Thursday, January 16, 2014

A21’s 2008 report on public violence is still relevant today


Richard Eckersley and Lynne Reeder

The Prime Minister’s recent remark likening some entertainment precincts to war zones because of alcohol-fuelled violence echoes comments made down the years about the problem. Violence in public places is an international phenomenon, associated in part with the huge growth in what is called the night-time economy. In Britain, this growth has been called the biggest single threat to public order and health and safety.

The idea might have been to create a civilised, European-style nightlife. The reality is something different: as a British commentator noted, ‘Yeah, well, actually it is a real European environment out there, but a bit less like Paris and more like the Somme’.

In 2008 Victoria Police commissioned Australia21 to conduct an expert roundtable and to write a report on violence and public safety as part of the development of a whole-of-government strategy. The participants came from a range of relevant scientific disciplines and State Government departments and agencies with responsibility for policy development and implementation.

There was agreement across all jurisdictions – police, ambulance, hospitals, courts and education – that there had been a pronounced increase in previous years not only in the incidence of violence, but also in its severity. As one participant said, in the past a pub brawl was just a brawl. The worst thing that might have happened was that someone would be swinging a billiard cue around. ‘Now it’s gone beyond that. It’s the king hit, it’s the glassing, the stabbings, the things that you didn’t really see in the past.’

Much, but not all, of this public violence is alcohol- and drug-related, and involves young people as both offenders and victims. The upsurge in public violence is not readily explained. It is possible Australian society has reached a tipping point, where the conjunction of many social changes and developments – short-term and long-term, specific and broad - has produced social conditions conducive to violence.

Explanations include the growth of the night-time economy and a 24/7 lifestyle, involving specific issues such as: industry deregulation and promotion of economic considerations over social goals; the failure of accords between licensees and authorities; and inadequate public transport in entertainment precincts. There had also been a lack of sustained action to address the problem, and a dearth of good research evidence on what works in some key areas.

Broader explanations include changes in poverty and disadvantage, the family and parenting, and communications technology and the media; an individualistic, consumer culture; and young people’s biological and social development, including links between antisocial behaviour and other aspects of young people’s health and wellbeing. Specific factors here include: parental over-protection or neglect; increased social expectations and pressures, on the one hand, and social exclusion and alienation, on the other; a perception of violence as the norm, even fun; a lack of respect and empathy; and a sense of invulnerability and ignorance of human fragility.

When it came to proposing solutions, some participants focused on more immediate, direct interventions to address public violence, others emphasised a broader, social-development perspective. Nevertheless, most, if not all, participants agreed on the need for a multi-dimensional strategy spanning timeframes, social scales and government jurisdictions.

Key responses reflected this wide range of actions, including:
·         Increased policing of randomly selected premises at random times, and more targeted policing of problem premises.
·         Training bar staff in managing all antisocial behaviours, not just drunkenness.
·         Achieving a better mix of regulatory strategies that balance economic and social goals and objectives, combine informal and formal regulation, and can be adapted to suit different localities.
·         Introducing specific programs in schools to enhance the social and emotional wellbeing of students.
·         Broadening the focus of the education system beyond academic achievement and vocational qualifications to make the curriculum more relevant to young people’s lives and passions.
·         Increasing parent education.
·         Addressing violence in the media.  

Actions have been taken since 2008; some have worked to reduce alcohol- and drug-related violence. But as recent events show, the problem remains. Everyone - including parents, young people, education providers, police and government at all levels - has a role to play in addressing public violence. There are no quick fixes; we need to tackle the deeper social issues as well as the problem itself.

Richard Eckersley and Lynne Reeder are directors of Australia21 and the authors of its report, ‘Violence in public places: Explanations and solutions’, commissioned by Victoria Police in 2008. The report is available at:

http://www.australia21.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ASViolenceInPublicPlacesR1.pdf

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Moving on from Australia’s exclusionary approach to citizenship


Below are the biographical note, and abstract and introductory paragraphs of the contribution by Professor Kim Rubinstein and Jacqueline Field to the Australia21 publication Refugees and asylum seekers: finding a better way.

Who we are not is not who we are: Moving on from Australia’s exclusionary approach to citizenship
Kim Rubinstein and Jacqueline Field

Kim Rubinstein is Professor and Director of the Centre for International and Public Law at the Australian National University. She is an acknowledged expert on citizenship law. Jacqueline Field has been working with Professor Rubinstein on the Australian Research Council project: Small Mercies, Big Futures (ARC Linkage LP100200596) since 2012. She is currently based in Singapore, with an NGO that advocates migrant workers’ rights.

Abstract

Contemporary Governments’ treatment of asylum seekers and refugees is symptomatic of an enduring focus on excluding outsiders in immigration and citizenship policy. Australia’s constitutional history illustrates that the process of defining the nation itself was grounded ina social and political climate of racism and exclusion. It is significant that in the years since Federation, immigration and citizenship legislation in Australia has largely been based on the Commonwealth’s power to make laws for ‘naturalisation and aliens’. The distinction between citizens and aliens is the foundation of Australian immigration law, which has led to the use of Australian citizenship as a political device of exclusion. But we, as Australians, should not let our history define us. We can engage with the question of what it means to be Australian. We can seek to address the missed opportunities of the past, and reclaim the politicised debates in the refugee and asylum seeker context.

Essay begins

In 2013, both major Australian political parties took radical steps to prevent asylum seekers and refugees from reaching and remaining on Australia’s shores. The treatment of asylum seekers and refugees by current Governments is symptomatic of an enduring focus on excluding outsiders in immigration and citizenship policy. Since the creation of Australia as a Federation, the exclusion of outsiders has been a fundamental policy attitude. This exclusionary focus is grounded in an Australian Constitution that defines its members not by who they are, but rather by who they are not. It reflects a history of Australian citizenship law that has created a community defined by those it excludes. From a constitutional and legal point of view, Australia has never really come to terms with who its members are. In order to move the discourse on asylum-seekers and refugees away from one of exclusion, we as Australian citizens must depart from our historical fixation on who we are not, and seek to define what it means to belong to the Australian community.

To read the full essay

The full essay can be obtained by accessing the complete publication which can be downloaded as a PDF file at no charge from the Australia21 website here.

If you would like to buy a hard copy for $25 including postage you may do so from here.

Note:
Please remember that Australia21 is dependent upon public donations to continue its work. If you would like to make a donation you can do so by visiting the Australia21 website at www.australia21.org.au. Donations over $2 are tax deductible.

Saturday, January 4, 2014

Jane McAdam: Leading on protection.


Below are the biographical note, and abstract and introductory paragraphs of Professor Jane McAdam’s contribution to the Australia21 publication Refugees and asylum seekers: finding a better way.

Leading on protection.

Jane McAdam is Scientia Professor of Law and the Founding Director of the Andrew and Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law at the University of New South Wales. She holds an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship, and is a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Brooking Institution in Washington DC and a Research Associate at the University of Oxford’s Refugee Studies Centre. Professor McAdam serves on a number of international committees and has undertaken consultancies for UNHCR and various Governments on issues relating to forced migration and international law.

Abstract

How do we create an asylum policy that reflects Australia’s international legal obligations and is acceptable to the general public? This essay argues that strong, ethical leadership can shape and shift ideas by educating the community about the complexities of forced migration, and appealing to the Australian ideal of a ‘fair go for all’. International law provides both a legal and a moral compass – for our leaders to respect the protection commitments that previous Governments assumed in good faith, and for the rest of us to call our leaders to account.

Essay begins

In a country as large, wealthy and multicultural as Australia, it is incongruous that the treatment of asylum seekers has become a national preoccupation. The discussion centres not on rights or responsibilities, but on ‘stopping the boats’ and ‘smashing the people smugglers’ business model’.

As in many countries, asylum seekers are an easy target for anxieties about national security, unemployment and demographic composition. They cannot vote, so their voices are marginalised in political debate, and as they are increasingly moved outside the Australian community into immigration detention in remote offshore processing centres, the divide between ‘them’ and ‘us’ is reinforced.

At the heart of Australia’s hardline approach to asylum seekers is a fundamental misconception – the assumption that draconian measure will deter desperate people. And on top of such flawed logic, many expedient myths have been built.

To read the full essay

The full essay can be obtained by accessing the complete publication which can be downloaded as a PDF file at no charge from the Australia21 website here.

If you would like to buy a hard copy for $25 including postage you may do so from here.

Note:
Please remember that Australia21 is dependent upon public donations to continue its work. If you would like to make a donation you can do so by visiting the Australia21 website at www.australia21.org.au. Donations over $2 are tax deductible.

Friday, January 3, 2014

Mick Palmer on asylum seekers


Below is the biographical note and abstract from former Federal Police Commissioner Mick Palmer’s contribution to the Australia21 publication Refugees and asylum seekers: finding a better way.

The full essay can be obtained by accessing the complete publication which can be downloaded as a PDF file at no charge from the Australia21 website here.

If you would like to buy a hard copy for $25 including postage you may do so from here.

Asylum seekers: Does our approach reflect our character? The lessons that must be learnt.
Mick Palmer

Mick Palmer AO APM is a former career police officer and barrister at law, who served as Commissioner of Police with the Northern Territory Police and the Australian Federal Police. Since his retirement from policing in 2001 he has conducted a range of corporate governance related inquiries including inquiries into prison management in Victoria and Tasmania and the inquiry into the Immigration Detention of Cornelia Rau. He is a Director of Australia21.

Abstract

This essay examines treatment of asylum seekers in Australia against the background of tow notorious cases, Cornelia Rau and Vivian Alvarez, and seeks to illustrate the critical importance of due process, competence and integrity to a just and effective asylum-seeker management and handling system. The emotional and psychological impacts that are likely to be caused by immigration detention and the damage that can be caused by inadequate inquiry are illustrated and the questions asked: have the lessons of Rau and Alvarez been learned and are current practices and procedures likely to lead to just and humane outcomes? Are we comfortable as a society with our current approach? Do our treatment and handling processes reflect expected Australian values? Assessment criteria are suggested which as decent Australians, we should expect to apply in the treatment of people in Australian immigration detention.

Note:
Please remember that Australia21 is dependent upon public donations to continue its work. If you would like to make a donation you can do so by visiting the Australia21 website at www.australia21.org.au. Donations over $2 are tax deductible.

Wednesday, January 1, 2014

Repairing and preparing Australian landscapes for global change


In May 2013 Australia21 released a report entitled Repairing and preparing Australian landscapes for global change: Why we must do more. The report, written by Australia21 director Richard Eckersley, was based on the deliberations of an expert roundtable, held at Melbourne University on 21 February 2013, to consider the question:

What are the benefits of large scale reforestation and revegetation, and how can they best be achieved?

The starting point for this work was a paper written by Dr Eckersley and published by CSIRO in 1989, Regreening Australia: the environmental, economic and social benefits of reforestation. The report was a preliminary investigation into a large national program to ‘regreen Australia’ through massive reforestation and revegetation over a period of 10 to 20 years. The report attracted a great deal of public, political and professional interest, and had important influences on government policy at the time, but it was never implemented on the scale envisaged and necessary to realise the potential benefits.

In 2012, the Board of Australia21 agreed to re-examine the topic, using the 1989 report as a benchmark or reference point, given: almost 25 years had passed; greater recognition of the seriousness and urgency of climate change; and heightened global economic instability, making job generation potentially important to maintaining economic and social stability.

Participants

Participants in this re-examination were:
-  Mr Jason Alexandra, Consultant, former General Manager, Natural Resources Program, Murray Darling Basin Authority (1)
-  Professor Snow Barlow, Foundation Professor, Horticulture and Viticulture, University of Melbourne (1)
-  Mr Paul Barratt, Chair, Australia21 Ltd and former Secretary, Commonwealth Department of Primary Industries and Energy (1,2)
-  Prof Andrew Campbell, Director, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University (1,2)
-  Mr Paul Dettmann, Managing Director, Cassinia Environmental
-  Mr Ron Dodds, General Manager, Victoria, Greening Australia
-  Dr Michael Dunlop, Senior Research Scientist, Ecosystem Sciences, CSIRO Australia
-  Mr Richard Eckersley, Director, Australia21 Ltd (Chair) (1)
-  Mr Geoff Gorrie , Director Australia21 Ltd and former Deputy Secretary, Commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. (1)
-  Mr Kevin Goss, Senior Honorary Research Fellow, Future Farm Industries Co-operative Research Centre Ltd, University of Western Australia
-  Mr Simon Gould, Planning Coordinator, Soils for Life Program, Outcomes Australia
-  Prof Richard Harper, Alcoa Chair in Sustainable Water Management, Murdoch University
-  Dr Anthony Hooper, Chief Executive Officer, Natural Resources Conservation League of Victoria (1,2)
-  Prof Rod Keenan, Director, Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation Research and Head of Department of Resource Management and Geography, University of Melbourne
-  Mr Gerry Leach, Chair, Sustainability Committee, National Farmers Federation
-  Assoc Prof Clive McAlpine, ARC Future Fellow, School of Geography, Planning & Environmental Management, University of Queensland
-  Ms Winsome McCaughey, Senior Strategic Adviser, Research Partnerships, University of Melbourne
-  Dr Martin Moroni, Manager, Sustainability Branch, Forestry Tasmania
-  Mr Danny O’Neill, Executive Officer, National Natural Resource Management Regions’ Working Group
-  Ms Claire Parkes, Senior Policy Analyst, Carbon and Landscape Conservation, Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists
-  Dr Justin Ryan, Post-doctoral Research Fellow, School of Geography, Planning & Environmental Management, University of Queensland
-  Dr Carla Sgrò, ARC Future Fellow, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University
-  Mr Ian Smith, Victorian State Manager, Conservation Volunteers Australia
-  Mr Andrew Stewart, farmer, Member, Australian Landcare Council
-  Dr Hugh Stewart, Director, Natural Resources Conservation League of Victoria
-  Dr John White, Executive Director, Ignite Energy Resources Pty Ltd
-  Mr Mark Wootton, Principal/ Manager of Jigsaw Farms and Chair, The Climate Institute (2)
-  Mr Rob Youl, Consultant (1)
-  Dr Charlie Zammit, Consultant, former Assistant Secretary, Biodiversity Conservation Branch, Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (1)
In attendance: Ms Lyn Stephens, CEO, Australia21 Ltd 1
(1) member of project steering committee
(2) unable to attend roundtable

Outcome

The roundtable concluded that Australia needs to look at its landscapes in new ways if it is to meet the 21st Century challenges of climate change and food, water and energy security. Without a new vision for creating healthy, resilient landscapes, we will experience continuing environmental decline and degradation. For all the policy developments and practical achievements of the past 20 to 30 years in managing our environments and ecosystems, we are not closing the gap between the magnitude of the challenge and the scale of our response.

The new vision would:
• Embrace all Australian landscapes and all Australians, rural and urban alike. Landscapes are a vital part of local, regional and national identity; all our futures depend on them.
• Acknowledge climate change as a ‘game changer’, in terms of both the role of landscapes in mitigation and adaptation, and the huge, varied, but still uncertain, impacts of climate change on landscapes.
• Move beyond a ‘regreening’ conservation ethic to embrace multiple functions and values to achieve the best combination of environmental, economic and social benefits.
• Build on the synergies and convergences between these functions, as well as acknowledging potential tensions and conflicts. Many industries, resources and communities would benefit from expanded landscape revegetation and regeneration.
Specific objectives include to:
• Stimulate the growth of a landscape regeneration and management industry to produce the capacity to use available funding and meet policy objectives.
• Generate more private-sector involvement, including investment in traditional products and new markets for carbon, water or biofuels, using instruments such as carbon credits and ‘patient’ investment by superannuation funds.
• While being national in scope and ambition, devolve governance and design to the local level, so that landscapes are managed by farmers and other landowners, and interventions meet the needs and harness the resources of local environments and communities.
• Encourage better integration of policy and science, including effective, early evaluation and long-term monitoring.
• Build on existing policy, such as the Biodiversity Fund and Carbon Farming Initiative, and present institutional structures such as Landcare groups and regional natural resource management bodies.
The benefits of large-scale landscape regeneration, reforestation and revegetation, include: preserving biodiversity; reducing soil and water loss and degradation; providing shelter, shade and fodder; a cooler regional climate; carbon sequestration; increasing soil fertility and productivity; more sustainable agriculture; more timber and other tree products; better pollination; production of biofuels; enhanced food, water and energy security; benefits to tourism; supporting rural communities; creating employment; bridging the cultural divide between city and country; promoting national reconciliation; improving people’s wellbeing; and higher civic morale.
Full report
A copy of the full report may be downloaded free of charge from the Australia21 website here.
Please remember that as a small non-profit research organisation Australia21 is dependent upon public donations to carry out its work. If you wish to make a contribution you may do so by clicking the Donate button on the webpage.