Page 3886 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 19 October 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
fact, the poverty-proofing forum at Pilgrim House today was under the auspices of the Community Inclusion Board.
The board has an ambitious work program around issues such as household and personal debt, neighbourhood and belonging, indigenous disadvantage and long-term unemployment. One of the responsibilities of the board outlined in the social plan is to advise on and monitor a poverty-proofing trial based on the Irish model and other experiences. It is important to know that halfway through a program, a process, a strategy—call it what you will—it will be monitored. It is a fine idea to stop halfway and work out whether what you are doing is working or whether, in fact, it is doing more harm than good. For some individuals, that can be the case. As is said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and we need to stop sometimes and have a bit of a look.
It is hoped that the trial will provide a framework for assessing ACT government policies and programs at design and review stages to ensure that government decisions do not act to increase the levels or causes of poverty. It is pleasing to see that the board has already made considerable progress in investigating the complicated and difficult questions in relation to poverty proofing.
The Community Inclusion Board has not only discussed, at a number of meetings, how the poverty-proofing trial should be approached but it also held an earlier consultation workshop in April 2005 with interested representatives from the community sector. To assist in its work on the poverty-proofing trial earlier this year, the board commissioned a consultant, David Pearce, from the Centre for International Economics, to review poverty-proofing processes elsewhere in the world, particularly in relation to the Irish model, and, using this as a basis, to also assist in defining poverty and developing a practical process for poverty proofing. Mr Pearce has provided a report to the Community Inclusion Board which analyses existing poverty-proofing measures around the world, the merits of each approach, and options for the ACT. It provides background information to inform the poverty-proofing trial.
I am pleased to confirm today that the government will implement a poverty-proofing trial, using the Irish model, as part of its mid-point evaluation of Breaking the cycle of homelessness, the ACT homelessness strategy. There are obvious links between homelessness and poverty, and the homelessness strategy sets out a four-year blueprint to respond to the causes and effects of both. That is why the midpoint evaluation of the homelessness strategy is an ideal time to run a poverty-proofing test. It will allow us to recognise now if the directions we are taking in responding to homelessness are the right directions. To find out in 2007, at the end of the strategy cycle, would be too late to make any adjustments to the direction of the strategy.
I am sure we have the support of the opposition for our idea to stop halfway on this particular initiative and work out whether we are doing it right, to make sure that we have not caused cracks to widen, through which people could fall. This poverty-proofing trial will, I am sure, let us know whether or not we are heading in the right direction, whether we need to change direction just a little bit or a lot, or whether what we are doing is causing people more grief and more poverty and therefore we have to stop doing it. Now is the perfect time, midway through it, to stop and audit ourselves. And we are getting the community to do that; we are not doing that ourselves. We got the meeting of community people together today to assist in that process.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .