What do you mean “progressive”?

In researching Michael Cooney, purportedly Andrew Barr’s new Chief of Staff, I came across his work as the Policy Director at Per Capita, a think tank with offices in Sydney and Melbourne.

One of the interesting papers they have developed is their definition of “progressive”. I’ve always considered my political views to be progressive, although I had someone say to me recently that the word “progressive” has been hijacked by activists, changing it’s meaning to something sinister.

I reject that notion totally, and it’s pleasing to discover Per Capita’s paper, which is available here.

In summary, they suggest being progressive means three things:

• One, instinctively looking to the future for inspiration, rather than to the past.
• Two, fundamental values are the progressive values of fairness and community – mateship and the fair go.
• Three, believing that fairness as a value and prosperity as a goal form a virtuous circle, not a tough trade-off.

I like the defintion a lot. It works in closely with what I described during the campaign as “sustainainable prosperity – the idea that prosperity can be sustainable, available and equitable.

Labor-Greens Agreement Signed

The Labor – Greens Agreement signed on Friday signals a number of fundamental changes to the governance of the ACT.

The tone of the document is positive in the main and it will be interesting to see how some of the proposals translate.

One of the most significant is the proposal to develop “oversight institutions as an emerging fourth branch of government”. The role of the Legislative Assembly Committees are to be expanded with the Committees having both a traditional scrutiny role and a new collaboration role with the Executive, engaging on “legislative reform, policy setting and service delivery”. Committees will meet in two modes – Collaborative Meetings and Scrutiny Meetings. The increased engagement of elected representatives across the party spectrum could have very positive outcomes, however the danger is that the responsiveness of government will be slowed by the increased need for meetings and dialogue.

Greens’ MLAs will become Chairs of the following Committees:

* Public Accounts
* Health, Community and Social Services
* Climate Change, Environment and Water
* Select Committee on Ecological Carrying Capacity for the ACT and region

So while the Greens have not become part of the Government by taking on a Ministry, they will have a say in the policy direction of the health and environment areas (given the addition of the collaborative modes of the Committees) and in public governance and probity through the Public Accounts Committee.

There has been criticism of the Greens that they have an “all care and no responsibility” approach and it will be fascinating to watch how they balance their input into policy outcomes with their desire to maintain and strengthen their electoral position in the future.

One other point to highlight is the introduction of Triple Bottom Line reporting. The “People, Planet, Profit” approach to accountability and sustainability will, I assume, attempt to measure social capital, natural capital and fiscal outcomes.

Will we be able to put Triple Bottom Line reporting into practice without it being merely lip service layered with bureaucracy? I’m not convinced anyone yet understands the implications of the approach. There are obvious benefits from understanding the social and environmental impacts of each piece of legislation or policy proposal, but as always, good outcomes are only achieved when lofty ideals are translated into crystal clear realities.

Support for Retirement Village Code of Conduct

Welcome news today from the Chief Minister Jon Stanhope that a re-elected ACT Labor Government will legislate a Code of Conduct for retirement villages in the ACT.

This announcement builds on the work done by ACT Labor MLA Mary Porter in consulting with the community on the needs of residents, owners and operators.

It’s crucial that with our ageing population, the financial and social interests of all those involved are well understood, clearly documented and observed.

The code of conduct will help build a legal platform for the future, and compliments the ACT Labor Government’s strategies for the provision of affordable housing options for older Canberrans.

Since ACT Labor came to Government in 2001, 900 aged care beds have either been delivered, or are under design or construction.

Responding to queries

I recently received a couple of queries from a Canberra Times journalist, asking my views on civil unions, public art funding and the arboretum. Here’s my response:

Civil Unions

I absolutely support the inherent equality within the Civil Unions legislation. I don’t believe we should discriminate on the basis of sexual preference. People in same sex relationships should have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples and I therefore fully support Civil Unions in the ACT.

Public Art Funding

Government has a responsibility to provide not only fundamental services such as health, education, housing and transport, but to also support the nurturing and awareness of art and culture. The funding of public art is one way of achieving this, and by taking art to places where people travel, shop, gather or live, I believe we are enhancing the “civility” of our city.

There will always be people who dislike a particular artwork, or even the concept of spending any funds on public art. But if we responsibly fund public art, I believe we are on the whole enhancing Canberrans’ quality of life.

Arboretum

As I campaign around Canberra, so many people say to me: “Please work to preserve our green spaces; our bush capital. Make sure we don’t become like any other concrete city”. I believe the arboretum helps fulfil this wish.

As with Lake Burley Griffin, our children will not say: “Why did they spend money on that?” They will say: “Thank goodness they had the foresight to create something that makes Canberra an even better place to live”.

Men’s Sheds

The Men’s Sheds movement is really taking off in Australia. Mensheds Australia is a not-for-profit organisation specialising in the needs of men, their health and well being, and their sheds!

Deputy PM Julia Gillard recently spoke about Men’s Sheds at the launch of the Centre for Social Impact at the Uni of NSW. When discussing innovative approaches to social inclusion in local communities, she said:

“…I could mention the Men’s Sheds movement, which is spreading rapidly across Australia. Many people will still laugh at the idea of men and their sheds being a public policy objective. But the reality is that the situation of many men, over 50, with skills which are not properly valued by the labour market and limited opportunities for recreation that they really enjoy, has become a serious issue for health budgets and for workforce participation rates.

For what seem to be very small outlays, Men’s Sheds provide a focus for work that uses the skills and knowledge of their members, creates direct community benefits and which, according to the evidence, also achieves many of those other goals associated with social contact, improved health outlook and greater wellbeing.

I’m told that there are now more than 150 Men’s Sheds across Australia, from Salisbury in Adelaide to the Western Plains of NSW, and that they are still spreading fast. That seems to me the kind of social innovation that might initially begin under the radar of government but is highly relevant to our objectives.”

We have a few Men’s Sheds around the region. These include: Lanyon Homestead in Greenway, the Northside Community Centre in Dickson, another one proposed in Richardson plus others in Gunning, Goulburn and Cooma.

They reckon a fully developed Men’s Shed will:

* Be a place for nurturing mateship and creating feelings of belonging
* Have a structured program for advancing men’s health and well being
* Have developed a positive and participative culture among its members
* Meet the needs of its members and their families
* Be supported by members’ families
* Generate sufficient income to be financially independent
* Be well connected to the community
* Be a valuable asset in the community, respected and supported
* Have an appropriate organisation structure
* Have an effective and broadly-based leadership structure
* Have appropriate activities supported by an OH&S program
* Have an appropriate risk management and insurance program
* Have effective partnerships within the community
* Be effective in managing and disseminating information
* Have problem-solving capacity
* Be a place for learning
* Have innovation capacity

With men’s life expectancy in Australia nearly six years lower than that of women, it sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I’m off to my shed!

The Lens of Social Inclusion

With a new Federal Government on the Hill, there are by nature many changes being made to the former Government’s policies. Some dynamic and writ large such as the Apology to the Stolen Generations and industrial relations, some more patient and subtle.

One area that needs ongoing examination is the approach to social inclusion.

Social inclusion is inextricably linked to social exclusion. As Power and Wilson in the UK put it in 2000:

“Social exclusion is about the inability of our society to keep all groups and individuals within reach of what we expect as a society”

There are many barriers to social inclusion such as chronic physical or mental illness or disability, unemployment, homelessness, poor literacy or numeracy, cultural and/or language barriers, poverty, age, access to transport, etc.

The previous Federal Government focused on workforce participation as the key to social inclusion. While this is an important step towards achieving inclusion, it does not recognise that social inclusion is greater than having the financial means to participate. For some Australians, their experience of exclusion stems from a more fundamental level than unemployment.

The most basic human needs are physiological and safety needs, then social needs, that is, a sense of belonging. Therefore, people cannot begin to participate in the socio-economic sphere if those basic physiological and safety needs are not addressed.

The new federal Labor Government recognises the importance of addressing these fundamental needs in addition to promoting workforce participation, to enhance social inclusion. An example is its engagement of a taskforce to address homelessness.

Social inclusion requires a holistic perspective that traverses the landscape of individual experiences within an ever changing political, economic and social context.

Social inclusion is therefore not a single action that Government should take, but rather a lens through which the structures and functions of governance should be viewed, decisions considered, and their impacts on vulnerable people explored. Such a lens encompasses all aspects of policy making from environmental planning, to fiscal policy, health and education.

To have policy makers see issues through the lens of social inclusion is an important step in redressing inequality and reducing disadvantage in our society.

Reaffirmation of ACT Apology to the Stolen Generations

I see Chief Minister Jon Stanhope has moved to reaffirm the ACT Assembly Apology to the Stolen Generations first given in 1997. This is an excellent idea which further cements the national Apology to be delivered on Wednesday.

