A Fair Go for All Australians: International Comparisons, 2007 10 Essentials Published on Behalf of Australia Fair

A fair go for all Australians: International Comparisons, 2007 10 Essentials Published on behalf of Australia Fair

By Australian Council of Social Service

Locked Bag 4777 Strawberry Hills, NSW, 2012 Australia Ph 02 9310 6200 Fax 02 9310 4822 Email: [email protected] Website: www.acoss.org.au

ISSN: 1326 7124 ISBN: 85871 705 0

This publication is copyright. Apart from fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism, or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to the Publications Officer, Australian Council of Social Service. Copies are available from the address above. Contents

Introduction 1

Some key international comparisons 2

Economic Indicators 11

Poverty Lines 12

International comparisons 14

Fair Community 15

Fair Education 18

Fair Environment 22

Fair Health 25

Fair Housing 28

Fair Reconciliation 32

Fair Rights 37

Fair Services 40

Fair Welfare 43

Fair Work 47

Endnotes 51 Introduction In 2007, despite the strong economy and large What is meant by fairness in budget surpluses many Australians are not Australia enjoying a decent standard of living. Australia Fair consultation produced a very clear consensus that the ten essentials to make Australia fair for all are: Australia Fair held extensive consultations in every State and Territory in 2006 to identify Fair Community Fair Reconciliation Fair Education Fair Rights what the public thinks are the 10 essentials to Fair Environment Fair Services ensure a fair go for all Australians. Fair Health Fair Welfare Fair Housing Fair Work

This report releases new figures on income These results were then tested through in Australia which show that at least one in telephone opinion polling which reinforced ten Australians are living at or below the the message that the Australian community recognises ten essentials to ensure a fair go poverty line. for all Australians.

This report looks at the currently available data A follow up national surveys revealed that:  91% of Australians believe that ‘a fair go from Australia and across other rich countries in for all’ is an important Australian value the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and  77% believe that the gap between rich Development (OECD) to examine where and poor in Australia is widening  45% believe that Australia is not Australia’s performance is falling behind other becoming a fairer place. wealthy nations in offering a fair go for all.

There are many indicators that show that our nation’s performance is well above average in the OECD, for example in life expectancy, home ownership and economic growth. However, there are areas that we rank poorly across each of the 10 essentials to make Australia fair, for example the gap of life expectancy between Indigenous Australians and the rest of the community, the cost of owning or renting a house and the number of people living on less than half average incomes.

Research featured in this 2007 report indicates that the ideal of a fair society is not one that can be achieved through the existing policy settings. While 22 out of 30 OECD nations have implemented national social inclusion or poverty strategies to share the social and economic benefits of the nation, Australia has no coordinated response to disadvantage. Given the persistence of joblessness, poor health and other forms of disadvantage for some Australians, such a strategy could provide a tool to strengthen communities for the future.

A fair go for all Australians: International Comparisons, 2007 firstly outlines key international comparisons, looks at latest research on those Australians living below the poverty line and then, using the 10 essentials identified by the Australian public, examines where Australia is falling behind other wealthy nations in realising a fair go for all its people.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Some key international comparisons

While Australia’s economic growth is above the OECD average1 Australia ranks 14th on the United Nation’s (UN) Human Poverty Index.

FIGURE 1: Average Annual Economic Growth of OECD Countries (2001-06) 2

l y y n s k D d g d c ic d ga l n d a d ce a r ria m co a y K A d a n C n lia nd in r n nd li ry ce e a e y l n u I ta a an p n n t iu xi U S a e E la a a a u l a la b a e r rk ub la rt m rl a la ra nm us lg e rw U n e d O in tr al Sp b o e p u n g re o u p e o er e J e r F e A e M o a w F s e m P Ic e u K T e Ir P i tz h D B N C S Au Z xe R H G R G w e t w u h k S N e L c va N ze lo C S

The Human Poverty Index is an indication of the standard of living in rich countries, developed by the United Nations.3 The lower the rating, the less disadvantage within the country.

FIGURE 2: UN Human Poverty Index (2006)4

k s n y s d r y d a rg e n m in i a m e d l y e a d n a n n d u c a iu a l o t n a d w an la m a l a a o n p g p ra gd ta la It e r l in n m r n b ra a l S t n e w o r F e r e a F J e s i S Ir N e e tz C m B u K d S th D G i e A te e w x ed i N S Lu i t n n U U

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Community For overall economic measures, such as average income, Australia ranks about midway in the OECD.5 But for older Australians, the proportion of people living in low income households is above the OECD average.6

FIGURE 3: GDP purchasing power ($US) per person (2006) 7

$90,000

$80,000

$70,000

$60,000

$50,000

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$0 l k D y g d s d a s d n y e n e a a y r a m a l d a r d i m n i i i n n e n d C d n l a c c e a t n a r o u e a a n n g u a a t a n a i a p a t n e r l a l a E d l d I p a e u o w l m s g r l o t t n a a a e e r e l g n l t m r e v r b n u O i r S r a r a r J r K o S c n e s I e i e o o I e F w F l m A e u e G C B N d z P t h K S Z S e D i t A G e x t i e d w w u e n S N t e L i U n N U

FIGURE 4: Older people in poverty (less than 50% of median income) (2005) 8

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

d l y D k d c n a o S ce li a an l K y d e nd ia ny n r rg ry a n li ds d a g ic U e a p ta U C a n nc a tr a e a u a ad a b n n el tu x e tr a I E rw la a l s d m o g n ol u a l a Ir or e r s J O o r r in u rm e n b n a P p rl a P M G u N ze F F A e w e m u C e e e A it G S D e H R th Z w x h e w S Lu c N e ze N C

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Education Australia ranks 9th out of 30 OECD countries on educational levels achieved by the adult population9, but we come in the bottom half of spending on education as a percentage of GDP. 10

FIGURE 5: Adult educational average number of years' schooling of 25-64 year olds (2004) 11

4 l y y rk s g a d a n c c n a a D d y e m d s e in d ly y o a a n a t e r d nd n li nd om e li li pa re tr i C an ar c iu n d c a n ta ke ic g w a m a ou na a la ra a d d b u b a o s E l g n g la n e e p la I r x tu or rm n St b a rl I re st al g e pu p J K u O Po n ra e l in r la r S ce u e o r N e e m C ze u e in w e e A u F B F e G I T M P G D ed e it A Z K S R R H th i t x w w d h k e n Lu S e i te c va N U N n ze o U C Sl

FIGURE 6: Government spending on education as a proportion of GDP (2006)12

9.0%

8.0%

7.0%

6.0% 6.0% 5.8%

5.0%

4.0%

3.0%

2.0%

1.0%

0.0%

l l y e d in ic ic n s ly y ia ia a a e K ry d m e d d y n d o le rk S a d e e c n a l l a d a n tr l d g g U a n u c n n a e n ic i a U e n a rk e a b b p n It a a a a a i n a a w d a x h r a r e l p u u a a s tr n tu r g l lg a l r l r e l e C m o l s u r r e S p p J r l rm u s a r e n in r o e o a n K e I T G I e e e e A u o v u F e F P z N w e M e Ic h C P A H B it S Z R R t G A D h k e w w c a N S e e v N z lo C S

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Environment Australia compares poorly to other wealthy countries on the proportion of energy derived from renewable resources.13 How well Australians respond to threats to these essentials of life now will impact on future generations.

Australia’s current care for the environment is critical for intergenerational fairness and for fair consumption of resources worldwide.

FIGURE 7: Proportion of energy from renewable sources (2005) 14

50%

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

l a g K d n s ic d l S ic y e a y d n e ly e o y k a a d n d y e r n a d m l n e l r c li n n i c g c e a r d ri n e n a r u U a p n iu b a ra U b a e a a a a n ta a i k g a a t a d a w o o l a a g u l s u g e tr l p a I r x r tu m n s l e l r K b e J r l l p e I p n r s rm o S r e e u r n a u in a o Ir e e e Ic e u G u P F v M T o A F w e m B H e A P e C S Z N e th R R A G D x e h k w u c a e L N e v N z lo C S

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Health Life expectancy is among the highest in the world 15 but adult oral health is in the bottom third of OECD nations.16

FIGURE 8: Male life expectancy at birth (2005)17

y lic d y ic o a a l rk g d D m e e y S n K a d s y a a d n d d r b n e bl ic e g a ur n C u c c n ai ri n d al d li en n a n n ga u la rk u x o r tu m o la E gi e n a U p U s t l a an It a ra d la p la la n p o u p e K r n b in O el re ra rm S u a rl an st e r Ja re e u e P T e M o e m F B G F e A e e C u w ze I Ic H R R P D e G Z th A S it k h ux w e w va c L e N S lo ze N S C

FIGURE 9: Decayed Missing and Filled Teeth (2006) 18

0 l k c a ly a in y A n e ia ry D d e ny K r ia ds li d nd a y d re ta g a ke S p a nc tr a EC an e c a U a al n b n a ad a an o I rt u p ur U a a s g el e m m tr la u r la ol n rw l K o S T J r u un O Ir r r en s r e p e P a o ea P F A H G e D u h e R tz C N Z G A et h i N c Sw ew ze N C

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Housing Australia has one of highest home ownership rate in the OECD,19 but the highest ratio of median prices to median incomes among the English speaking OECD countries.20

FIGURE 10: Home ownership rate (2005)21

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

y k s l y n n r ce d e a S m K lia e a l d in e a d n g d U u U c g ta n a a d n n la ra a i ra e u I la p m e m la ra n e n lg t re r t e S r w n r i v a e s o Ir e S e e F F C B u G G D th A A P e N

FIGURE 11: Ratio of median house price to median income in English speaking OECD countries (2007) 22

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Australia NZ Ireland UK US Canada

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Reconciliation The gap between the life expectancy of the Indigenous and non-Indigenous population is wider in Australia than it is in NZ, USA or Canada.23

FIGURE 12: Life expectancy gaps, Indigenous and general populations. 24

80.3 80 80 79.1 77.4

75 72.5 71.1 70.8 70

65 62.5

40 Australia New Zealand Canada United States

Indigneous Total

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Welfare Australia spends much less than the OECD average on income support (as a percentage of GDP),25 but has the 5th highest proportion of people of workforce age in jobless households in the OECD.26

FIGURE 13: Government spending on income support as a percentage of GDP (2003)27

0 l a d e ly m y n a e rk rg y in y li c d d D s lic m d n a d s a d a o tri n c a iu n e g c a u ar a a b n n C d b o n a li n te d n e ic s la n It g a d t u e m o g p w u la la E an u gd l a ap ra la ta a la or x u o ra el rm e r re n b n S r p in r O rl ep n a J s t re S an e K e A P F B e w o G e m u o e F ze e Ki e u I d C Ic M G S P D e H N R it th R Z A e x h w e k d w it Lu c S N va ite e n ze lo n N U C S U

FIGURE 14: Proportion of people of workforce age in jobless households28

18%

16%

14%

12%

10%

n o d l S a n g y d e k D a d d ly y e s c a K y y d a ic n ga U d e r e n c ar C tri n n a a c d li li U a r n n p x la u a d ou rk la ee E s la la It rw an n ub ra g a la Ja e e r rt an e b u in r n m O u re a o r rla p st n r m o M tz o C Sw m T F G e A I Ze N F e e u u e P i P e D th R A H G w ux w e h S L e N c N ze C

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Work Australia has an official unemployment rate below the OECD average29 but the value of minimum wages have only recently caught up with what they were worth in 1986 in real terms.30

FIGURE 15: Unemployment indicators (2006) 31 20

l d ic y y e e in d m ic y y D a a a s s rk n m g d d a d o d n l n e c n a l l n r d i i d e y a o r n n b a c a iu g b a e a C l tr n t a a u n e ic n la u r k n e p la u It d E a a a p d a la r la x la o a e lg t u g n tr s la t m w a g o l e o p rm u r r S in r p e n O a u r S n r J n b r r K a e e P e T e o e w u s e o i e I e c e F G F B C u A e d K m z M I R P R S H h D N e it Z k G A t te d h e i x w w a c n te u e v e N i L S o z U n N l U S C

FIGURE 16: Real weekly minimum wages (A$) (2006) 32

Real minimum wage, Australia ($A2006 per week)

550

500

450

400

5 7 9 1 3 5 7 9 1 3 5 7 -8 - 8 -8 - 9 -9 - 9 -9 -9 -0 -0 -0 -0 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 98 98 98 99 99 99 99 99 00 00 00 00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Economic Indicators The Australian economy has grown strongly and steadily over the last three years, a continuation of positive trends over the past 15 years. From 2001 to 2006, economic growth averaged 3.0% per year, well above the average rate of economic growth in the OECD over this period (2.3%). This has been achieved while keeping inflation low - an average of 3.1% per year over the period.

Strong economic growth and corporate profits have strengthened government budgets. On average, since 2001, the general government sector (including Australian and State Government Budgets) has posted a surplus of 0.9% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), compared with an average deficit of 2.8% across the OECD.

Economic growth has also contributed to a marked fall in unemployment as officially measured, from 6.8% in 2001 to 4.9% in 2006. This is significantly below the average of 5.9% for the OECD as a whole. Strong employment growth was the main reason: jobs growth averaged 2.2% per year in Australia over the last 6 years compared with just 0.9% for the OECD as a whole.

When hidden unemployment (including jobless people who have become discouraged from looking for work and underemployed workers wanting to work more hours) is added to the ‘official’ unemployment rate, the number of people affected almost doubles. The Australian Bureau of Statistics estimates that this broader measure of joblessness fell from 12.4% of the labour force in 2001 to 9.3% in 2006.33

FIGURE 17: International Economic Indicators

Economic indicators: Australia OECD average between 2001 and 200634

Annual growth in real GDP 3.0% 2.3%

Average inflation rate35 3.1% 2.8%

Average annual growth in 2.2% 0.9% employment Average annual reduction in -5.6% -0.1% unemployment rate (%) Unemployment rate in 2006 4.9% 5.9%

Government Budget balance36 +0.9% -2.8%

A major outstanding problem is that jobless people are increasingly drawn from the most disadvantaged groups in the labour market. Of 533,000 people on Newstart or Youth Allowance in April 2007, 306,000 (57%) were on unemployment payments for over 12 months.37 Among jobless sole parents and people with disabilities on income support, over 60% have only completed a year 10 education or less. Most have not been employed for many years.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Poverty Lines A key internationally accepted mechanism to define and measure disadvantage in rich countries is by calculating the proportion of the population living below a poverty line. Poverty lines are usually based on the disposable (after tax) income of households.

In Australian and international poverty research, the poverty line for a single adult is usually calculated as a proportion of the disposable income of a ‘middle income’ (median) household. There are different poverty lines to take account of the number of adults and children in a household.

New research from the Social Policy Research Centre at the University of New South Wales 38 indicates that in 2004, 1,935,000 or 9.9% of Australians, including 365,000 children, lived below the most austere poverty line widely used in international research. This poverty line, which is used by the OECD, is set at 50% of the median (middle) disposable income for all Australian households for a single adult. In 2004 this poverty line was $249 per week.

Research based on this poverty line indicated that some groups in Australia are more likely than others to live below the poverty line, including:  40.2% of unemployed people  39.0% of single adults over 65 years  31.5% of all people whose main income is social security  22.8% of single adults of workforce age  11.4% of sole parent families.

A less austere but still low poverty line, that is used to define poverty in Britain, Ireland and the European Union, is 60% of median income. In the case of a single adult, this poverty line in Australia was $298 per week in 2004.

When this poverty line was used in the same research, 3,859,000 people, including 786,000 children, were found to be living in poverty in 2004. This represented 19.8% of all Australians. A major reason for the large increase in the number of people living below this income is the level of social security payments. For example, at that time the single rate of Age Pension was $226 per week.39

FIGURE 18: Comparison of 50% and 60% of Median Income Poverty Lines in 2003-04 ($ per week) 40 50% of median 60% of median Family Type income income Lone person $249 $298

Couple only $373 $448

Couple with two children $522 $627

Lone parent with two children $398 $478

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 19: Numbers and percentages of people living below the 50% and 60% of Median Income Poverty Lines in 2003-04 41 50% of median 60% of median income income Number of people below poverty line 1,934,988 3,859,034

Number of children below poverty line 365,270 785,571

Percentage of people below poverty line 9.9% 19.8%

Percentage of children below poverty line 9.4% 20.2%

Research based on these poverty lines indicated that some groups in Australia are more likely than others to live below the poverty line.

FIGURE 20: Groups at high risk of poverty: proportions living below the 50% and 60% of Median Income Poverty Lines in 2003-04 42 50% of median 60% of median income income Unemployed people 40.2% 62.1% Single adults over 65 years 39.0% 60.1% People whose main income is social security 31.5% 66.9% Lone parent families 11.4% 32.1% Single adults (without children) of workforce age 22.8% 29.4% All people 9.9% 19.8%

Examining both of these measures of poverty in Australia, poverty increased over the decade to 2004:  from 7.6% to 9.9% using the 50% of median income poverty line  from 17.1% to 19.8% using the 60% of median income poverty line.

FIGURE 21: Trends in poverty from 1994 to 2004: Proportions living at or below the 50% and 60% of median income poverty lines 43 25%

20%

15%

10%

0% 1993-94 1998-99 2003-04

50% of median income poverty line 60% of median income poverty line

Australia Fair Report – 2007 International comparisons The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) defines poverty primarily as a denial of choices and opportunities for living a life one has reason to value. Lack of income is therefore far too narrow to serve as a holistic indicator. As a result, a broader measure was devised in order to capture the many, but not exhaustive, dimensions of human poverty. The Human Poverty Index (HPI) is a composite index measuring deprivations in the three basic dimensions captured by the human development index; a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living. It also captures social exclusion.44

The HPI indexes the probability of not surviving to age 60, the long-term unemployment rate, the proportion of people lacking functional literacy skills and the proportion of the population below 50% of median income.

As shown in Figure 22, Australia ranks 14th in the OCED in relation to the UN Human Poverty Index. The lower the composite score the less social and economic disadvantage within the country.

FIGURE 22: UN Human Poverty Index (2006)

s d rk y a g e n m n a m s d y n y d n a n d d r c a i li o e n l e a n a a n a u n p iu a a d t a ta d rw a l m la n o a a l g p tr g ta l I e o rl in n rm r a b r J e S s n S re w e F e e e m F u i I S N h D tz C e B K d t G i x A d te e w u e i N S L i t n n U U

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Community In the Australia Fair community consultation in 2006, FAIR COMMUNITY people often nominated child protection, safety from Key chapter points violence or crime, divisions between people from different countries and the gap between rich and poor Communities in Australia vary in size, environments and the as being worries they had about communities. General language and background of their levels of poverty and social exclusion of disadvantaged members. Australians and levels of violence in Australia are Lack of services for people who concerns. suffer domestic violence, mental illness and drug misuse are Whether in the city or country, Australians display a problems in many communities. People with disabilities, who are concern for fairness in their community – for the people poor or have low levels of sharing their town, suburb or area and in terms of education are less likely to be access to services and resources. included in all elements of community life. If a sense of community, often expressed as a sense of inclusion, exists in an area people feel safe, included and able to participate in and access the opportunities of the community. This sense of community or connectedness is often referred to as ‘social capital’.

Societies with high levels of social capital also tend to have higher levels of trust in others.45 Less than half of Australians, however, are socially trusting — in 2003, 39% of Australians (41% of males and 37% of females) responding to the Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (AUSSA) agreed that most people can be trusted. This is a decrease from the early 1980s when 46% of Australians reported trusting most people.46 Some groups of Australians are less likely to feel safe in their communities (see Figure 23). The less disadvantaged the area, the more likely people were to report they felt safe.47

FIGURE 23: Reported feelings of being unsafe 48

18% 16% 14%

12% 10% 8% 6%

4% 2% 0% Single parents w ith People in couple People born People born in People w ith a dependent children families w ith overseas Australia disability or long term dependent children health condition

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Many disadvantaged groups are also isolated or excluded from society because they live in poverty or are at risk of poverty. Data from the National Centre for Economic and Social Modelling (NATSEM), indicated groups at risk of financial hardship are: Indigenous people (58%), jobless people (28%), people renting (28%), single parents (22%) and older people (7%).49

A recent report by Professor Tony Vinson found that just 1.7% of postcodes and communities across Australia accounted for more than seven times their share of top rank positions of the major factors that cause intergenerational poverty, including: low income, limited computer and internet access, early school leaving, physical and mental disabilities, long-term unemployment, prison admissions and confirmed child maltreatment.50

Australia has considerable language and ethnic diversity, although this has increased more slowly than most other OECD countries. People from other countries still face discrimination in their communities. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) has indicated discrimination and vilification of Arab and Muslim Australians is a current concern.51

The isolation and exclusion of people with disabilities and mental illness remains significant for communities, with at least 1 in 5 people experiencing mental illness at some point in their lives and many facing barriers such as access to education and employment.52 One indicator of the severe human cost of isolation for this group is Australia’s suicide rate, as seen in Figure 24.

FIGURE 24: Most common causes of deaths from injury (2003-04)53

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

0% Falls Suicide Accident Traffic accident

Research indicates links between other elements of social exclusion (unemployment, lack of social or family contact, low levels of education and low incomes) and suicide. Higher suicide deaths are found among manual workers, and especially if they were also never-married, divorced or widowed. Male suicide is strongly associated with low income, education and occupation.54

The ABS publication, Women's Safety Survey,55 and the more recent ABS Personal Safety Survey 2005 provide an indication of women’s personal safety in 16

Australia Fair Report – 2007 relationships,56 though the 2005 survey takes a narrow view of violence which does not include stalking, harassment or emotional abuse. The surveys asked women about their experiences of violence and found that:  5.8% of women had experienced violence in the 12 month period preceding the survey in 2005 compared with 7.1% in 1996.  4.7% of these women had experienced physical violence (this includes physical assault and threat of physical assault) in 2005 compared with 5.9% in 1996, and 1.6% had experienced sexual violence (this includes sexual assault and threat of sexual assault) compared to 1.5% in 1996.  Of the women who experienced sexual violence during the 12 months prior to the 2005 survey, 21% had experienced sexual assault by a previous partner in the most recent incident, and 39% by a family member or friend.

The Personal Safety Survey 2005 found that 49% of men and women who experienced violence by a current partner reported that they had children in their care and 27% said that these children had witnessed the violence.

Many countries, including most of the OECD nations (22 out of 30), are defining poverty, disadvantage and its effects as social exclusion and introducing national strategies to increase social inclusion. Australia is one of the few nations not to have a targeted and strategic plan to reduce poverty and disadvantage.

These strategies typically include a range of programs joined up across Government departments to improve life chances in health, education and employment and decrease discrimination for socially excluded people.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Education In the Australia Fair community consultation in 2006, FAIR EDUCATION education, from preschool to tertiary education and Key chapter points further training, was recognised as a key essential in providing Australians with a fair go. Education dramatically improves the life chances of all Australians.

Increasing education rates has been proven to lead to Children who have a disability, are higher rates of employment, higher wages, lower from a poor background, or are reliance on welfare, better health, increased likelihood of Indigenous have lower levels of access to preschool education and home ownership and lower levels of social ills such as lower levels of educational violence, suicide and depression. attainment at all levels from preschool to post-school Education also helps combat intergenerational education. disadvantage. For example, 62% of Indigenous students Australia spends near the least on whose parents or guardians had 13 or more years of education of all English speaking OECD nations. Underspend and education were rated by their teachers at average or funding cuts are particularly noted above average academic performance. As the number in early childhood education and of years of education for parents declined, so too did the post secondary school education. proportion of Indigenous students with average or above average academic performance. Indigenous students whose parents had not attended school were the least likely to have average or above average academic performance (25%).57

As a proportion of GDP, Australia spends the least on education of the English speaking OECD countries apart from Ireland, while 1 in 6 Australians lack functional literacy skills.58 Given the opportunities that education provides for disadvantaged Australians to improve their employment, housing and health prospects, this underspend is a significant lost chance to reduce the gap in life chances for these Australians.

FIGURE 25: Education spending as % of GDP, selected OECD countries (2003) 59

0% Australia UK US Korea Israel (highest)

Regarding education, the OECD reports: ‘Australia compares poorly with the United States and other G7 countries [the G7 comprises the seven largest economies in the world; USA, Japan, Germany, the UK, France, Italy and Canada], particularly in terms of the proportion of the population that has not attained at least upper 18

Australia Fair Report – 2007 secondary education. Applying the results of the OECD Growth Study suggests that raising human capital to the level of the United States could raise GDP per capita by between 4 and 7.5%’.60

Australia ranks 9th out of 30 OECD countries on educational levels achieved by the adult population.61 Low levels of education are not just a concern for younger people – but for the general population. Out of the English speaking countries, only the UK had lower rates than Australia of people aged 25-34 years old and 45-54 years old with an upper secondary education in 2004. In that year, 62% of people aged 45-54 in Australia had this level of education, although 77% of people aged 25-34 had this education. This compares poorly with the US and Russian Federation for example where 90% of 45-54 year olds had a secondary school education.62

Further, the UN Human Poverty Index (2006) indicates that Australian adults’ literacy rates are below much of northern and western Europe’s, though above the rates in the UK and the US.63

FIGURE 26: UN Human Poverty Index indicator of functional literacy (2006) 64

n y rk d s y a d a m s m d ly e a a n d n d n li u te o n a d w l a n a a a ra i a d la It e r nm n l a m n rl t l g t g e o e i r r a e s e S in Ir w N F e e C tz u B d K S D th G i A te d e w i e N S n it U n U

In addition, despite the wealth of evidence on the economic and social return on investment in early childhood education, Australia underspends on early childhood education as seen in Figure 27. Only 1.5% of public investment in education in Australia goes into pre-primary education, compared to an OECD average of 7.2%. For those countries providing data, only Ireland invests less proportionately in pre- primary education.65

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 27: Early childhood education spending as proportion of overall spend on education (2004)66

d d y s a l y k ic y e y d li a n n a ce d d d n ri a n r l m l d i n c r an a a a w e an an n de t g a a b u ta n a n a l tr l rl r e l l a e s tu m u gi I la p a g re s ea e o r i n e rl u r rm n p l o S r n I u tz N G F Ic e w A o e e e e P F u A Z i th S P G D R B H w w e h e S N ec N z C

Australia’s rate of preschool enrolment varies in each State and Territory, making comparative measures of participation difficult to ascertain.Currently Australia’s average rate of preschool enrolment is placed in the bottom half of OECD countries.67

Some nations have successfully used their education systems as mechanisms to raise the living standards of children from lower socio-economic backgrounds and so achieving a fairer start to their adult lives. Canada, Denmark and Ireland are among these nations.68 In Australia, 70% of variation in test results can be accounted for in terms of the income and background of students – students going to schools in disadvantaged areas are more likely to have lower test results.69

Tests in schools conducted by the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) for Australia indicate that in mathematics performance, 40% of the variation in results between schools can be accounted for in terms of differences in individual social background and 30% is associated with the average social background of students in the schools.70

Australia has particular problems with school completion. Young people leave school without a qualification at a rate of 17% in Australia. More students stay at school in Western Europe, UK, USA and Canada.71

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 28: Proportion of young people not working or studying, selected OECD countries (2003) 72

18%

16%

14%

12%

10%

0% Australia France Ireland Canada US UK 15-19 years 20-24 years

Good quality, universal education can be a route out of disadvantage – rewarding talent and providing greater life chances to children on low incomes or from disadvantaged backgrounds. In relation to literacy, the upcoming OECD report of adult literacy levels in Australia is expected to highlight that no progress has been made over the last decade.73 Trends such as the increasing relative gap between overall resources available for private and public schools, the rising costs of higher education and training to individuals and relatively low levels of financial support for further education are likely to increase the relationship between privilege and education.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Environment In the Australia Fair community consultations in 2006, FAIR ENVIRONMENT the environment was recognised as a key essential in Key chapter points the future of Australia. Australia is responsible for the care of spectacular and diverse natural beauty and Australia hosts 10% of the Earth’s biodiversity including many unique treasures. These environments host 10% of the diversity species. of life on Earth and many unique species not found elsewhere. While environmental awareness and some land/sea protection regimes have improved, Reflecting recent interest in environmental issues, such Australians are large consumers of as water management, the Australia Fair consultations water and energy and large producers of waste and emissions. in 2006 often nominated the need for sustainable use of resources as a concern, along with broader issues such Australia has a particularly poor as climate change. record on climate change, being both the largest producer of CO2 emissions per person in the OECD Australia’s record for caring for the environment is mixed and one of the few developed – while significant gains have been made in the area of nations to not sign the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. land and sea recently protected and/or put under Indigenous custodianship, consumption of resources remains high and Australia’s rivers, sea, land and climate have been threatened and in some cases irrevocably changed by human contact. For example, despite progress in management of fisheries, many species remain at risk (see Figure 29).

FIGURE 29: Status of Australian fisheries (of 83 species assessed in 2005) 74

Overfished or subject to overfishing Uncertain status Not overfished

Similarly, while Australia has been known internationally for community based environmental action – evidenced by the 4,000 Landcare groups in rural communities and the 1 million people who participated in Clean Up Australia Day in 2007 – general waste and consumption are on the rise. How well Australians respond to threats to these essentials of life now will impact on future generations. Australia’s current care for the environment is critical for intergenerational fairness and for fair consumption of resources worldwide.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Climate Projections of specific impacts of climate change on Australia by the Climate Project and the Australian Conservation Foundation indicate that if conservative estimates of a 1°C rise in temperature occur there will be:  3-11% less water supply for Melbourne;  70% increase in droughts in NSW; and,  a shrinkage of Australian snow cover by 10-40%.75

Given predicted direct impacts of climate change on Australian life, it is striking that Australia has low rates of renewable energy, high emissions per capita and joins the US in being the only developed nations not to sign the Kyoto Protocol to reduce emissions. 76

FIGURE 30: Percentage of energy supply based on renewable sources, selected OECD countries (2005)77

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Australia Iceland Norw ay Sw eden Sw itzerland Canada

FIGURE 31: CO2 emissions from energy use per capita (tonnes CO2), selected OECD countries (2002)78

0 Australia US Canada UK France Hungary Switzerland (highest) (lowest)

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Nations with far greater populations and industry output have reduced their contributions to climate change: Norway (whose industry sector contributes 41% of GDP compared to Australia’s 26%) has reduced emissions by 18% since 1990 and the United Kingdom (industry sector 25%) has reduced emissions by 14%.79

Land Australia has 18.5% of its land under a protection regime. This is the 11th highest in the OECD compared to higher rates in USA (25%), the highest rate of 32% in New Zealand and the lowest rate of 1.2% in Ireland.80 This rate of environmental management has led to below OECD average rates for threatened species in Australia – around 25% of mammals, 15% of birds, 5% of vascular plants – but this still represents potential incalculable loss of value to ecosystems and biodiversity.81

Australia has the 5th highest rate of household and municipal waste in the OECD – almost 700 kilos per capita (kg/capita),82 but recycling rates are relatively low. For example, Australia recycles just under 50% of paper compared to Germany’s rate of over 70%.83

Water In its economic survey of Australia, the OECD highlighted water as an issue of particular concern: ‘Water is scarcer in Australia than on any other continent, except Antarctica. Australia also has the highest year-to-year rainfall variability, many of its rivers have highly variable flows and droughts are common. And because Australia is a large country there is enormous spatial and seasonal variation in rainfall. Against this background it may seem surprising that Australia has the fourth highest rate of water removal per capita in the OECD.84

FIGURE 32: Water abstraction rates per capita, selected OECD countries 85

1,800 1,600

1,400 1,200

1,000 800

600 400

200 0 Australia NZ Canada US Sw eden UK Denmark (low est)

However, public water usage per Australian was about median at 0.274 m3 per person per day compared to high users Iceland (0.705), New Zealand (0.633) and USA (0.595) and low users of Poland (0.156) and Germany (0.180).86

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Health Australia has relatively high life expectancy and has had FAIR HEALTH significant success in reducing some health risks such Key chapter points as smoking and increasing early treatment of some health conditions such as breast cancer. While other Australia has relatively high life expectancy and spending on health risks, such as obesity and mental illness remain a health. concern for all Australians, general statistics tend to hide the poor health of people on low incomes. Indigenous Australians and people from poor backgrounds still have much lower life expectancy and Australia’s high life expectancy rate is not shared by all. poorer health. People in rural and Indigenous people have a life expectancy that is 17 remote areas also have a shortage of doctors, dentists and other years less than the rest of the community. People living health services. on low incomes are much less likely to live a long and healthy life. In fact, if all Australians enjoyed the health Australia compares poorly with other countries in relation to of the richest 20% of Australians then premature death Indigenous health and dental rates in Australia would reduce by 19% for men and health. While smoking has lowered, 12% for women.87 obesity remains a significant health risk. The gaps in life expectancy are based on a range of factors which contribute to health such as housing, education, income, rates of violence, drug misuse and other factors discussed elsewhere in this report. The interaction of these multiple disadvantages and problems on health is seen most dramatically in the 17-year gap between the life expectancy of Indigenous and non- Indigenous people in Australia (see Figure 33).

Life expectancy for the general population is high and the gap between life expectancy for men and women is narrowing in Australia (similar trends regarding the gender gap are seen in Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States).88

FIGURE 33: Male life expectancy, selected OECD nations (2004)89

0 Australia Japan Iceland (highest) Sw itzerland Sw eden Turkey (low est) Australia (national) (Indigenous)

Australia spends more on health as a proportion of GDP than the OECD average, and this has been increasing in recent years. However, the OECD points to inefficiencies and lack of coordination of health services between the State, Territory

Australia Fair Report – 2007 and Federal governments as a source of concern in its latest assessment of Australia’s economic performance.’90

In Australia, 67.5% of health spending was funded by public sources in 2003, below the average of 73% in OECD countries and higher rates of over 80% in Nordic countries, the UK and Japan. The public sector is the main source of health funding in all OECD countries, except the United States and Mexico.91

FIGURE 34: Health spending as a proportion of GDP, selected OECD countries (2003) 92

18%

16%

14%

12%

10%

0% Australia Korea (low est) UK NZ Canada Germany US

Patients increasingly pay more for health services, leaving people with low incomes worse off. From 1997–98 to 2004–05, the main areas of real growth in individuals’ out-of-pocket funding were for aids and appliances, medications, and dental services. In real terms, average out-of-pocket health expenditure per person grew by 4.7% a year in the decade from 1994–95 to 2004–05. Over this period, the two areas of out- of-pocket expenditure that had the most rapid real growth were ambulance services, at 15.1%, and aids and appliances at 12.5% per year.93

As calculated by the Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) late last year, an estimated 40% of Australians are unable to access dental care when they need it, including at least 500,000 people on waiting lists for public dental care.94 The fact that so many Australians are unable to afford or access dental care means that Australia compares poorly with most other OECD countries in terms of adult oral health, ranking in the bottom third – 16th lowest with the UK, USA and much of Europe having lower rates of tooth decay.95 Australia has the 19th lowest supply of dentists per person as well as shortages in rural areas.96

While Australia still has general shortages for medical staff, this particularly impacts people living in rural and remote Australia as illustrated in Figure 35. Generally, Australia has fewer doctors per person than most other OECD countries – 2.6 per 1,000 people in 2003, compared to the OECD average of 3. On the other hand, there were 10.4 qualified nurses per 1,000 people, a higher figure than the OECD average of 8.3.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 35: Number of doctors (2001-02) and dentists (2003) by regions97

350

300

250

200

150

100

0 Major cities Inner regional areas Outer regional areas Remote areas

Number of doctors (per 100,000 population) Number of dentists (per 100,000 population)

Looking at one of the major causes of death, coronary heart disease, in 2000-02 men living in the most disadvantaged areas had a 25% higher death rate from heart disease and women a 29% higher death rate compared to people living in the most advantaged areas.98 Some of this difference can be accounted for in the reduced access to health services in these areas – rates for some heart surgery procedures were lower in rural areas, despite higher needs. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare states this may indicate broader health inequality: ‘Rates of surgical procedure are likely to be affected by issues such as need and access, both physical and financial.’99

For the general population, obesity remains a major health risk – at least 1 in 5 Australians are obese, on par with the UK with only the US having a significantly higher rate (see Figure 36). This is considered likely to increase health care costs in future if it is not addressed.100

FIGURE 36: Obesity rates in adults, selected OECD nations, latest figures101

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

0% Australia US (highest) NZ Canada UK

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Housing Home ownership is considered a symbol of Australian FAIR HOUSING quality of life. The ‘Australian dream’ is that every Key chapter points Australian should at least have a space they feel is their own, that is safe and that is a source of comfort. While home ownership rates remain high, Australians are in more debt and face higher house Australia has enjoyed relatively high rates of home prices than much of the OECD. ownership in the past but recent decades have seen a Homelessness and evictions leave dramatic drop in affordability. At the end of the 1950s, many Australians vulnerable and the house price to income ratio was around 3.5 or 4 to services to assist these groups are 1.102 Today the median house price to median income strained. Indigenous housing has also been noted as inadequate and ratio is 6.6 to 1 and Australia features some of the least overcrowded by the UN. affordable cities for housing in the world.103 Australia spends relatively little on social housing compared to the This means that most disadvantaged Australians are rest of the OECD. unable to buy housing and instead rent in low cost areas which tend to have fewer jobs, services and other The majority of Australians believe that housing is a key issue where opportunities. A recent report from the Australian Australia is not delivering a fair go Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) looked to all. at households in housing stress, defined as those earning the lowest 40% of incomes and facing housing costs of more than 30% of their income. AHURI indicated an estimated 1.4 million low income households have insufficient income to maintain a ‘frugal standard of living’ after paying for housing (see Figure 37).104

FIGURE 37: Number of working households in housing stress 105 Number of Type of household households Total households in housing stress 862,000

Households in housing stress after Rent Assistance 746,000

Working households, gross incomes below $600 per week 229,000

Working households, gross incomes $800-$1,200 a week 100,000

The high cost of housing is a major, if not the main factor, in the emergence in Australia of postcodes of wealth and opportunity and postcodes of poverty and disadvantage. The impact of housing on fairness is such that new research is increasingly able to predict a child’s chances for good health, work opportunities, educational attainment and economic assets based on where they live.

Australia has the fourth highest rates of home ownership in the OECD but the second highest debt service ratio (interest-only debt service as a percentage of disposable income) as seen in Figure 39. While rising house prices are found in many countries, a recent international housing affordability survey compared median income to median house price in English-speaking developed countries. The report found that: ‘In Australia there has been a marked loss of affordability over the past 10 years’ (see Figure 40).106

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 38: Home ownership rates, selected OECD countries107

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Australia Spain Ireland Italy UK US Canada France Germany (highest)

FIGURE 39: Interest only debt service as a percentage of disposable income, selected OECD countries (1985-2005)108

Netherlands Sweden New Zealand Germany 14 Canada Australia Euro area Finland

0 1985 90 95 2000 05

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 40: Median house price to median income, selected countries (2006) 109

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Australia NZ Ireland UK US Canada

On Census night 2001, 100,000 Australians were estimated to be homeless, many of them children. Nationally 1 in every 51 children aged under 5 walked through the doors of a homeless service in 2004-05. 110

There are 80,000-100,000 evictions from rental accommodation each year, which indicates severe financial stress. Most of these are for rent unpaid and most involving people living alone, young people, single parents, older men, people with substance abuse problems, and women escaping domestic violence. 111

This is leading to increased pressure on housing services – all of which are critically under-funded. For instance, 12,000 adults and children each day are turned away from emergency accommodation services because these services can not meet demand.112 There are 186,934 families on waiting lists for public housing, 11,224 of which were classified by the authorities as in ‘greatest need’.113

Meanwhile, Australia’s supply of social rented housing is the 4th lowest in the OECD (see Figure 41); that is, housing where costs are partially supported by Governments and made available to people on low incomes.

FIGURE 41: Proportion of housing tenure in social rented housing, selected OECD nations114

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Australia Greece & US Sw eden Denmark UK Netherlands Spain (highest)

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Many other cities and countries are tackling housing affordability with supply-side subsidies or efforts to address supply of affordable housing.115 For example, in London, 50% of all new housing developments are required to be affordable. The renewal of lower Manhattan includes a 20% affordability quota.116 Australia has yet to adopt similar schemes nationally.

In 2006, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Adequate Housing raised a number of concerns about housing in Australia including the poor standards of living and rights of Indigenous people, homelessness, public housing waiting lists, emergency accommodation shortages and lack of provisions to protect tenants from forced eviction without reason and arbitrary rent increases. 117

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Reconciliation Reconciliation is generally seen as a process by which FAIR RECONCILIATION Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians build a Key chapter points relationship based on greater respect for Indigenous cultures, rights and equality for Indigenous people. In Indigenous people are extremely disadvantaged across a wide range the Australia Fair consultations it was clear that of indicators. Gains have been reconciliation must address the living standards of achieved by Indigenous-controlled Indigenous Australians. health services, child care and education services but many of these rely on Indigenous Reconciliation has come under the spotlight in 2007, this volunteers and face funding being the 40th anniversary of a national referendum on shortfalls to meet community needs. constitutional reform in 1967 for the benefit of Indigenous people. Life expectancy for Indigenous Australians is lower than Indigenous peoples in other OECD Health, a basic indicator of wellbeing – as measured by nations. life expectancy – shows that the well-being of Indigenous Australians continues to lag substantially The recent legislation grants overwhelming powers to the behind the rest of the country. Indigenous Australians Federal Minister to intervene in the can expect to live 17 years less than other Australians. lives and communities on Undoubtedly, reconciliation includes elevating the living Indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory. standards and opportunities of Indigenous people in Australia, particularly in regard to health, education, The UN has raised concerns about housing, services, freedom from violence and adequate welfare agreements, mandatory sentencing laws in some States, welfare. However, there are underlying causes of these imprisonment of young people symptoms of disadvantage such as the denial of nationally and amendments to the Indigenous people’s rights over land and places of Native Title Act to ensure it remains consistent with the Racial cultural and spiritual significance, removal of Indigenous Discrimination Act. children from their families and several other human rights abuses that still require justice and healing.

Across Australia, Indigenous people make up 2.4% of the Australian population which means that many Australians may not have any interaction with or understanding of Indigenous communities and the challenges they face.

Unlike several other OECD countries (most notably New Zealand), Australia has no formal recognition of Indigenous peoples in a treaty encompassing land rights. Land has great spiritual significance to Indigenous people; the place where they are from is key to their sense of identity and culture. In 2004-05, 62% of Indigenous people recognised an area as their homelands or traditional country. In 2004-05, just 15% of Indigenous people lived on their homelands, a decrease from 22% in 1994, whereas 48% did not live there but were allowed to visit.118

Significant gains were made towards the recognition of Indigenous land rights in the 1990s, and more recently with a determination in Western Australia that another 10% of land was subject to native title. However other recent changes to State law have taken a step away from advancing the rights of Indigenous communities to land. For example, one of the more progressive land rights acts – the Northern Territory Land Rights Act – was amended last year to replace rights to land ownership with rights to 99-year leases in townships.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 In June 2007, the Northern Territory Government released the Little Children are Scared Report which highlighted the issue of child abuse which reinforced the serious issue that many other reports had raised over the last 10 years. The Report made 97 recommendations to the NT Government.

In response to the Federal Governments announced intervention in the Northern Territory the Combined Aboriginal Organisations of the NT stated that a comprehensive approach to child protection in an emergency context must give priority to protection from immediate physical or emotional harm, but must go further. It should also address community safety and access to essential services including housing, health care and education. A failure to also commit to addressing these underlying issues will ensure the current risk factors contributing to existing child abuse and neglect will remain. 119

After the passing of the Northern Territory Emergency Response Bills 2007 many Aboriginal organisations questioned why effective and proven programs to address child abuse were not perused and why the measures involved the removal the removal of permits and land ownership and the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act. The Combined Aboriginal Organisations of the NT have outlined effective and proven methods to protect children and strengthen communities and families.

The improved life chances for Indigenous people who have gained a secondary level education (see Figure 42) is evidence that many of the problems experienced, such as violence and imprisonment, are closely linked to poverty and lack of opportunities.

FIGURE 42:Experiences of young Indigenous people by education level, based on survey responses, National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Survey 120

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Not employed In financial stress In poor health Received police charge in past

Finished secondary school Not finished secondary school

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Meanwhile, Indigenous household income increased by just $30 since 1994 and remains low as illustrated in Figure 43. FIGURE 43: Household incomes of Indigenous households (2002-2005)121

$700

$600 $618 $500

$400

$300 $340

$200

$100

$0 Household income, Indigenous households Household income, non-Indigenous households

Positive achievements in improving life expectancy of Indigenous peoples have been made in several other countries by taking a broad approach to increasing life chances and rights. For example, in Canada the Indigenous to non-Indigenous life expectancy gap is 8 years.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner Tom Calma states, ‘It is not credible to suggest that one of the wealthiest nations in the world cannot solve a health crisis affecting less than 3% of its citizens. Research suggests that addressing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health inequality will involve no more than a 1% per annum increase in total health expenditure in Australia over the next ten years.’122

FIGURE 44: Median age of death, Indigenous populations, selected OECD countries 123

0 Australia Canada US NZ

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Australia’s poor record in improving the life opportunities of Indigenous people has also come to the attention of several United Nations bodies. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has expressed concern about: ‘the unjustified, disproportionately high percentage of Aboriginal children in the Australian juvenile justice system and that their applications for bail are often refused.’124

Indigenous young people, aged between 15-24 years old, are more likely to be arrested by police. They were 23 times more likely to be detained than other young people in 2005.125

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination previously expressed concern about the impact upon Indigenous peoples of the minimum mandatory sentencing scheme that still operates in Western Australia and was recently repealed in the Northern Territory.126

In relation to the West Australian law the Committee stated: ‘The effect of the law is that circumstances of the offence and the circumstances of the offender must be ignored. A 13 year old Indigenous child who enters a home looking for food because he is hungry is treated in exactly the same way as an adult “career criminal”.’ 127 Indigenous young people, who are a small fraction of the young population of WA, comprise three quarters of mandatory sentencing cases.

Several Indigenous communities, often through their own initiative, have started ‘night patrols’ in order to reduce levels of violence and arrests, particularly among young people and intervene in problems before the police get involved. Some have secured government funding to carry out these activities.

In relation to welfare, Indigenous communities are increasingly the subject of trial projects and new rules for welfare payments and programs. Known officially as ‘mutual obligation’ initiatives, these are intended to tie changes in behaviour to funding from the Government. One new initiative within this approach is Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRA), which began a few months after the abolition of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission in 2005.

The UN’s Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has identified the following as core minimum obligations that would not be appropriate for inclusion within SRAs:  access to the minimum essential amount of water, that is sufficient and safe for personal and domestic uses to prevent disease;  physical access to water facilities or services that provide sufficient, safe and regular water;  measures to prevent, treat and control diseases linked to water, in particular ensuring access to adequate sanitation;  the minimum essential food which is nutritionally adequate and safe, to ensure freedom from hunger to everyone;  basic shelter, housing and sanitation; and

Australia Fair Report – 2007  essential drugs, as from time to time defined under the WHO Action Programme on Essential Drugs.128

The UN Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, in addition to highlighting poor Indigenous housing, commented last year that, ‘the so-called “shared responsibility agreements” are very likely to be discriminatory and contrary to international human rights standards.’129

In other recent developments, the OECD has noted particular needs for early childhood programs to address Indigenous disadvantage stating: ‘Poverty and early education issues arise most acutely with regard to Indigenous children. The key to the success of the new Indigenous programmes will be their respectful approach to issues of self-determination, cultural ownership, and for some, language.’130

At a worldwide level, the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People has been adopted by the UN Human Rights Council. It provides guidelines and standards to be observed in pursuing and achieving social justice.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Rights Internationally, Australians and its Government have FAIR RIGHTS played leading roles in the development of Key chapter points International Instruments. For example Doc Evatt chaired the UN General Assembly on the adoption of Treatment of people with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. disabilities, people in same sex relationships, Indigenous peoples and refugees and asylum seekers Rights can cover a range of issues, some of which are are a concern for the application of explored elsewhere in this report. This chapter fair rights to all Australians. examines human rights and fundamental freedoms Australia is the only OECD country guaranteed by international human rights law that are not to have a Bill of Rights to not covered elsewhere in the report, with a particular protect its citizens. focus on disadvantaged Australians. Violence and discrimination against Muslims and people of The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity middle Eastern appearance and the treatment of people in detention Commission (HREOC - an independent organisation centres remain largely established in 1986 by law which reports to Parliament unaddressed by Government. through the Attorney General of Australia) provides an important ‘watchdog’ role on rights in Australia. It particularly monitors the rights of Indigenous people, people with disabilities, people from non-English speaking backgrounds and refugees but also addresses age and sex discrimination in reference to domestic and international law.

Australia does not have a Bill of Rights unlike all other Western countries. The Australian Capital Territory in 2004 was the first State or Territory to take this step with the ACT Human Rights Act. (While HREOC is an independent human rights institution, its authority is limited to responding to complaints, it cannot make enforceable determinations and there is no requirement on Government to even respond to its recommendations.)

Recent rights-based issues for disadvantaged Australians are summarised below.

People with disabilities People with disabilities are often unable to enjoy the rights of other Australians. This has been seen elsewhere in this report – the social exclusion of people with disabilities (see Fair Community), their difficulties gaining services (see Fair Services), and the discrimination faced in employment and education (see Fair Education and Fair Work).

A recent Productivity Commission review in 2004 of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) in practice concluded that there was more to be done to reduce discrimination against people with disabilities.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare summarised the report’s findings: ‘Overall, the DDA has been reasonably effective in reducing discrimination. But its report card is mixed and there is some way to go before its objectives are achieved:  Access to public transport and education has improved more than employment opportunities.

Australia Fair Report – 2007  People with physical disabilities have been helped more than those with mental illness or intellectual disabilities.  People with disabilities in regional areas, from non-English-speaking backgrounds and Indigenous Australians still face particular disadvantages — but race discrimination, language, socioeconomic background and remoteness also play a part.  The nature of the challenge facing the DDA will change as the focus shifts from removing physical barriers to addressing attitudinal barriers.’131

Australia has recently signed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Indigenous people Australia’s poor record regarding the rights of Indigenous people is detailed in Fair Reconciliation. Since the demise of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, the key representation of Indigenous people regarding rights is the HREOC Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner.

Refugees and asylum seekers Australia’s intake of refugees remains relatively low by international standards.132 Reports at the start of the decade about levels of mental illness and self-harm among people in detention highlighted the long waiting periods many asylum seekers face in detention centres and the poor conditions in which they lived.133 Fortunately, in recent years conditions within detention centres have improved somewhat, but a report by HREOC this year stated that some detention centres still had inadequate conditions and the processing of applications was still slow: ‘HREOC staff met many detainees who expressed extreme frustration about the length of time they had been detained. And discussions with mental health teams confirmed what is already well-known: the uncertainty and length of detention inevitably leads to mental health problems.’134

Since 1992, all people who arrive in Australia without a valid visa must be detained (mandatory detention) until they are removed from Australia, deported or granted a visa. Yet people who arrive on a visa then claim refugee status are not detained.

Amnesty International Australia says the distinction between how people arrive in Australia and how they are treated is unfair, as is the mandatory detention rule itself. Amnesty also points out that Australia’s mandatory detention policy breaches international law: ‘Numerous bodies have found that Australia’s mandatory detention regime is arbitrary and in breach of international human rights law. These include the UN Human Rights Committee, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Special Envoy and the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.’135 There are still significant numbers of people in Australia who are detained or on temporary visas, as indicated in Figure 45.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 45: People awaiting immigration status in detention or on temporary visas136 Number of Status type people People detained for more than 18 months 200 Detainees for more than 3 years 150 People on three year Temporary Protection Visas 1,100

Same sex couples HREOC’s 2007 inquiry into the rights of same sex couples found that their rights, and the rights of their children, were breached in relation to employment, workers’ compensation, tax, social security, veterans’ entitlements, health care, family, superannuation, aged care and immigration laws. 137

Other current concerns Recent counter terrorism laws have included measures that override individual rights. As outlined in the Amnesty International Report 2006 the laws: ‘[have] included preventative detention in secret for 14 days without charge or trial, [and] renewable control orders for up to 12 months; the latter could severely constrain freedom of movement and association and could limit employment and communications. Freedom of speech was limited by new sedition laws.’138 People detained under these laws also do not have the right to remain silent and may be imprisoned for failing to answer questions.

The potential for unknown rights abuses to occur is greater following the introduction of these counter terrorism laws - it is now illegal for anyone, including lawyers, journalists or parliamentarians, to report on operational issues related to an ASIO anti-terrorism investigation, within two years of the investigation. 139

Associating with an organisation deemed to be a terrorist by the Australian Government is now an offence. This potentially means that someone who had supported the East Timorese independence movement could be vulnerable to charges. 140 The Australian Muslim Civil Rights Advocacy Network reported there were concerns and fear, for example, from people who had given money to Muslim aid organisations in Aceh following the tsunami as they were worried such donations may be seen as associating with terrorism.141

Reforms have been proposed to the rules for citizenship in Australia, which includes a test on Australian values, the extension of the qualification period before a person can become a citizen and English language proficiency.

The proposal to link English language testing to citizenship has been criticised by the Federation of Ethnic Community Councils (FECCA) and others as both discriminatory and undermining of the social and economic contribution of many people who came to Australia from non-English speaking countries. 142

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Services Community services are a vital part of Australian FAIR SERVICES wellbeing. The strength of individuals, families and Key chapter points communities is dependent on the ready availability of good quality services that assist people through the life Many Australians rely on community services for help in course – for example child care and community aged times of need or on an ongoing care – and people in crisis – for example services for basis to balance work and family people who are homeless, experiencing domestic responsibilities. violence or dealing with drug and alcohol problems. Ageing of the population, Indigenous disadvantage and the Services are also vital in assisting disadvantaged spread of population across rural and remote communities present Australians with particular problems they may face – challenges for services in such as employment assistance to help people find Australia. work, legal aid and counselling advice on how to deal Australia has a relatively high rate with financial crisis or eviction. of older people living at home but unmet demand exists for most Due to the diversity of community services, this service types, including care and chapter can only provide a snapshot of services that disability services. are not covered elsewhere in this report.

Although there is strong public support in Australia for greater investment in services to support people in their communities, there is significant unmet need in Australia’s community services systems. Australia has some unique challenges in achieving fair services – its relatively small population and large land area means that providing services to rural and remote communities can require more in terms of cost and staffing levels. 143

Overall, demand for services is greater than the existing services can deliver. ACOSS’ Australian Community Sector Survey 2007 found that 1 person was turned away from a service they needed for every 16 people who received a service from agencies last year. Services particularly under strain included housing services and disability support accommodation (1 in every 4 people who received a service was turned away), community legal centres (1 in every 5), child care (1 in every 12), and emergency relief services (1 in every 14).144

The Australian Community Sector Survey 2007 states that 90% of community service providers reported that their waiting lists were the same or had worsened between 2004-05 and 2005-06. In addition, 69% of respondents agreed that the people who needed services in 2005-06 had more complex needs than in 2004-05.145 These complex needs are likely to indicate general disadvantage – for example a mother recently made homeless might need counselling, emergency housing, food and assistance to get welfare payments for her and her children.

As important as services are to all families, they are particularly important for disadvantaged Australians that do not have the support of a family. Often older people, homeless people, victims of violence and refugees are among those who without the help of services would have to fend for themselves. With the support of services they are able to interact with people in the community including co-workers, friends, mentors, carers, partners and others.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Some significant unmet needs include:  In 2005, unmet demand for disability accommodation and respite services was estimated at 23,800 people. There is also a shortage of appropriate services for younger people with a disability.146  More than 400,000 older Australians living at home have unmet needs for community care services and less then half of all Home and Community Care (HACC) service providers received a score of ‘high’ in the most recent HACC National Standards Appraisal and about one quarter of providers received a score of ‘basic’ or ‘poor.’147  Australian Bureau of Statistics surveys indicate that one third (35.7%) of people aged over 65 who need help each day with one basic activity are not getting this assistance.148  Currently unpaid family and informal care accounts for 74% of the support provided to older people and people with disability. There are 57 primary carers for every 100 older persons needing care. By 2031 the availability of carers is expected to have fallen to 35 carers per 100 older persons needing care – a reduction of 39% - significantly increasing the demand for formal care.  Other services likely to face unmet need include child care and preschool. Certain disadvantaged families were less likely to access child care for their children. Child care costs increased by 40% between 2000 - 2004 and many parents report difficulties getting places in their area.149  In 2006, while 4.6% of children aged 0-12 were Indigenous, the proportion of Indigenous children in child care was only 1.7%. Further, although 7.7% of children had a disability, the proportion of children with a disability child care was only 2.7%.150  Children from a non-English speaking background participated in child care at a similar rate to this group’s representation in the community while it was slightly less for low income families and families in regional areas.151

The lack of information on where and what type of child care places are needed means that apart from cost, the main reason Australians cannot find child care services is scarcity of places, as shown in Figure 46. These figures are likely to underestimate demand as they do not reflect families who need a different form of child care or additional hours to the services provided.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 46: Reasons for not using child care services, survey response of parents with children aged 0-11 years152

30.0% Booked out or no places 33.6%

Cost of services

No services/don't know anyin my area

Do not know whether care was available 9.4%

Other 16.4% 9.9%

Comparative data between countries (apart from health and education discussed in the relevant sections) is lacking on many services, but the OECD recently reviewed Australia’s early childhood services. The OECD noted differences in jurisdictions and coherence and emphasised the need for national strategic framework. It also noted that low pay and conditions for staff are critical factors which reduces outcomes from early childhood services in Australia. 153

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Welfare Australia’s welfare system is an important but FAIR WELFARE incomplete protection for individuals who are Key chapter points unable to work at all or full time due to illness, caring responsibilities, or who cannot obtain and Payments for families, jobless and older people dominate Australian retain employment because of low levels of welfare. Payments are modest, some education and skills. falling below the poverty line, targeted and include an increasingly complex While many people on pension payments (for set of rules for recipients. example, older Australians, some people with Australia’s mismatch between low disabilities and parents) live below the poverty overall unemployment but many jobless households is described by the line, the risk of poverty is generally higher for OECD as a ‘polarisation of work’. people on the lower allowance payments (young Australia has not reduced long term people, students and unemployed people). unemployment with the same success as European countries which generally invest more in education, training and FIGURE 47: People receiving welfare payments with support. income below poverty lines (2003-04)154

Income on Income on Type of person or Poverty line Dollars below Allowance Pension + family 60% Median poverty line +FTB FTB Lone person $193 $226 $298 $105/$72

Couple only $347 $378 $448 $101/$70

Couple with 2 children $517 $548 $627 $110/$79

Lone parent with 2 $378 $396 $478 $100/$82 children Note: Family Tax Benefit (FBT) payments are for 2 children aged 5-12 yrs. Rent Assistance is not included.

Many Australians agree welfare payments do not provide an acceptable standard of living. In a Roy Morgan Research Survey on what Australians thought was an ‘acceptable standard of living’, only 21% of respondents perceived that a single adult could achieve an acceptable living standard on $250 or less per week, the payment rate for a single unemployed person.155

While payments for single people are low, Australia’s family payments play a crucial role in limiting poverty amongst families. They are particularly important to the 800,000 children living in households where no one works and the main source of income is welfare.

The OECD notes that Australia has a different approach to welfare payments to European countries. It notes that ‘in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom an above-average share of government transfers goes to low-income households and a below-average share goes to high income groups. In these countries, the payment of cash benefits is more often related to income and earnings than in Europe.’156 At the same time that Australia has a reputation for means testing and delivering welfare payments to those in greatest need, it has a relatively low level of

Australia Fair Report – 2007 social expenditure – just under the OECD average. In other words, Australian social security payments are generally lower than average, and more tightly targeted towards low income households.

In general, Australia spends less on income support than much of Western Europe but slightly more than the United States and Canada. The OECD countries with the highest levels of social expenditure also have the highest incomes (as measured by GDP per person), such as Norway and Luxembourg. 157

FIGURE 48: Government spending on income support as a percentage of GDP (2003)158

0 l a d e ly m y n a e rk g y in y li c d d D s lic m d n a d s a d a o ri n c a iu n e g c a ur ar a a b n n C d b o n a li n te d n e ic s t la n It g a d t u e m o g p w u la la E an u gd l a p ra la ta a la or x u o ra l rm e r re n b n S r p in r O rl p n a J a s t re S an e K e A P F Be e w o G e m u o e F ze e e i e u I d C Ic M G S P D e H N R it th R K Z A e x h w e k d w it Lu c S N va ite e n ze o n N U C Sl U

Concerns have been raised about the increased rules and penalties that accompany welfare payments including a new penalty, introduced in 2005, of an 8-week period without any payments. People on an 8-week suspension and are not eligible for further government help, often have to rely on charities. The most recent data from Anglicare Australia shows that over 90% of people seeking Emergency Relief are receiving welfare payments. Single unemployed people are the largest group accessing Emergency Relief, followed by sole parents and people receiving payments because of disability.159

Australia has the 5th highest proportion of individuals in jobless households as shown in Figure 49.160 The OECD has commented: ‘In Australia and France (joblessness) remained stable, despite increases in employment rates in both of these countries in the second half of the 1990s. The fact that higher employment did not consistently lead to lower joblessness reflects polarisation of work and the growth in the proportion of two-earner households in most OECD countries.’161

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 49: Proportion of people living in jobless households (2000)162

18%

16%

14%

12%

10%

0% Australia Japan Mexico US Canada NZ UK Germany Poland (low est) (highest)

Part time work is the most common form of employment for mothers in the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Australia. The OECD contrasts this with Northern Europe where: ‘A strong focus on gender equality in public policy and generous public child-related leave arrangements and childcare services underlie high maternal employment rates in the Nordic countries.’163

As pointed out in 2006 by ACOSS, countries that have had dramatic successes in lowering unemployment tend to be those who have invested heavily and strategically in employment assistance for unemployed people. For example Denmark spends 1.6% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on active labour market programs and Denmark has reduced unemployment from 9.6% in 1993 to 5.4% in 2004. Similarly, as part of a national plan to reduce social exclusion through better education, services and welfare payments, Ireland reduced unemployment from 11.3% in 1996 to 6% in 2004. Australia spends just 0.5% of GDP on such employment programs 164

Addressing what the OECD describes as the ‘polarisation’ of work and opportunities, Australia requires a broader response than income support and associated programs alone. Education and services have made the key difference in countries such as Ireland and Denmark. A social inclusion plan that links these different solutions to disadvantage to create real opportunities has been started in 22 out of 30 OECD countries. International evidence suggests Australia’s peculiar situation of a strong economy yet entrenched and continuing exclusion could be improved through taking a similar approach.

Australia’s child poverty rate falls in the middle of the international rankings. In 2007, UNICEF’s report on child poverty in OECD countries revealed that Australia had the 14th highest child poverty rate. As UNICEF argues, it could be improved by raising income support family payments and reducing joblessness among families. 165

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 50: Child poverty rate (2007)166

25%

20%

15%

10%

0% Australia Denmark (low est) France UK US (highest)

In OECD nations, people in retirement and aged 65 and over generally have lower relative income compared to those under 65. However, Australia stands out as having the lowest relative income of older people in the OECD and in 2000 Australia had the 6th highest poverty rate for older people in the OECD.167 Major reasons for this are that our age pensions are set at a low flat rate ($263 per week for a single pensioner in June 2007) while many other OECD countries pay a proportion of their previous wage, and superannuation in Australia has only become available to a majority of workers in the last decade or so.

FIGURE 51: Relative income of older people (2000) 168

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Australia (low est) US Canada France UK Mexico (highest)

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Fair Work Work provides Australians with fairer chances in life – FAIR WORK chances not just for an adequate and secure income Key chapter points (including work benefits such as superannuation) but for further learning and strengthening of social links and Low wage earners have experienced a slower rate of support. Fair work can provide Australians with a feeling increase in earnings, less hours of connection with others including value and reward for and more contract and part time their individual efforts and joint achievements. The work than high wage workers. importance of these non-monetary values of work is Australia has relatively good seen in increased rates of depression and social minimum wages compared to other isolation of unemployed Australians compared to those OECD nations but relatively poor rates of workforce participation in work. among disadvantaged workers such as older Australians, mothers A person’s chances of work and security of work is and people with disabilities. Industrial relations changes leave directly linked to education levels, with better educated these groups particularly workers having significantly more job security and vulnerable to further competition higher income, as detailed in the section on Fair and job insecurity. Education.

In 2005, Australia had an official unemployment rate of 5%, lower than the OECD average, as seen in Figure 52.169 Overall Australia had the 10th highest workforce participation rate in the OECD – the highest being Iceland, Norway and Sweden and the lowest being Turkey, Italy and Belgium. Out of the English speaking nations, Australia’s participation rate was only slightly higher than the UK – the US, Canada and New Zealand all had significantly higher rates.170

FIGURE 52: Unemployment rates (2005) 171

20% 18%

16% 14%

12% 10% 8%

6% 4% 2% 0% Australia Iceland Ireland UK US France Poland (low est) (highest)

Good overall employment figures mask relatively poor performance on increasing employment for disadvantaged Australians (see Figure 55) although Australia had the 2nd highest participation rates in the OECD for young people aged 15-24 years old (this may reflect the relatively higher numbers of young people not completing school).172 See Fair Education.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 FIGURE 55: Australia’s workforce participation rates, selected groups (2005)173 OECD Rank for workforce Population group participation rate Participation rates for males 25 to 54 years 6th lowest Participation rates for women 25 to 44 years 8th lowest Older men and women aged 55 to 64 years 13th

Employer discrimination may explain part of the low participation rates for some groups - in July 2006 29% of people unemployed and aged over 45 years reported they were ‘considered too old by employers’. 174

Australia has a relatively high rate of part time work.For example it has the second largest proportion of all work as part time work for women (40%) with the Netherlands being highest (60%).175 Many of these workers need or want more hours of work per week. In the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics survey 1.8 million Australians said that they needed a job or more hours (see Figure 56). 176

FIGURE 56: Underemployed and unemployed people (2006) 177

1,200,000 977,300 1,000,000

800,000

600,000 321,700 465,000 400,000

200,000

0 People usually working few People unemployed People not working or on hours per week unemployment payments

Temporary jobs can trap workers in employment and earnings insecurity, and temporary jobs are usually not a voluntary choice. The OECD notes: ‘Access to non- wage benefits, which represent an (increasingly) important part of job quality, also tends to be lower than for workers under permanent contracts. This is particularly the case in countries where fringe benefits are not provided by employers on a universal basis, such as Australia, Canada and the United States.’178

On the other hand, skilled full time Australian male workers are more likely to face very long hours of work (50 hours or more each week) – 22% of men worked these hours in 1985 but in 2005 this had risen to 30%.179

Australia’s history of collective bargaining for wages and conditions has led to relatively high minimum wages. Although our level of minimum wages is relatively high, the proportion of Australian workers on low pay (defined here as less than 67% of the median or ‘middle’ fulltime wage) is about average among the OECD countries

Australia Fair Report – 2007 (see Figure 57)180. This may reflect the fact that a large number of Australian workers (including many young people employed on ‘youth rates’) are actually paid less than the minimum hourly wage.

Figure 57: International comparisons of minimum wages and the proportion of workers who are low paid (Minimum wages and low pay in the OECD 2000-03)181 Incidence of low pay 30

25 KOR HUN USA UK CAN

POL 20

NLD GRC 15 ESP JPN AUS IRL NZL FRA BEL

10 PRT

5 20 30 40 50 60 70 Minimumwage as a percentage of median wage

Note: Incidence of low pay (percentage of full time employees on less than 2/3 of median wages) is on the vertical axis; Minimum wage as a percentage of median wage is on the horizontal axis.

Australian minimum wages have fallen in real terms over the long term. Recent increases have only restored their real value to levels attained 20 years ago (see Figure 58).182

Figure 58: Real weekly minimum wages (A$) (2006)183

Real minimum wage, Australia ($A2006 per week)

550

500

450

400

85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 4- 6- 8- 0- 2- 4- 6- 8- 0- 2- 4- 6- 98 98 98 99 99 99 99 99 00 00 00 00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Australia Fair Report – 2007 A study by RMIT and the University of South Australia reveals some trends in low paid insecure work including:  80% of the 2.5 million jobs created in Australia since the 1980s have been paid less than $600 per week (in 2000 values)  48% of net new jobs paid less than $15,600 a year  10% of services provided by community organisations providing support to people in poverty target workers. 184

In relation to gender equity at work, the OECD notes that the high incidence of part time work among women (about three times greater than among men) is a contributory factor to the lower professional attainment of women in terms of salary and career position.185

Australia and the USA are the only nations in the OECD not to offer paid maternity leave and along with the US and Denmark the only nation not to offer leave to care for sick children.186

Australia Fair Report – 2007 Endnotes

1 OECD Economic Outlook: November 2006 No. 80 - Preliminary Edition 2 OECD Economic Outlook: November 2006 No. 80 - Preliminary Edition 3 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006, p 295 4 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006, p 295 5 International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2007 6 OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2005, p. 59. 7 International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2007 8 OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2005, p. 59. 9 OECD Education at a Glance 2006, p 28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/207238520880 10 OECD, Education at a Glance 2006, p. 194 & 207, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/208411713807. 11 OECD Education at a Glance 2006, p 28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/207238520880 12OECD, Education at a Glance 2006, p. 194 & 207, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/208411713807. 13 OECD, Factbook 2007, p 111 as viewed on http://caliban.sourceoecd.org/vl=4126362/cl=16/nw=1/rpsv/factbook/05-01-05.htm 14 OECD, Factbook 2007, p 111 as viewed on http://caliban.sourceoecd.org/vl=4126362/cl=16/nw=1/rpsv/factbook/05-01-05.htm 15 OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2006, p 89. 16 World Health Organisation (WHO) 2006, Oral Health Country / Area Profile Programme. 17 OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2006, p 89. 18 World Health Organisation (WHO) 2006, Oral Health Country / Area Profile Programme. 19 OECD 2006, OECD Employment Outlook 2006, p 152, Chart 2.A2.2. 20 Demographia, 3rd Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey:2007, Ratings for Major Urban Markets, p 8. 21 OECD 2006, OECD Employment Outlook 2006, p 152, Chart 2.A2.2. 22 Demographia, 3rd Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey:2007, Ratings for Major Urban Markets, p 8. 23 Statistics New Zealand, 2004, New Zealand Life Tables 2000-2002, p 12, Wellington. Trovato F. Aboriginal mortality in Canada, the United States and New Zealand. Journal of Biosocial Science 2001;33(1):67-86. OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2006 p 89. 24 Statistics New Zealand, 2004, New Zealand Life Tables 2000-2002, p 12, Wellington. Trovato F. Aboriginal mortality in Canada, the United States and New Zealand. Journal of Biosocial Science 2001;33(1):67-86. OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2006 p 89. 25 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 24 26 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 39. 27 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 24 28 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 39. 29 OECD 2006, OECD Employment Outlook, Paris www.oecd.org/els/employmentoutlook/EmO2006) 30 Dawkins (2000) The Labour Market, quoted in Reserve Bank, The Australian Economy in the 1990s; ABS, Consumer Price Index; Australia Fair Pay Commission 2006, Wage Setting Decision. 31 OECD 2006, OECD Employment Outlook, Paris www.oecd.org/els/employmentoutlook/EmO2006) 32 OECD 2006, OECD Employment Outlook, Paris www.oecd.org/els/employmentoutlook/EmO2006) 33 ABS 2007, Measures of underutilised labour. Discouraged workers plus underemployed workers, as a percentage of the labour force plus discouraged workers. ABS 34 OECD 2007 Economic Outlook; OECD Statistics. 35 Includes effects from introduction of the GST.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 36 Includes State Government Budgets. 37 DEWR 2007, Labour market and related payments. These statistics are more reliable than the ABS data on long term unemployment, which removes people from the count if they have had as little as a week’s casual work during the past year. 38 Social Policy Research Centre 2007, Poverty in Australia; Sensitivity Analysis and Trends. 39 In April 2007 it was $268 per week. 40 Social Policy Research Centre 2007, Poverty in Australia; Sensitivity Analysis and Trends. 41 Social Policy Research Centre 2007, Poverty in Australia; Sensitivity Analysis and Trends. 42 Social Policy Research Centre 2007, Poverty in Australia; Sensitivity Analysis and Trends. 43 Social Policy Research Centre 2007, Poverty in Australia; Sensitivity Analysis and Trends. 44 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006, p 295 45 Robert Putnam, Note for discussion, Meeting of OECD Education Ministers, 18-19 March 2004: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/37/55/30671102.doc .

46 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia’s Welfare 2005, p. 47.

47 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Aspects of Social Capital, 2006, p.22.

48 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Aspects of Social Capital, 2006, p.24.

49 NATSEM & The Smith Family, Financial disadvantage in Australia, 2001.

50 Professor Tony Vinson 2007, Dropping off the edge: The distribution of disadvantage in Australia. Catholic Social Services Australia and Jesuit Social Services. 51 Tom Calma, Race Discrimination Commissioner, Speech at a national symposium Responding to Cronulla: Rethinking Multiculturalism, Brisbane, 21 February 2006. 52 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Measures of Australia’s Progress 2006 Reissue, 2006, p. 38. 53 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Injury deaths, Australia 2003–04, 2007, p. vii. 54 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australian health inequalities: Trends in male mortality by broad occupational group, Issue 25 March 2005, p. 10. 55 ABS 1996 Women’s Safety Australia, p. 4. 56 ABS 2006, Personal Safety Survey 2005, p. 5. 57 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australian Social Trends 2006, p. 102. 58 OECD, Education at a Glance 2006, p. 194 & 207. 59 OECD, Education at a Glance 2006, p. 194 & 207. 60 OECD, Economic Surveys – Australia 2006, p. 57 61 OECD Education at a Glance 2006, p 28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/207238520880 62 OECD, Education at a Glance 2006, p. 31. 63 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006. The measurement used is the percentage of people aged 16-65 scoring in the range called “Level 1” in the International Adult Literacy Survey, in the latest available data 1994-2003. 64 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006. The measurement used is the percentage of people aged 16-65 scoring in the range called “Level 1” in the International Adult Literacy Survey, in the latest available data 1994-2003. 65 UNESCO Institute for Statistics: http://www.uis.unesco.org/profiles/EN/EDU/360.html 66 UNESCO Institute for Statistics: Data Tables. 67 See OECD, PF11: Enrolment in day-care and pre-schools, www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/13/37864698.pdf and AIHW www.aihw.gov.au/publications/phe/apoac/apoac-c07.pdf

Australia Fair Report – 2007 68 OECD, Education at a Glance 2006, p. 77. 69 Barry McGaw, University of Melbourne Education Research Institute Director, Education and Social Cohesion, 16 May 2006, p. 27. 70 Barry McGaw, University of Melbourne Education Research Institute Director, Education and Social Cohesion, 16 May 2006, p. 27. 71 OECD, Employment Outlook 2006, p.138 72 OECD, Employment Outlook 2006, p. 139 & http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/183278352480 73 Ben Bardon, General Manager Central West Group Apprentices, Paper prepared for ACOSS Congress, November 2006. 74 Bureau of Rural Science, Fishery Status Reports 2005 – Status of Fish Stocks Managed by the Australian Government, 2007, p. 1. 75 Climate Project/Australian Conservation Foundation, Australia’s Inconvenient Truth – An overview of climate trends and projected impacts of climate change in Australia, 2006. 76 United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2006, p. 161. 77 OECD, Factbook 2007, as viewed on http://caliban.sourceoecd.org/vl=4126362/cl=16/nw=1/rpsv/factbook/05-01-05.htm 78 OECD, Environment at a Glance – OECD, Key Environmental Indicators, p. 15. 79 WWF Australia, Priorities for a Living Australia - Federal policy proposals to tackle dangerous climate change and build environmental resilience, February 2007, p. 8. 80 OECD, Environment at a Glance – OECD, Environmental Indicators, p. 99-100. 81 OECD, Environment at a Glance – OECD, Environmental Indicators, p. 33. 82 OECD, Environment at a Glance – OECD, Key Environmental Indicators, p. 21. 83 OECD, Environment at a Glance – OECD, Key Environmental Indicators, p. 67. 84 OECD, Economic Surveys – Australia, p. 112. 85 OECD, Factbook 2007, p 165 as viewed on http://oberon.sourceoecd.org/vl=1910535/cl=15/nw=1/rpsv/factbook/08-01-01.htm 86 OECD, Environment at a Glance – OECD, Key Environmental Indicators, p. 82. 87 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia’s Health 2006, p. 154. 88 OECD 2006, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2006, p 89. 89 OECD 2006, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2006, p 89. 90 OECD, Economic Surveys – Australia 2006, p. 15. 91 OECD, Health Data 2006 – How Does Australia Compare? p. 2. 92 OECD, Health Data 2006 – How Does Australia Compare? p. 1-2. 93 AIHW, Health Expenditure Australia 2004-5, Canberra 2006, p42 94 Australian Council of Social Service, Fair Dental Care for Low Income Earners, 2006, p. 11. 95 World Health Organisation (WHO) 2006, Oral Health Country / Area Profile Programme. 96 National Rural Health Alliance, Federal Budget Submission 2007-8, 2007, p. 9. 97 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2006, Australia’s Health 2006, pp 325, 329. 98 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2006, Australia’s Health 2006, p. 51. 99 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2006, Australia’s Health 2006, p. 245. 100 OECD, Health Data 2006 – How Does Australia Compare? p. 3. 101 OECD, Health Data 2006 – How Does Australia Compare? p. 3. 102 Judith Yates, AHURI, Paper prepared for the ACOSS Congress, November 2006. 103 Demographia, 3rd Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey:2007 Ratings for Major Urban Markets.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 104 Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Housing Affordability in Australia, Feb 2006. p. viii. 105 Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Housing Affordability in Australia, Feb 2006. p. viii. 106 Demographia, 3rd Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey:2007 Ratings for Major Urban Markets, p. 3. 107 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD Employment Outlook 2006, p. 152 (figures from ‘early 2000s’) 108 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD Economic Outlook 2006 No. 80, November 2006, p.210 109 Demographia, 3rd Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey:2007 Ratings for Major Urban Markets, p 1. 110 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Homeless Children in SAAP 2004-5, Bulletin Issue 48, August 2006 p. 3-4. 111 Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, AHURI Research and Policy Bulletin, Issue 73, June 2006. 112 Australian Federation of Homelessness Organisations, Factsheets, 2006. 113 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Public rental housing 2005–06: Commonwealth State Housing Agreement national data reports, p. viii-ix. 114 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD Employment Outlook 2006, p. 152 figures from ‘early 2000s’. 115 Prof. Terry Burke, ‘Australian Rental in Context’, Global Tenant: International Union of Tenants Quarterly Magazine, January 2007, p. 5. 116 Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Housing Affordability, Occupation and Location in Australian Cities and Regions, AHURI Final Report No. 97 February 2006, pxi. 117 United Nations Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, Miloon Kothari, Mission to Australia 31 July – 15 August 2006 Preliminary observations, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 15 August 2006, p. 4-5. 118 Productivity Commission, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage 2007, p. 50. 119 Combined Aboriginal Organisations of the Northern Territory, A proposed Emergency Response and Development Plan to protect Aboriginal children in the Northern Territory, available at www.acoss.org.au 120 Productivity Commission, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage 2005, p. 7.18. 121 These figures are for gross weekly equivalised household income. Productivity Commission, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage, 2007, p. 17. 122 Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Social Justice Report 2005, p. 12. 123 Statistics New Zealand. New Zealand Life Tables 2000-2002. Wellington: Statistics New Zealand 2004 and Trovato F. Aboriginal mortality in Canada, the United States and New Zealand. Journal of Biosocial Science 2001;33(1):67-86. 124 UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Ensuring the Rights of Indigenous Children, October 2003, p. 12. 125 Productivity Commission, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage 2007, p. 23. 126 National Human Rights Network of the National Association of Community Legal Centres, Australian Non-governmental Organisations’ Submission to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, January 2005, p. 26. 127 National Human Rights Network of the National Association of Community Legal Centres, Australian Non-governmental Organisations’ Submission to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, January 2005, p. 26. 128 HREOC, Social Justice Report 2005, p. 91-92.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 129 Human Rights Council 2006, Report of the Special Rapporteur, Miloon Kothari, on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, p 23. 130 OECD, Sure Start II, p. 273. 131 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia’s Welfare 2005, p. 205. 132 HREOC, A last resort? National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention, 2004, p. 2. 133 HREOC, A last resort? National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention, 2004. 134 HREOC, Summary of Observations following the Inspection of Mainland Immigration Detention Facilities, January 2007. 135 Amnesty International, The impact of indefinite detention: the case to change Australia’s mandatory detention regime, 2005. 136 Amnesty International, The impact of indefinite detention: the case to change Australia’s mandatory detention regime, 2005. 137 HREOC 2007, Same-Sex: Same Entitlements. National Inquiry into Discrimination against People in Same-Sex Relationships: Financial and Work-Related Entitlements and Benefits. 138 Amnesty International, Amnesty International Report 2006, p. 61. 139 National Human Rights Network of the National Association of Community Legal Centres, Australian Non-governmental Organisations’ Submission to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, January 2005, p. 41-42. 140 Combined Community Legal Centres, Submission to the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism for Australia: study on human rights compliance while countering terrorism, March 27 2006, p.33. 141 Combined Community Legal Centres, Submission to the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism for Australia: study on human rights compliance while countering terrorism, March 27 2006, p.33. 142 Federation of Ethnic Community Councils of Australia, Position Paper: Proposed Changes to Australian Citizenship, 2006. 143 SANE, Media Release, Tuesday 30 January 2007. 144 Australian Council of Social Service, Australian Community Sector Survey 2007, p. 2. 145 Australian Council of Social Service, Australian Community Sector Survey 2007, p. 3. 146 Allen Consulting Group, Report to Community Care Coalition, The Future of Community Care, March 2007, page vii. 147 Allen Consulting Group, Report to Community Care Coalition, The Future of Community Care, March 2007, page vii. 148 Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services 2007, p. 12.39 149 ACOSS 2006, Fair Start: 10 point plan for early childhood education and care on www.acoss.org.au 150 Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services 2007, p. 14.12. 151 Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services 2007, p. 14.12. 152 Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services 2007, p. 14.47 153 OECD, Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care: Early Childhood Education and Care, 2006, p. 272. 154 Social Policy Research Centre 2007, Poverty in Australia; Sensitivity Analysis and Trends 155 Melbourne Institute, Poverty Lines, 2005 (head in workforce) Roy Morgan Research, Perceptions of an acceptable standard of living in Australia (median responses), 2005. 156 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 54-55. 157 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 24 158 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 24 159 Anglicare Australia, State of the Family 2006, p. 22.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 160 OECD, Economic Surveys – Australia 2006, p. 134. 161 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 38. 162 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 39. 163 OECD, Society at a Glance – OECD, Social Indicators 2005, p. 32. 164 Australian Council of Social Service, Welfare to Work – effects and solutions, July 2006, p. 4. 165 UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, An Overview of Child Well-Being in Rich Countries, 2007, p. 6. 166 UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, An Overview of Child Well-Being in Rich Countries, 2007, p. 6. 167 OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2005, p. 59 168 OECD, Society at a Glance – Social Indicators 2005, p. 59. 169 OECD, Employment Outlook 2006, p. 37. 170 OECD, Employment Outlook 2006, p. 37. 171 OECD, Employment Outlook 2006, p. 37. 172 Productivity Commission, Workforce Participation Rates – How does Australia compare?, p. x. 173 Productivity Commission, Workforce Participation Rates – How does Australia compare?, p. x. 174 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Job Search Experience, July 2006, p. 3. 175 OECD, Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care: Early Childhood Education and Care, 2006, p. 27 176 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Barriers and Incentives to Labour Force Participation, February 2006, as accessed on http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Lookup/6239.0Main+Features1Aug%202004%20to%20 Jun%202005?OpenDocument 177 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Barriers and Incentives to Labour Force Participation, February 2006, as accessed on http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Lookup/6239.0Main+Features1Aug%202004%20to%20 Jun%202005?OpenDocument 178 OECD, Employment Outlook 2006, p. 170. 179 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australian Social Trends 2006, p. 127. 180 OECD 2005, Employment Outlook, supplementary data 181 OECD 2005, Employment Outlook, supplementary data 182 Dawkins (2000) The labour market, in Reserve Bank, The Australian economy in the 1990s; ABS, Consumer Price Index; Australian Fair Pay Commission 2006, Wage setting decision. 183 Dawkins (2000) The labour market, in Reserve Bank, The Australian economy in the 1990s; ABS, Consumer Price Index; Australian Fair Pay Commission 2006, Wage setting decision. 184 Anglicare Australia, State of the Family 2006, p. 39. 185 OECD, Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care: Early Childhood Education and Care, 2006, p. 27. 186 OECD, Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care: Early Childhood Education and Care, 2006, p. 24.

Australia Fair Report – 2007 57

Australia Fair Report – 2007