employed, worked part-time more people earning in one household. This is due to the fact that Pacific households are larger and could have more One parent family: people earning to support a bigger group of individuals. Employed, worked full-time Therefore, the weekly income that one family in the general Australian population would earn, may take one or more 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% people living in the one Pacific household to earn. AUS PAC AUS GEN With regard to the ‘labour force status of parents / partners in families’, across the 7 unemployment variables, the unemployment rate for Pacific families is higher than the general Australian population across all areas (Figure 32);

PAGE 20 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Furthermore, it is also interesting to note that a significant percentage of Pacific people are never married (Figure 34). However, this could also be due to the Pacific communities’ youthful population. The Pacific population also have slightly higher rates of separation at 2.7% in comparison to the general Australian population at 2.5%. The ‘Not applicable’ category for the Pacific population, which stands at 35.7%, also supports the claim that the Pacific community is a youthful population.

Figure 34: (MDCP) Social Marital Status 40.0%

35.0%

30.0%

25.0%

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0% Married in a Married in a Not married registered marriage de facto marriage

AUS GEN AUS PAC

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 21 (e) Household The composition of Pacific households also speaks to the Pacific community being more communal in comparison Figure 35: (MV5D) Household Five Year Mobility Indicator to the general Australian population. For example, the 60 Pacific population are three times more likely to have a ‘Two family household with only family members’ at 9.2%, in comparison to the general 2.9% (Figure 37). Furthermore, 50 Pacific families are four times more likely to have a ‘three or more family household with only family members’. 40 Pacific families are slightly more likely to have a ‘one family household with only family members present’ at 73.5%, 30 while the general Australian population sit at 72.6%.

20 Figure 37: (HHCD) Household Composition

10 Not applicable

0 Other non-classifiable

Visitors only

Not stated Group household Not applicable Some residents

aged five years and Lone person household over the last five years address five years ago

during the last five years Three or more family household and over changed address and over changed address over changed address last five years but all stated All residents aged five years No residents aged five years with non-family members present Three or more family household AUS GEN AUS PAC with only family members present Two family household with When comparing household mobility, Pacific communities are non-family members present more likely to change addresses within a period of five years Two family household with only family members present (Figure 35). Furthermore, the general Australian population are One family household with twice more likely to remain in a stable home over a period of non-family members present one year in comparison to the Pacific population. (Figure 36) One family household with only family members present

Figure 36: (MV1D) Household One Year Mobility Indicator 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 80.0% AUS GEN AUS PAC 70.0% When comparing the ‘number of person usually in a 60.0% dwelling’, Pacific families are significantly larger when 50.0% there are five or more persons in a dwelling. Furthermore, the Pacific population are eight times more likely to live in 40.0% dwelling with 8 or more person (Figure 38). Generally, Pacific

30.0% families are significantly larger, however when taking into consideration the average number of bedrooms in a home 20.0% for a Pacific family, they are still residing predominately in a home with 3 bedrooms. This could suggest that Pacific 10.0% communities in Australia are much more susceptible to 0.0% overcrowding in homes. Further issues around health related problems due to space might also develop (Statistics New Zealand & Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs 2011). Not stated Not applicable All residents in the household No residents in the household aged one year and over had a aged one year and over had a aged one year and over had a different address one year age different address one year ago different address one year ago Some residents in the household AUS GEN AUS PAC

PAGE 22 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Figure 38: (NPRD) Number of Persons Usually Resident in Dwelling Figure 40: (SAFD) Supported Accommodation Flag 25.0% AUS GEN AUS PAC

20.0% Supported accommodation 0.08% 0.19% Not applicable 99.92% 99.81% 15.0% Total 100.00% 100.00%

In terms of ‘Tenure and landlord type’, the general Australian 10.0% population are four times more likely to outright own a home at 25.6%, in comparison to the Australian Pacific population at

5.0% 6.0% (Figure 41). Pacific communities in Australia are less likely to own a home with a mortgage at 28.4%, in comparison to the general population at 38.1%. Additionally, Pacific communities 0.0% in any type of rental property are more than double the general One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight population at 60.8% in stark contrast to 26.8% (Figure 42). person persons persons persons persons persons persons or more persons These statistics strongly supports the claim that housing is a significant issue for Pacific communities in Australia. AUS GEN AUS PAC

Pacific families are two times more likely to live in public Figure 41: (TENLLD) Tenure and Landlord Type – Mortgage housing at 6.7% in comparison to the general Australian 40.0% population (3.3%) (Figure 39). Pacific families are also more likely to rent. 35.0%

30.0% Figure 39: (LLDD) Landlord Type 25.0% Not applicable 20.0% Not stated 15.0% Housing co-operative/ community/church group 10.0% Employer-other employer 5.0% Employer-Government (includes Defence Housing Authority) 0.0% Owned outright Owned with a mortgage Residential (includes caravan parks and marinas) AUS GEN AUS PAC Person not in the same household-other person Person not in the same household-parent/other relative Figure 42: (TENLLD) Tenure and Landlord Type – Rent

State or territory housing authority Rented: Landlord type not stated Real estate agent

Rented: Other 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% landlord type

AUS GEN AUS PAC Rented: Housing co-operative, community or church group Pacific people in Australia are also two times more likely to need supported accommodation (Figure 40). Supported Rented: Person not accommodation services in Australia is predominantly in same household targeted towards the homeless; this therefore suggests that while Pacific families are larger, they are more vulnerable Rented: State or territory when it comes to finding housing in contrast to the general housing authority Australian population. This data could speak to two issues facing Pacific households; a) There is a serious housing issue Rented: Real estate agent for Pacific people in Australia b) there could be a breakdown in cultural and familial ties, if homelessness is higher for Pacific peoples who are inherently a communal culture. 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%

AUS GEN AUS PAC

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 23 Despite Pacific families having more housing mobility and living in overcrowded circumstances; with more than one family per household, Pacific people have relatively the same rate of access to the Internet (Figure 43). Therefore, access to digital technology may further support educational aspirations if respectively promoted.

Figure 43: (NEDD) Type of Internet Connection 80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0% No Internet Broadband Dial-up Other Not stated Not applicable connection connection connection connection

AUS GEN AUS PAC

Pacific people are less likely to own a vehicle (Figure 44). This is despite Pacific communities having larger families. However, a larger percentage of Pacific families do own one vehicle to nonetheless transport more than one family per household. This may also suggest that there is limited access or mobility to take up educational and/or employment options when they are a further distance away. Therefore, Pacific communities are pushed towards using public transport, which may cause extra financial strain considering Pacific people as individuals earn significantly less than the general population.

Figure 44: (VEHD) Number of Motor Vehicles 40.0%

35.0%

30.0%

25.0%

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0% No motor 1 motor 2 motor 3 motor 4 motor 5 motor 6 motor vehicles vehicle vehicles vehicles vehicles vehicles vehicles

AUS GEN AUS PAC

PAGE 24 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA Concluding reflections

When reviewing the data in terms of the current demographic and socio-economic context outlined in the above statistics, despite only constituting 1.3% of the Australian population, the Pacific community are set to rapidly grow to 3% in the coming decades (College of & Pacific 2014).

Pacific people will continue to be a vibrant and youthful part of an ageing Australian population. There are particular social trends that are specifically impacting on the well-being of Pacific communities in Australia. Housing conditions in terms of accessibility and affordability are somewhat a concern for Pacific families in Australia with issues of overcrowding and an increased reliance on rental accommodation.

It is evident in the data presented that cultural and societal factors (Figure 45) both play a key role in influencing Pacific communities. For example, the need to pursue employment to support larger families (cultural factor) is due to the lack of access to social security benefits and tertiary study loans (societal factor). This is also despite good completion rates in year 11 and 12. Pacific communities also have a high mobility of moving houses within a 1 – 5 year period due to housing availability (societal factor) to cater for more than one family in a household (cultural factor), which may then have a significant impact on the ability to access and commit to ongoing education or employment (societal factor) that sustains financial stability and social mobility.

Figure 45: Examples of Cultural & Societal Factors impacting Pacific communities

CULTURAL FACTORS SOCIETAL FACTORS

Type of employment obtained reflects desire to work Full- Pressures to earn as many Pacific people are not eligible time vs. Part-time jobs for benefits.

Higher number of people in Pacific households Housing availability across region where Pacific people reside

More families in one household, where caring responsibility Inability to afford paid care for larger group of dependant for children is shared. children

Household income larger due to more people in one Overcrowding in homes due to a lack of affordable household housing

Lower rate of divorce despite higher rate of separation and Lower divorce rates and higher de facto relationships due de facto relationships to financial costs

Possible disharmony within families influencing higher Pacific household less likely to have sufficient number percentage of Pacific people requiring supported of bedrooms which may lead to social, health and accommodation educational issues

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 25 Recommendations

• Further research around relationship patterns and reasons that may influence certain trends to occur. • Further research towards Pacific people accessing pathways in vocational trades (apprenticeships/traineeships). • Further research on how to promote living conditions that support larger families in smaller homes. • Promoting synergy between Pacific research and Pacific needs in order to better map key findings and solutions that support effective service provision in Australia. • Improved recording and access of specific data on Pacific people involved in prisons, corrections, youth justice, and immigration detention centres. • Enhanced culturally appropriate and inclusive services to help with Pacific families transition and settle into Australian society. • Promoting the use of technology within Pacific families to develop vocational and career aspirations.

PAGE 26 – PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA References

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011. 2011 Census – Counting Persons; Place of Usual Residence, Canberra.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2014. Life expectancy, p.1.

College of Asia & Pacific, 2014. State of the Pacific 2014 – Pacific Communities in Australia: challenges and moving forward. State of the Pacific Conference 2014, p.1. Available at: http://ips.cap.anu.edu.au/news-events/podcasts/state- pacific-2014-pacific-communities-australia-challenges-and- moving-forward#.VaSVGHjfCS0.

Davis, G. & Robinson, B., 2013. A Smarter Australia, Canberra.

Department of Immigration and Border Protection, 2014. Fact sheet – New Zealanders in Australia, Canberra. Available at: http://www.border.gov.au/about/corporate/information/ fact-sheets/17nz.

Horton, P., 2014. Pacific Islanders in professional rugby football: Bodies, minds and cultural continuities. Asia Pacific Journal of Sport and Social Science, (December), pp.1–14. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/ 21640599.2014.970428 [Accessed December 15, 2014].

Klapdor, M., Coombs, M. & Bohm, C., 2009. Australian citizenship: a chronology of major developments in policy and law, Canberra. Available at: http:// www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_ Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/~/link. aspx?_id=19DEF7F2687C4163A747A7E913BB116F#_ Toc224109066.

Maclellan, N. & Mares, P., 2006. Remittances and Labour Mobility in the Pacific: A working paper on seasonal work programs in Australia for Pacific Islanders.

Ravulo, J., 2014. Developing diversity awareness and practices in the National Rugby League (NRL): Progressive player participation and club collaborations, Sydney.

Ravulo, J., 2015. Pacific Youth Offending within an Australian Context. Youth Justice. Available at: http://yjj.sagepub.com/ cgi/doi/10.1177/1473225415584983.

Ravulo, J., 2009. The Development of Anti-Social Behaviour in Pacific Youth, Sydney: University of Western Sydney.

Statistics New Zealand & Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs, 2011. Health and Pacific Peoples in New Zealand, Available at: http://stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_ communities/pacific_peoples/pacific-progress-health.aspx.

PACIFIC COMMUNITES IN AUSTRALIA – PAGE 27 University of Western Sydney Locked Bag 1797 Penrith NSW 2751 Australia