I believe we have a unique opportunity to send a strong message that we not only stand up against the wrongs of the past that entrenched the social exclusion of so many Indigenous Australians, but that we must now put in place strategies to ensure Indigenous people have the same rights and outcomes as other Australians.

As Yvonne Goolagong Cawley said on News Radio this morning, we need to move to address the 17 year gap in life expectancy as the very first follow on action from the Stolen Generations Apology.

Euthanasia Debate Reignites

I see in the CT this morning the debate on euthanasia has reignited with Senator Bob Brown writing to the PM and Opposition Leader asking for a conscience vote on a bill for the Rights of the Terminally Ill.

No doubt this will fire up a vigorous debate in the community which I strongly encourage.

My position on voluntary euthanasia is simple: it’s about dignity.

I believe, under strict conditions, terminally ill people have the right to choose the time of their passing, to choose to leave their life at peace and with dignity.

My views are driven not just by ideology but by personal experience – both my mum and dad passed away in circumstances where they both suffered and lost their dignity at the end of their lives.

As Civil Liberties Australia puts it:

“CLA supports a person’s rights over his or her mind and body, from birth through death. Competent individuals should have free choice in advance whether they wish to receive treatment, or continuing treatment when no longer competent. A person is free to end his or her own life. These rights should be contained in legislation.”

Notwithstanding my position on the issue of euthanasia, it is entirely at odds with our democratic system of Government that two jurisdictions with self-government and self-determination can be overruled by the Federal Government, simply because of their status as Territories. The Northern Territory’s “Rights of the Terminally Ill” Act was overturned by the Howard Government in 1997. Similarly, the ACT civil unions legislation was quashed twice by the Coalition because it disagreed with its intent and outcomes.

The people who live in the ACT and NT are no different to those that live in any other state where if such a law was passed, it would remain free from intervention from another Government in this country.

It’s time to review the powers of the Commonwealth to intervene in the matters of the Territories and to once and for all, ensure that the people of the ACT and the Northern Territory have the same rights as all else in this country and that the practice of discrimination on the basis of geographic location is forever more a thing of the past.

A Shared Future

Two of my good friends have been in a loving and caring relationship for the past 17 years. They relocated from Melbourne together in the early 90’s and have gone on to prosper in Canberra, which has given them opportunities to grow as people, to develop positive careers and to start their own successful business.

But what if one of them was to be incapacitated or die through illness or accident? What would happen to their way of life? Their super? Their business? Their house? Their car? Their pets?

My friends have done everything legally possible to insure against such an outcome – powers of attorney, explicitly written wills, and yet if it did happen, the surviving partner could be frozen out of their assets and face an uncertain future with potentially no access to superannuation or the outcomes from death and disability insurances.

And why? Because of their sexuality. Because something completely beyond their choosing means our society rejects their partnership, rejects their shared future, rejects the humanity of their relationship. And all because of hundreds of years of prejudice and fear.

Canberrans can change this prejudice. We can change the law to recognise same-sex relationships. We can remove illogical fear from our statutes. And the overwhelming majority of Canberrans want to achieve that. Now.

For our shared future.

Contemporary Issues of Aging

Like most areas in Australia, Canberra has an aging population with multiple challenges for government to ensure we have appropriate programs and facilities in place to support the community now and into the future.

As figures from the Chief Minister’s Department show, the most rapid growth in age groups over the next 25 years will be in the 85 and over age group which is expected to grow more than four times to over 15,000 by 2032, while the number of people in their 70’s is expected to grow to over 23,000.

Given such dramatic demographic changes, there are a range of areas that need close focus, such as recognising value, community integration, support, education, infrastructure, aged health and the right to dignity. We must work strategically and collaboratively to recognise and enact the following principles:

• The right to receive care
• Dignity as a life long right
• Nutrition and infection control as fundamental rights
• Social Inclusion strategies
• Ending the blame game between state and federal governments
• Striking a balance between government funded and privately funded care
• Added community focus – incentives for an increase of not-for-profit aged care centres run by NGOs
• No accommodation bonds
• Career assistance, skills development and appropriate compensation for aged care workers
• Mature age workers as valued members of the workforce
• Incentives to business to increase the numbers of mature age workers in the workplace
• Development of the links between Nursing Home care and Palliative care
• Training and development in palliative care strategies
• Policy setting of appropriate staff-patient ratios
• Euthanasia as a human right
• End of life management policies developed and implemented through community programs
• Transition care beds between hospital and nursing home care
• Additional support programs for carers of frail aged
• Encouragement of life long learning and positive aging