31 January 2002

Let’s get real about poverty NATIONAL STATEMENT ON POVERTY

Thirteen major community sector organisations participated today in a forum to move the debate on poverty beyond a narrow focus on poverty lines.

Our experience of people living in poverty convinces us that we need a holistic approach to address disadvantage in Australia today. The solutions will be different from those that may have been satisfactory in the past. Maintaining social connectedness will be critically important.

Both academic research and our experience points to rising inequality in Australian society.

The values that we believe should underpin Australia’s response to poverty are:

 · All people have worth and dignity and have a contribution to make.  · All people need access to the social opportunities and basic goods required to participate fully in everyday life.  · We all have an obligation to ensure that these needs are met.

Poverty is fundamentally about a lack of access to the opportunities most people take for granted – not only food, shelter and income, but also jobs, adequate education, health services, childcare, transport, and safe places for living and recreation.

The purpose of measuring poverty is to inform effective policy responses that incorporate notions of participation, affordability and choice. Policy responses should also consider social exclusion, disadvantage and risk factors.

National goals must be established and targets are required to ensure that the strategies undertaken are effective.

A truly effective solution to the growing divide in Australia today will demand a broad collaborative approach, of all levels of government, and the business and community sectors, not a divisive, ideological debate.

Lin Hatfield Dodds National Director UnitingCare Australia

Megan Mitchell Director ACOSS

Kathy Bell Executive Officer Australian Federation of Homelessness Organisations

Kevin Brennan President Australian National Organisation of the Unemployed

Elizabeth Orr Executive Director, Community Services Baptist Care Australia

Fr Nic Frances Manager Research and Policy Brotherhood of St Laurence

Toby O’Connor National Director Catholic Welfare Australia

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Purpose of the Forum

To develop a shared public statement outlining the community sector’s position on measuring and responding to poverty, and associated policy issues.

Participants in the Forum represent the major national community organisations involved in working with people in poverty.

Background

The forum is an initiative of UnitingCare Australia in response to the current public debate around measuring poverty.

Following the release of the annual Smith Family/NATSEM report on poverty in late 2001, Senator Amanda Vanstone stated that the Government could not accept the figures mentioned in the report (which were based on a half average income). In January 2002 the Centre for Independent Studies published a response to the Smith Family/NATSEM report, raising similar issues to Senator Vanstone, and proposing that a half median poverty line instead be the benchmark.

Most of the ensuing discussion has focused on the relative merits of different statistical definitions of poverty (described as poverty lines). All of these measures are based on income. This approach gives an incomplete picture of the reality of living in poverty. Poverty lines ignore the major causes and consequences of poverty, and therefore are often not well connected to policy responses. Finally, debates over definitional issues give the impression that there is some acceptable level of poverty.

Measuring and responding to poverty

Poverty lines are, and will remain, an important part of debates concerning poverty. Agreement in the public sphere regarding a poverty line would help any debate about poverty to move beyond what constitutes the most accurate form of measurement to the deeper issues around the most appropriate and effective responses to poverty. An agreed poverty line would also encourage discussion about the impact of poverty on Australian society, and about social and economic well-being more generally.

Poverty lines are usually based on financial income. Some examples are:

Type of Poverty Line Poverty Line Percent in Poverty

Henderson $561.88 22.4%

Half Average $416.00 13.0%

Half Median $361.50 8.7%

Data from NATSEM & Smith

Family, Financial Disadvantage in Australia 1990 – 2000, NATSEM, Canberra, 2001 and Melbourne Institute, Poverty Lines June 2001, Melbourne Institute, Melbourne, 2001 for single income couples with two children.

The major problem with poverty lines is what they neglect.

A lack of income is only one aspect of poverty, and one of the simplest to redress. Poverty is fundamentally about a lack of access to the social opportunities most people take for granted – not only food and shelter, but also education, childcare, transport, safe places for children to play.

The purpose of measuring poverty is to inform effective policy responses.

Poverty measures should therefore take account of the major causes of poverty, particularly unemployment, poverty traps (that remove incentives for work), and social factors that can undermine individual resilience and motivation. Poverty measures should contextualise poverty, incorporating notions of participation, affordability and choice. They should also address social exclusion, disadvantage, and risk factors.

Poverty measures should not be used to distract attention from the need to address the reality of poverty. We as a society have an obligation to stand by those living in poverty, to enable them to participate fully in our collective life. Involuntary poverty – particularly sustained poverty – is unacceptable in a country like Australia.

Stigmatising those living in poverty disempowers the weakest and most vulnerable in our community.

Feedback on this page to the NSW Synod Communications Unit at: