DROPPING OFF THE EDGE: THE DISTRIBUTION OF DISADVANTAGE IN AUSTRALIA

Extreme social disadvantage in Australia is real and it's measurable. Its endemic to a small number of locations in this country, and it can be fixed, according to major new research to be released on Wednesday.

Dropping off the Edge: the distribution of disadvantage in Australia is the most comprehensive national study of its kind. The report, which is a joint project with Jesuit Social Services and Catholic Social Services Australia, is the third in a series of reports on the issue, written by researcher, Professor Tony Vinson, from the University of Sydney.

The previous two reports (1999, 2004) mapped social disadvantage in New South Wales and Victoria. This latest report provides a very clear picture of areas of entrenched disadvantage nationally. It also shows how and where public policy can be used to overcome these long term problems.

The report finds that just 1.7 per cent of postcodes and communities across Australia account for more than seven times their share of top rank positions on the major factors that cause intergenerational poverty.

"Our findings demand recognition of a common pattern associated with inadequate education and training - unemployment, low income, poor health and ‘making ends meet' by criminal means, resulting in high rates of convictions and imprisonment. Where these characteristics are concentrated there, too, we find high levels of confirmed child maltreatment," said Professor Tony Vinson, author of the research.

"Just like the challenge of Indigenous disadvantage, the alienation of whole communities within mainstream Australian society simply cannot be tolerated, especially in times of such obvious economic growth and prosperity. We need targeted, coordinated action now from Federal and State governments, before these communities fall off the edge," said Fr Peter Norden, Associate Director of Jesuit Social Services.

"The problem is of a scale that can be treated with the right policies targeted to the right places. Addressing pockets of disadvantage is not only good social policy, its good economic policy," said Frank Quinlan, Executive Director of Catholic Social Services Australia.

Maps and more information are available at Australian Disadvantage . Following is a summary of the report.

26 February 2007

CONTACT

JUDITH TOKLEY
Public Affairs Manager, Catholic Social Services Australia
02 6285 1366 / 0408 824 306

FATHER PETER NORDEN SJ AO
Project Manager and Associate Director, Jesuit Social Services

PROFESSOR TONY VINSON
Author, Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney

SUMMARY

Dropping off the Edge: the distribution of disadvantage in Australia

A report by Professor Tony Vinson for Jesuit Social Services and Catholic Social Services Australia

Dropping off the edge - a major new study mapping levels of social disadvantage right across Australia - has found that despite our nation's recent strong economic growth, some communities remain caught in a spiral of low school attainment, high unemployment, poor health, high imprisonment rates and child abuse.

The report, carried out by Professor Tony Vinson for Jesuit Social Services and Catholic Social Services Australia, finds that pockets of concentrated and severe social disadvantage have become entrenched across rural and remote as well as suburban Australia.

It finds that just 1.7 percent of postcodes and communities across Australia account 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.

The report estimates that in Victoria, where adequate surveys have been conducted, nearly one-third (33.1%) of all communities suffer from ‘low social cohesion' - where inadequate levels of community reciprocity, trust and resources make it more difficult for individuals and families to overcome the individual and family problems that lead to poverty.

The report highlights the particularly strong link between intergenerational poverty and low educational attainment. By detaching individuals, families and whole communities from the modern economy in this way, the report argues that disadvantage is holding back the nation's economic potential. Concentrated disadvantage of the kind demonstrated in the report, robs the nation of needed skilled workers, adds to labour shortages and, by inflating welfare expenditure, reduces government expenditure than would otherwise be necessary.

The report complements other recent studies based on OECD data showing Australia to be (1) near the bottom of OECD rankings on child poverty and (2) experiencing widening gaps in income, wealth and opportunity between the rich and the poor.[1]

The report lists the highest ranking disadvantaged communities in each state, dividing them, where the data allows, into six bands of comparative susceptibility to poverty (see pages 66-86).

And it finds that in every state, a low number of communities are massively over-represented when it comes to the factors that cause or demonstrate disadvantage (see pages 26-47):

In Tasmania: just four of the state's 29 Local Government Areas account for 43.3 percent of the top ranked positions of the key indicators of disadvantage.
In Victoria: just 1.5% of all postcode areas account for 13.7% of the top 40 rankings of indicators of disadvantage - a nine-fold over-representation.
In NSW: just 1.7% percent of all postcodes account for 12.5% of the top 40 rankings of indicators of disadvantage - a more than seven-fold over-representation.
In Queensland: 25 of the state's 459 Statistical Local Areas appear between 6 and 11 times in the top 20 indicators of disadvantage.
In South Australia: just 2 of the state's 114 Statistical Local Areas (1.8%) account for 10.3% of the top 12 positions across 23 indicators of disadvantage - an over-representation of 5.7 times.
In Western Australia: just 2 of the state's 142 Local Government Areas (1.4%) accounted for 7.8% percent of the top 14 positions across 21 indicators of disadvantage - an over-representation of 5.6 times.
In the ACT: just two of the territory's 24 postcode areas account for 26% of top-five positions across 23 indicators of disadvantage.
In the NT: the Darwin Region is the most generally disadvantaged locality, although all regions feature prominently in four of the eleven indicators of disadvantage.
Dropping off the edge concludes that this new data, which lists the factors that cause social disadvantage and the places where disadvantage is most acute, offers hope that disadvantage can in fact be reduced. Making inroads into disadvantage is possible if we have the right level of will joined to the correct programs targeted to the right locations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Policy development should be targeted to the communities suffering the greatest disadvantage. Some suggestions include:

Government Planning and Funding

Integrated planning between government departments and between all levels of government to address the compounding effects of disadvantage experienced in identified areas.

The establishment of flexible funding pools, contributed to by all levels of government, to support innovative local projects which address issues of locational disadvantage.

Shaping of broader policy measures, especially in education, to meet the needs of communities experiencing a marked concentration of social disadvantage.

Health

Concentrating on the early years of life, including post-natal outreach services, parenting support programs, childhood diagnostic services and adolescent health services.

Education and Training

Aiming to raise educational attainment by improving early education programs, pre-school attendance, improving primary schools and provide financial incentives to attract experienced and successful teachers to the most disadvantaged schools.
Guaranteeing three and four year old children living in areas that fall within the 10 per cent most disadvantaged localities in each state/territory 18 hours per week of free preschool to support a good start to formal education.

Support for projects which combine personal support, attention to educational deficits and skills development for disengaged young people.
Community Strengthening

Building local community cohesion alongside tangible measures including training and work placement.

Creating in selected localities of Commonwealth and State/Territory funded community strengthening projects of appropriate duration which exemplify ‘best practice'.
Transport

Improving transport options to enable people to travel to jobs and access vital education, health and human services. This applies to rural as well as urban areas.
Housing

Authorities administering to socially disadvantaged neighbourhoods have a particular responsibility to attract and support the contributions of other government and non government agencies.

Suppliers of water, electricity and gas might use this report to deal more equitably with the default and delays in the payment of fees.

Prisons

An ever increasing number of prisoners come from a relatively small number of neighbourhoods. The correctional arm of governments should monitor the social impacts of its own operation and synchronise its endeavours with other Government portfolios.

Data Collection

Establishing an Australia-wide uniform social data system to illuminate the spatial distribution of social disadvantage.

Improving inter-governmental co-ordination in the collection and policy application of social data.

Based on overseas experience, the report emphasises that all place-based policies to reduce social disadvantage must be given long-term (at least 7 to 8-year) timetables for success, not the short (1 to 3-year) time lines they often receive.

The report calls for more Commonwealth-led initiatives to reduce disadvantage, starting in 10 areas of high national priority in NSW, Vic, Qld, Tas, the ACT(see page 102):

State/Territory: Priority areas for effective intervention

NSW: Windale, Bowraville-Kempsey

Victoria: Rosebud, Braybrook

Queensland: Mt Morgan, Woodbridge

SA: Programs in place - Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands, Onkaparinga, North Western, Port Augusta, Salisbury, Murray Bridge

WA: Programs in place - East Kimberley, Kwinana, Lower Great Southern, Girrawheen/Koondoola/Balgra/Mirrabooka, Armadale, West Pilbara

Tasmania: Southern Midlands, Break O'Day

ACT: Narrabundah, Causeway


The report concludes with an appendix of computer-generated maps illustrating the distribution of disadvantage across all states and a number of capital cities.

26 February 2007


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] (1) UNICEF, An overview of child well-being in rich countries, February 2007; (2) A B Atkinson and A Leigh, The distribution of top incomes in Australia, ANU, February 2007.

To read the original article from Catholic Social Services, click on:
Catholic Social Services

Government's approach to indigenous affairs too slow

After five years the Council of Australian Governments reports on a study of the delivery of services to Indigenous Australians. The poor social indicators for most indigenous Australians are enough to demonstrate a pressing need for improved services and indigenous involvement in the real economy. Sadly, the phrase "indigenous specific services" has often been another way of saying services of a lesser standard.

To read the full article in The Age, click on:
The Age

US intelligence on Iran proves 'unfounded'

MUCH of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by American spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, according to diplomatic sources in Vienna.

To read the full article in The Age, click on:
The Age

The Government's rhetoric on Iraq has long defied reality

IT IS a measure of the Prime Minister's domestic authority and the ALP's political weakness that, until now, debate about the Iraq war has been successfully quarantined on Howard's terms...War aims and justifications such as the search for WMD, the liberation of Iraq and the promotion of democracy have been quietly dropped.

To read the full article from The Age, click on:
The Age

Hicks 'coming home'

JOHN Howard is bowing to mounting pressure over the David Hicks debacle and is working to bring him home before this year's federal election, highly placed sources have revealed to The Sunday Age.

To read the full article in The Sunday Age, click on:
The Sunday Age

The US has prejudged Hicks' guilt

Malcolm Fraser
February 16, 2007

IN HIS defence of his government's behaviour in having imprisoned David Hicks for five years without trial, the US ambassador was reported in The Age yesterday as saying that Hicks is ideologically ruthless, a fanatic, who would kill Australians and Americans without blinking an eye. The ambassador went on to argue that, because of the war on terror, it was fair enough to keep Hicks in jail while that war continued. This would mean keeping him in jail forever because, as defined by President George Bush, the war on terror will never end. It is also making a total mockery of the trial process.

To read the full article from The Age, click on:
The Age

US gets military base in Western Australia

Brendan Nicholson
February 15, 2007

AUSTRALIA'S close defence alliance with the United States is to be further entrenched with the building of a new US military communications base at Geraldton in Western Australia. The Age has learned that the US is to build the base, which follows three years of secret negotiations with Canberra. The base will provide a crucial link for a new network of military satellites that will help America's ability to fight wars in the Middle East and Asia.

To read the full article from The Age, click on:
The Age

Peace Is Possible in Papua If ...

Peace is possible in Indonesia's troubled eastern province of Papua, formerly known as Irian Jaya. But, according to a recently published East-West Center Washington Policy Studies, getting there will entail journeying down a different road than that recently traveled in the successful search for peace in Aceh, another unsettled Indonesian province.

To read the full 101 page report from the East West Center, click on
East West Center

Too complex for Dubbya

Unfortunately for the rest of the world, Rumsfeld and co never realised the Sunni-Shia division could get so complicated.

To read the full article from the New Stateman, click on:New Statesman

Sunni versus Shia

The clash between Sunni and Shia Muslims is the greatest cause of strife across the Arab world. Here - as part of our special issue on Islam - Zaki Chehab explains the deep-lying roots of the turmoil.

To read the article from the New Stateman, click on:
New Statesman

Politics Knows Nothing About the Reasons of Justice

Louise Arbour, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, has criticised the Afghanistan Parliament for voting for an amnesty on war crimes as being unacceptable. She rejects the idea that the price of peace is to defer justice in Afghanistan, Nepal and Dafur.

To read the English translation in Truthout of the original interview in Le Monde, click on:
Truthout

The Watada Mistrial: Here's What Really Happened

By Bill Simpich
t r u t h o u t | Report

Thursday 08 February 2007

First Lt. Ehren Watada knew exactly what his case was about - and that scared the judge.

There was absolutely no reason to stop the Watada trial.

The judge's claim that Lt. Watada did not fully understand a document he signed admitting to elements of the charges is completely untrue (see Melanthia Mitchell, AP, 2/8/07).

The military seized on that claim and complimented the judge for "protecting the rights of the accused" in granting the mistrial.

Here's what really happened.

Lt. Watada repeatedly told the judge on Monday and Tuesday morning, before the trial began, that he agreed with the 12-page "stipulation of facts" that was provided to the panel of seven officers as evidence of most of the key events in this case. The lieutenant reminded the judge in every response that he continued to believe that his orders to go to Iraq were illegal.

I was there, with a roomful of media, military and civilian observers. We all saw the judge review the document at length and offer a number of suggested factual corrections. (Also see "Watada Lawyer: Double Jeopardy Will Be Argued If Second Trial Proceeds.")

The judge also asked Lt. Watada if he felt "compelled" or "coerced" in his decision to not board the plane to Iraq. The lieutenant assured him that it was an intentional act and that his failure to board the plane was not due to any fear for his personal safety, while carefully reasserting his belief that he had no duty to obey an illegal order.

The judge reminded him that he had already ruled that the order was legal. Lt. Watada responded that he understood what the judge was saying, and then repeated his belief once more.

The stipulation specifically stated that Lt. Watada did not waive any legal defenses not addressed in the document.

The purpose of this stipulation was to drop two charges against Lt. Watada (sparing him exposure to two additional years in prison) in exchange for a written agreement that most of the facts would be admitted into evidence, and thereby evaporate any purported reason for subpoenaing journalists to testify against the lieutenant at the trial.

The document was prepared by the government. When construing a document, it is interpreted in favor of the person who did not prepare it.

It was signed by all parties over a week ago. This was not a last-minute task.

The judge was satisfied. The stipulation was accepted by the court and distributed to the panel Tuesday morning.

The panel proceeded to hear the entire prosecution case on Tuesday: the 12-page written stipulation, two videos that were also part of the stipulation, and three prosecution witnesses that appeared to aid Lt. Watada's theory of the case.

The judge raised concerns about the document on Wednesday morning, moments before Lt. Watada was set to take the witness stand.

The judge had just received a new proposed legal instruction from Seitz. Since the judge had recently ruled that the order given to Lt. Watada to deploy to Iraq was "legal," Seitz took the logical next step. Entitled "Reasonable Mistake of Fact/Law," his new instruction was designed to inform the panel that even if Lt. Watada were "mistaken" in his belief that the order was illegal, a defense to the "missing movement" charge would be viable if the panel made a finding that Lt. Watada's belief that the order was illegal was "reasonable."

Shaken by this instruction, the judge tried to claim that Seitz had introduced some error by submitting this instruction, forgetting that the panel had not seen the instruction and hence any error was literally impossible!

Realizing the error of his ways, the judge then tried to speak to Lt. Watada about his understanding of the stipulation without asking Seitz for his permission. After initially warning the judge that he might not let him speak to Lt. Watada, Seitz relented and told the judge that he would let him speak to him over objection.

The judge repeatedly tried to shake Lt. Watada's insistence that he reasonably believed that he was following an illegal order, all the while insisting that he wasn't trying to mislead him in any way. Lt. Watada again respectfully but firmly punctuated his remarks with his state of mind.

Unsuccessful in his apparent effort to derail the defense, the judge then claimed that "I'm not seeing we have a meeting of the minds here," Head said. "And if there is not a meeting of the minds, there's not a contract." (Seattle Times)

At this point, both the defense and the government figuratively "threw their arms around each other" and repeatedly told the judge that they wanted the trial to go forward. Courtroom observers agreed that they had never seen such a thing in their lives.

The Seattle Times reported that "The defense and prosecution teams both believed the agreement did not constitute an admission of guilt. But the judge on Wednesday said the agreement included all the elements required to find Watada guilty. It was more than an agreement, Head said: It was what he termed a "confessional stipulation," with whatever reasons behind the action irrelevant to the question of guilt."

Lt. Watada's attorney, Eric Seitz, said that the stipulation was not an admission of guilt.

"No. Absolutely no way," he said. "Lt. Watada's a smart guy. He knew exactly what he was agreeing to." (Los Angeles Times)

The judge turned to the prosecution and said "I can't unring that bell." But then, in what appeared to be a moment of panic, he suggested to the prosecution that they recall their witnesses. He warned them that he was considering issuing a mistrial. He offered to let them reopen their case if they wanted to. He offered them whatever time they needed to make a decision "thirty minutes, an hour, or more." When the prosecution assured the judge that they only needed thirty minutes, there was a disappointed look on his face.

Apparently the defense was also asked if it would be willing to withdraw the stipulation and let the case proceed on that basis. As the panel had been relying on the stipulation throughout the prosecution case, the defense was not willing to do anything of the sort.

Upon the prosecution's return, they asked for a mistrial. The defendant opposed it. The motion was granted, and a new trial date was set. But now there was a new problem that may make any new trial impossible.

Once the trial commenced, "jeopardy attached." Once jeopardy attaches, a second trial is generally not possible. This is known as "double jeopardy."

Like all maxims, there are exceptions to the rule of double jeopardy. For example, if a verdict cannot be reached by the finder of fact, defendant cannot object to the resulting mistrial. Nor can the defense create error in order to get the defendant off the hook.

But a mistrial caused by judicial or prosecutorial error is another story. Generally, the charges must be dismissed in order to ensure that the authorities are not tempted to commit error in order to obtain a second trial when events are not going their way.

This is what happened here. The prosecution knew that Lt. Watada was not waiving his right to defend himself against the charges. Again, the stipulation specifically stated that no such waiver was being made.

The judge tried to make some mileage by reciting on the record a warning that he had previously given to Lt. Watada that by signing the stipulation, he was admitting that there was sufficient evidence on each element of the "missing movement" offense (for failing to board the plane to Iraq) for the panel to find him guilty.

"Sufficient evidence," however, is a far cry from any kind of admission that there was no evidence to rebut the prosecution's evidence. It may be news to the judge that trials are conducted for defendants who have pleaded "not guilty," not for those who admit guilt. Was the judge considering what kind of trial he was suggesting? A trial where the determination of guilt or innocence by a panel of seven officers was literally meaningless?

Let's close by examining the law on whether Lt. Watada can be forced to endure a second trial despite the double jeopardy doctrine. The latest case on the subject, US v. Eliot, 463 F.3d 858, 864 (9th Cir. 2006), states: "When, as here, a mistrial is ordered over a defendant's objection, retrial is permitted only if there was a "manifest necessity" for a mistrial (a case-by-case determination with a "high" burden). Other factors to look at are whether the trial judge (1) heard the opinions of the parties about the propriety of the mistrial, (2) considered the alternatives to a mistrial and chose the alternative least harmful to a defendant's rights, (3) acted deliberately instead of abruptly, and (4) properly determined that the defendant would benefit from the declaration of mistrial."

A case to look at for guidance is United States v. Rivera, 384 F.3d 49, 56 (3rd Cir. 2004) which states: "Critically, a mistrial must not be declared without prudent consideration of reasonable alternatives. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 26.3 requires that "[b]efore ordering a mistrial, the court must give each defendant and the government an opportunity to comment on the propriety of the order, to state whether that party consents or objects, and to suggest alternatives. Where a District Court sua sponte declares a mistrial in haste, without carefully considering alternatives available to it, it cannot be said to be acting under a manifest necessity. Any subsequent reprosecution under those circumstances is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause."

When you comment that you can't "unring a bell," and then ask the defendant to agree to withdraw a stipulation already seen by the finders of fact for an entire day, you have "consideration" about as "prudent" as a car crash.

Eric Seitz has stated, "My professional opinion is that Lt. Watada cannot be tried again because of the effect of double jeopardy," and will file a motion to dismiss the entire case. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer has reported that John Junker, a University of Washington law professor, agrees that the granting of mistrial over the defendant's objection has opened the door to such a defense.

"The notion is that you can't just stop in the middle and say, 'I don't like the way it's going' and start over," Junker said. "If the defendant objected, it does raise the possibility" of double jeopardy, Junker said. "That would happen in a civilian court, and I presume in a military court. That doctrine comes from the Constitution."

Marjorie Cohn, a professor at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law and a proposed expert witness for the defense, opines: "When the Army judge declared a mistrial over defense objection in 1st Lt. Ehren Watada's court-martial, he probably didn't realize jeopardy attached. Although he faces the possibility of a dishonorable discharge, the judge's grant of a mistrial precludes retrial on the same criminal charges."

Prominent Honolulu defense attorney Howard Luke states, "Was there manifest necessity? That's up to the court to decide...From what I understand, I think not. The case could have been continued."

I wouldn't bet against these four authorities. Any fair-minded review of this case will reveal that the defense was doing far better than anyone had expected; that Lt. Watada had protected his rights at every turn; and that the judge was scared of letting this case go to any factfinder who had any chance of being fully informed of Lt. Watada's belief that the war in Iraq is illegal.


To read the original article from Truthout, click on:Truthout

Human Rights Conference

Tuesday 27 February 9.00 am - 5.30 pm: Freedom, Respect, Equality, Dignity - Human Rights Conference

ANZ Pavilion, Melbourne Arts Centre, St Kilda Road. Overseas speakers include Sir Nigel Rodley (UK), Dr Sima Samar (Afghanistan) and Major Michael Mori (USA). Registration is $120/$60 for Non-Government Organisations per person. Registration closing date 12 February. Further details click on:
Conference

Try Hicks, or free him

The retroactive laws to be invoked by the military commissions are fundamentally flawed and unfair, writes Major Michael Mori.

DAVID Hicks' situation can be drawn to a quick and fair close. If the US believes he violated US federal law, then Australia should demand that the US immediately try Hicks in a US federal court. Otherwise, he should be returned home and not subjected to a tribunal system that the US deems insufficiently fair to try its own citizens.

The retroactivity of the Military Commission Act (MCA) offence of "material support" is extremely important, especially in light of the position of Australian ministers that applying retroactive Australian laws to David Hicks is inappropriate. To permit the US to use its flawed military commissions system to apply retroactive laws to Hicks contravenes the ministers' stated position and is fundamentally unfair.

To read the full article in The Age, click on:
The Age

Bring David Hicks home

David Hicks has languished in detention in Guantanamo Bay for more than 5 years without trial. Other US allies pulled their citizens out, and no Americans are kept there. But the Australian government has done nothing but stand by a judicial process first found to be illegal, and then re-created in much the same unfair form.
Enough is enough - David Hicks should be brought home.

GetUp is conducting a campaign to bring David Hicks home. If you would like to sign their petition, click on:
GetUp

Eager recruit goes on trial for refusing to fight

Tomorrow, Lieutenant Ehren Watada, faces a court martial for refusing to go to Iraq and for making public statements against the war. He is the first officer to be prosecuted for publicly criticising the war — and the first since Vietnam. He could spend four years in jail. His journey from eager recruit to dissenter is a transformation that resonates with a public that has also turned against the war, making Lieutenant Watada, 28, a hero of the anti-war movement.

To read the full article in The Age, click on:
The Age

Crack in nuclear option

NUCLEAR power plants in Australia could suck up 80 per cent more water than conventional power stations, research for MPs conducted by the federal Parliamentary Library has found. This finding comes as the Federal Government is trying to wrest control of the nation's water supply system from the states.

To read the full article in the Sydney Morning Herald, click on:
SMH

Hunger threat for Papua refugees

Thousands of people fleeing a crackdown on Papuan separatists are now facing food shortages. The crisis is hitting refugees in Yamo district, Puncak Jaya regency, Papua, after Indonesian Military and police attacks on Free Papua Movement (FPM) rebels in the area. The Evangelical Church of Indonesia (GIDI) reports that 5,137 people are now facing hunger.

To read the full article in The Jakart Post, click on:
Jakarta Post