Homelessness in Australia: Government Policy - Literature review Example

Homelessness in Australia: Government policy (Name) (Institution) (Course) (Module) (Instructor’s Name) October 22 2009 Introduction According to the United Nations Economic and Social Council, everyone, male or female, child or adult, has a right to a safe secure place to live in peace and dignity. The government defines a homeless person as one accommodated by SAAP (Supported Accommodation Assistance Program) or some other form of emergency accommodation. Despite limited programs by the government in reducing the number of people in the streets, the number has been growing steadily. This paper thus explores the issues surrounding homelessness and discusses and critically examines the government’s policy on the issue. A. Description of policy Rubbo (2001) says as one of the leading developed nations of the world, Australia has a dirty story to tell pertaining to the glaring high level of homelessness. As of 1996, there were a total of 105, 304 (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009), 10% being families, 14% couples and 76% being single persons (Polakow & Guillean, 2007). Currently, 105,000 Australians are homeless on any given night (Homelessness Australia, 2009). Surprisingly, there were 26,060 homeless young people aged 12 to 18 in Australia as of 1996 (Crane & Brannock, 2009). A number of authors define homeless as being without a permanent place of residence (Crane & Brannock, 2009; Rubbo, 2001).There are various factors that lead to homelessness such as domestic abuse, drug problems, mental illness, voluntary etc. the causes determine the strategy employed to prevent increase in homelessness. The situation is complicated by the discussion of unequal wealth distribution (Homelessness Australia, 2009). Rubbo (2001) notes that a majority of person living in the streets do not do so out of their free will but its due to lack of an alternative. He says that many households have showed a wiliness to move away from the streets given a viable alternative. Therefore the government launched the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program through the Supported Accommodation Assistance of 1994. The act recognized a homeless person as one who has no or limited access to safe and secure accommodation. Thus the act aimed at supporting homeless persons and those vulnerable to homelessness through by assisting them with accommodation and supporting services. In order to ensure sustainability of the program, the act further states that SAAP should also aim to resolve crisis, to re-establish family links where appropriate and to re-establish a capacity to live independently of SAAP (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009).  Rubbo (2001) says illegal immigrants more so from Asia are increasingly moving into street corners. Again, aboriginal Australians migrating into the cities from the rural areas have found their way into the streets. Ironically, Australia is undergoing a period of reconciliation between the aboriginal people and other Australians while Australians as a people view themselves very accommodating to foreigners. Therefore, due to the hospitality nature, it is expected that there is a high number of people who do not have homes but fall in one of the premises described by AIHW. Out of 100,000 homeless Australians, about a half of them are hosted by their friends (A new approach to homelessness, 2009). B. Analysis of policy processes Supported Accommodation Assistance Program SAAP An analysis of the composition of the contemporary homeless people points to failure by SAAP to develop a clear definition of homelessness thus a clear focus on effort and resources. State and Territory governments are responsible for managing the program but delegate the provision of the services to independent agencies. Currently, there are an estimated 1,300 non government, community based or local government organizations working under the program. These bodies vary in size and the type of services they offer depending on their reach. In essence, they provide accommodation and support services to the homeless. As aforementioned, the composition of the homeless is broad and its definition has been a point of contention among various stakeholders (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2009). A release of homelessness figures in 1999 prompted the then Minister for Family and Community Services, Senator Jocelyn Newman, to declare that the reported high number of homeless peoples was due to the broad definition given to the homelessness (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009). Who really then constitutes the homeless? According to Council to Homeless Persons (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009), a homeless is economically and socially incapacitated to own and access a conventional home with associated services and utilities due to for instance lack of income of support for prospect. Such a person ends up falling below the poverty line or being dependent on friends and relatives. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) points out to five premises of a homeless person as presently living: on the street; in asylum accommodation; provisional arrangements with no security of tenure-such as living with friends or in a caravan; in an abusive family relationship; in extremely impoverished conditions due a personal crisis or inadequate income (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009). To harmonize these varying definitions, the minister overseeing this department as of 2000 suggested the grouping of homelessness into three levels 'primary', 'secondary' and 'tertiary' based on the communal understanding of minimum standard of living (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009). Primary homelessness refers to persons who literally sleep in the open or in cars and railway carriages while secondary homelessness includes all persons living in temporary shelters and moving frequently from one shelter to another while tertiary homelessness includes people who cannot afford to live above the minimum community standard but have to do with boarding houses. The Commonwealth State Housing agreement- This program caters for both renters and purchasers by providing appropriate accommodation and support services. It specializes with low income earners but not people without homes per se. As such, this program tends to alleviate poverty and provide housing but not cater for the homeless yes it is funded under the national homelessness kitty. Crisis Accommodation Program (CAP)- Funds homeless people willing to purchase houses or those caught up in crisis and is the only seemingly preventive program for homelessness. Its clients mainly consist of reformers under the SAAP program. This program is reactive but not pre-emptive. It has no drawn out policy on how to minimize the number of clients it serves. Rent assistance- Funded by the commonwealth, it offers financial support in form non taxable income provides rent backing in the form of non-taxable income supplement to people living in the private housing market. This program was established in response to rising housing costs that threatened to make people homeless. Unfortunately, there exist no comprehensive way to determine the level of need of assistance. As such, this program is prone to abuse. Again, it encourages people to rent houses beyond their level of income. The emergency relief program (ERP)- Provides This is a facilitating agent between the government and to community based and welfare organizations which are dedicated to helping families in immediate financial assistance. This program is also prone to abuse by dishonest people. The Road Home (Government’s white paper) This is a more recent development that succeeded the writing of a green paper which is expected to be bigger than SAAP in the long run. In the green paper, ‘Which Way Home? A new approach to homelessness’, all stakeholders made their submissions which the white paper incorporated in setting up strategies to halve overall homelessness and make available supported accommodation to the homeless by 2020. The program has three main strategies as: - early intervention; improve, expand and integrate all homelessness programs; prevention of recurrence of homelessness by moving homeless peoples into stable housing. This program will also seek to address various homeless groups differently by developing tailor made solutions. It also aims at making homelessness a national issue involving everyone. To achieve this, the Rudd government aims at increasing existing funding for homelessness by 55%. Launched in December last year, this program has yet to deliver results. D. Analysis of general policy The government has taken active steps in alleviating the problem of homelessness. However, the problem still persists with the number of street families increasing. The national response to homelessness is not harmonised or strategically focused to well articulate goals. The existing programs lack sufficient resources to adequately tackle homelessness (A new approach to homelessness, 2009). The Australian government has on many occasions argued that it cannot afford to resettle all homeless people. However, the idea seems to be lack of political will given that the country is growing economically yet the government does not have enough money to support the homeless. He notes that during the Sydney Olympics games in 2000, many street households were relocated from the city. Rubbo (2001) quotes what the Sydney Morning Herald said of the relocation as “they are all going on a summer holiday” (p. 162). Other major cities hosting international events have displayed the same intent of clearing their cities of street persons. Earlier this year, the government publicized a supplementary grant of $5.238 billion to be distributed over a period of three years for social housing through the Nation Building Economic Stimulus Plan. Another $400 million over was given out spread over two years for the repair and maintenance of all existing public housing facilities. While this program may seem expensive to the government in the short term, the long term cost of failing to address it is even higher. Such costs may entail the social breakdown of Australia as a society and even results into higher government spending in correctional measures such as supporting resultant siblings from street families. Another program by the federal government worth $672 million, to build houses for aboriginal people in Northern Territory seems to have stalled underway after being launched in early 2008. Named Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program, the project aimed at constructing 750 homes on budget, rebuild another 230 and refurbish two-and-a-half thousand. As of August this year, not a single house had been completed. The program managers argue that the money is not enough. This caused the Territory labour Minister, Alison Anderson to quit over the slow pace of the program (Colvin, 2009). This program was unveiled on the basis that nearly a quarter of all aboriginal people live in unhygienic and overcrowded areas that expose them to health risk thus qualifying as homeless people going by the CHP definition. Impact of policy The existing homelessness programs provide public housing and also supplement efforts of not-for-profit and community based organizations. With better living conditions, these people are expected to be more productive in the economy. In addition, these preventive measures reduce the chances of illness and hence the government spending on healthcare. However, there seems to be no clear definition of a homeless person as a government policy. The fact that the various agencies and bodies funded by the government through SAAP have various interpretations of homelessness points to lack of clear coordination and strategic planning of handling the problem (Gilbert, 2009). The SAAP program is mandated to promote independence of the homeless people and help them establish their own homes. However, the projects such as provision of overnight accommodation and food tend to encourage more and more people in to the streets. Taxpayers have argued that while the society has a moral obligation to help their fellow unfortunate members, they should be empowered to live and work on their own without relying on others. Funding for the homelessness programs tend to give much attention to caring for the homeless and little for addressing the issues leading to homelessness. The CHP notes that a majority of adults living in the streets have alcohol or drug related problems or mental problems. Women and children are most likely in the streets to escape abuse from spouses or relationships (Gilbert, 2009). A study to access the benefits of providing a home to a homeless person found that the lifetime net gain of keeping homeless young kids in school totaled $474 million (Counting the cost of homelessness, 2003). D. Recommendations The government should introduce harmonized strategic approaches to policy and programs. This will reduce the numerous levels of authority in the activation and management of programs, as noted by Colvin (2009), reduction in management levels and oversight authorities in the provision of housing for the aboriginals reduces the cost of the houses making the program viable. This paper recommends that a homeless person be considered as one without a permanent dwelling place that he himself is comfortable with. This will eradicate the confusion of viewing traditional aborigines as homeless people while its their culture to dwell in the houses that they do. Support community consultation in policy development. Local communities ought to be dynamically involved in formulation of homelessness programs. This is because most homeless people are not products of the street but the societies in which all belong. Abolition of the rent assistance program. This program targets both low income individuals in the private housing market. It is imperative that this program be combined with the minimum wages requirement by the government. In fact managing the program increases costs to the government and overlaps the mandate of the minimum wage requirement. Actual provision of accommodation assistance should be left to local governments and community based organisations with funding from the state and federal governments. Some non-governmental organisations have shown tendencies to embezzle funds. These unwarranted organisations also increase the cost of managing the programs. Local governments have the resources to build low cost housing establishments to cater for the homeless. Stratification on level of housing assistance. The existing programs treat people in the street as one. This is wrong as it fails to appreciate other personal problems affecting them. For instance, the housing programs should be empowered to establish their own rehabilitation centres to handle drug addicts and help them return to a straight life. Coordination between prison authorities and homelessness programs should be implemented. Prior to release, convicts should proof ownership of a dwelling place to avoid them going back into the street. This is most important for convicts who have been jailed for long periods whose chances of acclimatising to the social advancements are low. References A new approach to homelessness (2009). (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/housing/progserv/homelessness/Documents/homelessness_report/new_approach.htm Crane, P. & Brannock, J. (2009) Homelessness among young people in Australia, Early intervention & prevention, (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://eprints.qut.edu.au/4/ Colvin, M (2009). Problems found with NT Aboriginal housing program, (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2009/s2672299.htm Counting the cost of homelessness (2003) Ahuri Research & Policy Bulletin ISSUE 24 July 2003 ISSN 1445-3428, (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), www.ahuri.edu.au/publications/download/cnhs Gilbert, T. (2009). Inquiry into Homelessness legislation, Homeless Australia (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.homelessnessaustralia.org.au/UserFiles/Homelessness_Legislation_Discussion_Paper.pdf Homelessness Australia (2009) (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.homelessnessaustralia.org.au/site/about.php Homelessness Strategies in Australia: Homelessness Acknowledged, Hard Questions Remain, (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.chp.org.au/public_library/parity.chtml Minnery, J. (2007). Approaches to Homelessness Policy in Europe, the United States, and Australia, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 63, (3) pp. 641-655 Rubbo, A. {Polakow, V. Guillean, C. (eds)} (2001) Share the spirit: Homelessness in Australia International perspectives on homelessness, Issue 135 of Contributions in sociology Volume 135 of Critical Responses in Arts and Letters, (London: Greenwood Publishing Group) McIntosh & Philips, (2009). 'There's no home-like place' - Homelessness in Australia (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/SP/homeless.htm National Homelessness Information Clearinghouse (2009). Ex-Prisoners, SAAP, Housing and Homelessness in Australia (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.homelessnessinfo.net.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=275:ex-prisoners-saap-housing-and-homelessness&catid=382:mental-health&Itemid=224 Supported accommodation assistance program (SAAP) (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.aihw.gov.au/housing/sacs/saap/index.cfm The Australian Government White Paper on Homelessness - The Road Home, (Accessed online on 20th Oct from), http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/housing/progserv/homelessness/whitepaper/Pages/default.aspx   Read More

State and Territory governments are responsible for managing the program but delegate the provision of the services to independent agencies. Currently, there are an estimated 1,300 non government, community based or local government organizations working under the program. These bodies vary in size and the type of services they offer depending on their reach. In essence, they provide accommodation and support services to the homeless. As aforementioned, the composition of the homeless is broad and its definition has been a point of contention among various stakeholders (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2009).

A release of homelessness figures in 1999 prompted the then Minister for Family and Community Services, Senator Jocelyn Newman, to declare that the reported high number of homeless peoples was due to the broad definition given to the homelessness (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009). Who really then constitutes the homeless? According to Council to Homeless Persons (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009), a homeless is economically and socially incapacitated to own and access a conventional home with associated services and utilities due to for instance lack of income of support for prospect.

Such a person ends up falling below the poverty line or being dependent on friends and relatives. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) points out to five premises of a homeless person as presently living: on the street; in asylum accommodation; provisional arrangements with no security of tenure-such as living with friends or in a caravan; in an abusive family relationship; in extremely impoverished conditions due a personal crisis or inadequate income (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009).

To harmonize these varying definitions, the minister overseeing this department as of 2000 suggested the grouping of homelessness into three levels 'primary', 'secondary' and 'tertiary' based on the communal understanding of minimum standard of living (McIntosh & Phillips, 2009). Primary homelessness refers to persons who literally sleep in the open or in cars and railway carriages while secondary homelessness includes all persons living in temporary shelters and moving frequently from one shelter to another while tertiary homelessness includes people who cannot afford to live above the minimum community standard but have to do with boarding houses.

The Commonwealth State Housing agreement- This program caters for both renters and purchasers by providing appropriate accommodation and support services. It specializes with low income earners but not people without homes per se. As such, this program tends to alleviate poverty and provide housing but not cater for the homeless yes it is funded under the national homelessness kitty. Crisis Accommodation Program (CAP)- Funds homeless people willing to purchase houses or those caught up in crisis and is the only seemingly preventive program for homelessness.

Its clients mainly consist of reformers under the SAAP program. This program is reactive but not pre-emptive. It has no drawn out policy on how to minimize the number of clients it serves. Rent assistance- Funded by the commonwealth, it offers financial support in form non taxable income provides rent backing in the form of non-taxable income supplement to people living in the private housing market. This program was established in response to rising housing costs that threatened to make people homeless.

Unfortunately, there exist no comprehensive way to determine the level of need of assistance. As such, this program is prone to abuse. Again, it encourages people to rent houses beyond their level of income. The emergency relief program (ERP)- Provides This is a facilitating agent between the government and to community based and welfare organizations which are dedicated to helping families in immediate financial assistance. This program is also prone to abuse by dishonest people. The Road Home (Government’s white paper) This is a more recent development that succeeded the writing of a green paper which is expected to be bigger than SAAP in the long run.

Read More