Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 7 Hansard (21 June) . . Page.. 2402 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

community is to increase its capacity and-dare I use the words?-develop its social capital. Otherwise, a wedge will be driven further between the socially and economically marginalised members of our community and the more affluent and mobile consumers that Canberra is geared so well to serve.

When members of the government complain that I do not give them credit for all their good work, it is because they are not addressing the imbalances in society at the structural level. That, I would have thought, is their job. I have already spoken to that tonight and on other occasions.

Organisations in the community sector have had a tough six years. They have in general been flat out increasing their outputs on tighter on tighter margins. Service purchasing agreements have not produced, and will not always produce, the best results. The commercial paradigm in which this government likes to operate can be damaging in the community context.

There is sometimes a strong sense that the community sector has to do more and more with less and less. In estimates, when we were talking about the community linkages program, the minister said it would be good if it applied not only to tenants but to applicants. The chief executive officer said that he would like to be able to extend the community linkages program to applicants. The minister said that was fine with him-that he could do that-but not to expect any more resources. It was meant to be amusing, I think, but I found it quite disturbing, because it is an indication of how this government tends to approach matters. They say that you will achieve greater outcomes by efficiencies. It is that kind of pressuring and squeezing that is putting the community sector under a lot of pressure.

It is generally acknowledged in the field that if you want government support you had better be careful with what you say. Innumerable groups and individuals have advised me or my office that they support the position we are taking on social issues, and that we are supporting them in some instances, but believe they would be acting against their own interests if they publicly said so.

The number of times that community organisations staffed by people overextended and fairly poorly paid are described by this government, in discounting their positions, as being vested interests absolutely beggars belief. There has been an ongoing campaign for three or four years now to get this government to accept that community sector organisations, when funded by government, ought to be able to pay their staff properly-not properly like directors of business, or even properly like ACT public servants, but at least properly as far as award wages and conditions go.

It seems we have scored one victory this year. The ACT government has come up with the funds to allow those organisations funded by the Commonwealth and the territory to pay their employers who are under the SACS award-at last. But the government still has made no commitment to ensuring that all such community services can pay their staff properly and that the conditions and pay of the SACS award are industry standard.

There are very serious pressures on the community sector because of the cost of administering the GST. Other costs such as insurance are also causing great stress to the community sector.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .