Reports and Proceedings . SOCIALWELFARE RESEARCH CENTRE Ethnicity, Class and Social Policy in Australia by Andrew Jakubowicz, Michael Morrissey and Joanne Palser [I THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES (I (I P 0 BOX 1 • KENSINGTON • NEW SOUTH WALES • 2033 • AUSTRALIA ~ For further enquiries about the work ofthe Centre, or about purchasing our publications, please contact the Publications Officer, SPRC, University of New South Wales, PO Box 1, Kensington, NSW, 2033, Australia. Telephone (02) 697 3857. Fax: (02) 313 8367. ISSN 0159 9607 ISBN 85823 456 4 First printing May 1984 Reprinted May 1990 Reprinted September 1993 As with all issues in the Reports and Proceedings Series, the views expressed in this publication do not represent any official position on the part ofthe Centre. The Reports and Proceedings Series is produced to make available the research findings of individual authors, and to promote the development of ideas and discussions about major areas of concern in the field of social policy. -i- CONTENTS Preface 11 Chapter 1: Key Concepts .1 Migration and economic development 1 .2 Capitalism and social policy 3 .3 Roles of the state 5 .4 Social control and policy formulation 7 .5 "Culture" and ethnicity 10 .6 Ethnicity, class and social policy 17 Chapter 2: Class Relations and the Migration Program .1 The Homogeneous society: post-war reconstruction 20 .2 Migration and labour force discipline 23 .3 Assimilation as social policy 27 .4 Conflict and Order 31 Chapter 3: The Long Boom .1 Changing Class Relations 35 .2 Race and Class 39 .3 Social Change and Migrant Welfare 41 .4 The Politicisation of Migrant Welfare 48 Chapter 4: The Groundwork for Multiculturalism .1 Social Policy under Labor 56 ." .2 Strategies Inside and Outside the State - Ethnic Rights 60 .3 The Onset of Multiculturalism - Bureaucracy in Motion 64 .4 The Ethnic "New Class" and Social Policy 68 Chapter 5: Neo-Conservatism, Social Democracy and Multiculturalism .1 Neo-Conservatism and Social Policy 70 .2 The Hidden Reality of Galbally 79 .3 Corporatist Strategies 81 .4 Ideologies of Conservatism 89 .5 Social Democracy and Multiculturalism 93 Chapter 6: Conclusions and Proposals .1 Class Conflict and Ethnic Welfare 99 .2 Proposal 1: children's services 102 .3 Proposal 2: migrant women 102 .4 Proposal 3: the ethnic aged 103 .5 Proposal 4: unemployment and technological change 103 Appendix 1: Interviewees 105 References 107 -0- PREFACE The analysis of social policy and its relationship to the welfare of ethnic minorities in Australia has followed a convoluted and haphazard path. In part this reflects the systematic blindness in social policy to institutionalised discrimination against minorities. Yet more importantly it is a symptom of the problems that the concept of "ethnicity" can create for those who seek to understand and then change social programs in this country. This report is designed to meet three related but restricted goals: i. the identification and description of the process by which current social policies towards ethnic minorities have been developed; ii. an analysis of the relationship between social policies affecting minority groups, and wider social and political processes in Australian society; ill. the effect of these programs and policies on the welfare of ethnic minorities. The Report has been a long while in gestation - and in its final version represents a summary of a mass of information cqlleeted since the project commenced in 1981. The emphasis is on the Federal sphere though reference is also made to recent initiatives in Victoria and New South Wales. The question of ethnic welfare is primarily a political issue which has very firm links into the broader socio-political dynamic of Australia as a class society. Most analysts of social policy do not share this perspective. Indeed one of the major dimensions in the struggle over equity for ethnic minorities is what has come to be called the "ethnicity­ class debate". There are those who would argue that the crucial problems for immigrants and Australian society are primarily those of cultural intolerance - and that the solutions to 'ethnic' disadvantage lie in strategies that will change people's attitudes to one another. There are others who identify "linguistic exclusion" as the main problem - to be overcome by better English language classes, interpreters, and bi-lingual service delivery personnel. Yet others suggest that the most effective solutions lie in the provision of 'ethnic specific' programs, operating within 'ethnic communities'. Most recently there have been proposals to 'mainstream' services to ethnic minorities. This Report analyses these and other models and extracts those elements that are most useful, while pointing out their derivation and limitations. This is a Report on social policy however, and does not analyse in detail the delivery of welfare services to ethnic minorities. -m- A critical perspective on the range of issues is necessary to make sense of how social policy and research might develop. Emphasis must be placed on the day-to-day reality of peoples' lives, for so much of that experience has been distorted, corrupted and transfigured in political decision making. The central question that this Report returns to throughout its analysis is, why has 'ethnicity' become such an important designator of social differences in Australia? The ramifications of this question are of tremendous importance, particularly at a time when a social democratic government (the Australian Labor Party) in Canberra is facing a welfare edifice fashioned by the dominant social class and entwined within conservative social ideology. The language that is used to describe groups, to explain problems and to present policy initiatives is itself politicised and sectionally biased. It is thus important to present the logic of this language and its social implications as part of an analysis of social policy. Class analysis as applied to social policy is a comparatively new field - and has not been a feature of mainstream analyses. However, there is increasing awareness of the value of such an approach for asking questions which by their very nature are excluded from most accounts of policy development. The answers may be uncomfortable, for they necessarily lead to the next question - that of practice. Class analysis does not lend itself to 'easy' advice to government. It does not make a catalogue of social technology available to the state - or at least, not one that leaves unchallenged the role of that state in the perpetuating of the current system of class relations. This Reportis the outcome of the work and involvement of many people. Well over eighty people - politicians, public servants, academics, community activists, welfare workers, researchers and journalists, - agreed to be interviewed. Some spent many hours with us discussing issues - some allowed us to return later in the research to test out the directions in which we were moving. The conclusions we have drawn and the interpretations we have made of their contributions are our own responsibility - we accept that many will disagree with our argument and perspectives. The first draft of the Report and work-in-process conference papers were prepared by the principal project research workers - Andrew Jakubowicz, Joanne Palser and Michael Morrissey. The day to day management of the project and the bulk ofdocumentary research was carried out by Joanne Palser and Michael Morrissey. The principal researchers with the valuable assistance of Pat Jones undertook the fieldwork interviews during 1981 and 1982. Andrew Jakubowicz carried out the extensive editing of the first draft and updated the final.part of Chapter Five to produce the final Report during the period June 1983 to April 1984.Typing and wordprocessing was carried out with considerable forebearance -iv- and humour by Pat Jones, Deb McCloskey, Carlene Robinson, Moira Bowman and James Hardey. Ron Stewart as Acting Director for the Centre for Multicultural Studies at the University of Wollongong diligently proofread the first draft and provided editorial suggestions. Con­ stance Lever-Tracy provided a constructive and detailed critique of the first draft. Helen Meekosha provided valuable assistance in the preparation of the final Report, particularly on the relationship between migration, social policy and gender inequality. Many other friends and colleagues gave generously of their time in interviews and consultations. Ul­ timatelY, however, the views expressed in this Report are the sole responsibility of the three principal researchers. Management of the project lay with the Centre for Multicultural Studies until May, 1983 and subsequently with the Department of Sociology at the University of Wollongong. The project proposals which are outlined in the final Chapter of the Report reflect the experience of many of the fieldworkers with whom we have discussed the problems of action on 'ethnic' issues. The proposals also question traditional methods of social policy research. We argue for more activist and experimental pilot programs which do not freeze the ethnic working class into a position as passive objects of research. Andrew Jakubowicz May 1984 CHAPTER ONE KEY CONCEPTS .1 Migration and Economic Development The Australian post-war migration program has been an essential part of the development of Australian capitalism. It provided the labour power which created the surplus value on which depended the expansion of capital accumulation in Australia. The orientation of the ruling political parties, key industrialists and important sections of the trade union movement during the four decades since the large scale immigration program was imple­ mented, has been to support, encourage and in some cases demand immigration. The active role played by Federal governments in creating the conditions necessary for the massive recruitment of labour is one of the most significant features of the Australian state. These conditions have included not only those with economic implications, but also those which bear on the culture of Australian society, such as the apparent erosion of the domination of cultural life by Anglo-centric social institutions.