Download ECONOMIC FACTORS OF HOMELESSNESS FOR MEN

ECONOMIC FACTORS OF HOMELESSNESS FOR MEN
(Dr) Don Dingsdag
The 1980s and 1990s were decades of diminishing spending in social services
generically; and in the current century so far the trend continues. Successive Federal
governments since the late 1970s, eagerly embraced the Reaganist or Thatcherite neoliberal economic folly labelled economic rationalism in Australia. Under it, all
governments, Federal, State and Territory without exception reduced the size of the
public sector to free up its functions for the private sector, to privatise and/or
corporatise the remainder of the public sector so that it is less able to provide services
in social welfare, health, education and housing. Despite annual budget allocations by
the Carr Government, homelessness continues to grow.
Notwithstanding the economic contributions of this Government there remain
overarching economic factors which cause homelessness to endure. These have much
to do with macro-economic decisions that have impacted negatively on the Australian
economy since the early 1980s or so, and more specifically on the labour market and
social services for more than fifteen years. What I am referring to more broadly in the
instance of social services, is the attraction by all governments in Australia since the
early 1980s to 1980s to reduce the size of the public sector to free up its functions for
the private sector, to privatise and/or corporatise the remainder of the public sector so
that it is less able to provide services in social welfare, health, education and housing.
Australia now has the smallest public sector out of any of the members of the OECD.
Of course, it is the lack of housing for men that has particular poignancy for us here
today because we are concerned with men’s issues, although homelessness is rife in
all sectors of the community including male and female children. In this arena for
example, de-institutionalisation of mental health care patients occurred as much due
to the cost-saving factors it held out as it did to humanise the treatment of the
mentally ill. Whatever the real motivation, de-institutionalisation had a profound
effect on homelessness; the impact of which is still felt. It is not my intention to
blame particular governments for these policy preferences, but rather to suggest why
they have been either such willing perpetrators or perhaps victims of a seemingly
inexorable economic juggernaut, for combined they have had profound reciprocal
effects on poverty in general.
Generally, fault for Australia’s economic ills is sheeted home to globalisation, an
amorphous, inexplicable phenomenon that stalks the world without direction or being
directed by anyone. However, blaming it is a convenient and glib populist nostrum.
If by globalisation is meant capitalism’s ability to establish and/or exploit new
markets with cheaper labour and more consumers, that is as old as capitalism itself;
in fact, diversification of markets and mobility are the cornerstones of capitalism and
always were. To suggest that it has magically entered a new phase is to ignore history
and the role of national governments in the western industrialised world, which with
relish since the late 70s/early 80s deregulated their economy so that the free market
could flourish and dominate national policy. Australia was no exception.
2
Because time does not permit I will concentrate briefly on the impact of labour market
reform; in my view one of the major contributors to entrenching social inequity.
Under the crush of a neo-liberal economic direction, more popularly known as
economic rationalism in Australia, labour market participation rates fell causing
structural unemployment, social dislocation and ultimately contributing to rising
homelessness.
Since the mid 1980s or so as a result of the deregulation of the labour market, real
wages have fallen by more than 18 per cent as a portion of GDP. Australia now has a
permanent part-time workforce of about 30 per cent. Against this decline, the larger
private sector organisations’ profits rose. At the same time as a result of deregulation,
the ability of employers to make the remaining workforce work harder and longer (for
less money) prevailed, owing to the fear of unemployment which grew exponentially.
As a result, structural unemployment became entrenched. By that I mean that some
communities endured unemployment levels calculated at more than 30 per cent,
especially NESB and Aboriginal men and young men.
Although I don’t suggest that unemployment is the only cause of homelessness, there
is a direct correlation between the inability to find work, social dislocation, poverty
and homelessness. There are many and varied reasons why people become homeless.
It could be due to poverty, domestic violence, drug and/or alcohol abuse and family
breakdown. Homelessness has long been recognised as a major social issue in
Australia. It also has serious implications for public health. It is inextricably linked
to poverty.
Homelessness has important health implications for those affected. Health may be
compromised by the physical environment, nutrition and the enforced lifestyle. For
many men initial health impairments and disabilities can lead to homelessness and a
vicious cycle of deprivation.
Since the 1990’s several state and federal reports have given varying estimates of the
extent and severity of homelessness. What is significant that each has acknowledged
the seriousness of the problem. In urban areas in particular there is an increasing
number of destitute aged men who are unable to afford secure accommodation.
Access to appropriate health care, especially primary health care, is often
compromised by the mobility of affected men to find affordable shelter, and the
stigma of disadvantage can impede access to main stream health care. Thus, more
appropriate forms of primary health care and access to main stream services are
needed for these men.
When homelessness is added to other social disadvantage and health problems, a
particular challenge arises for the public health community to provide health
promotion which is appropriate. In addition what is required is:
•
•
•
•
a wide range of supported accommodation for people with mental illness;
increased access to public housing;
stringent licensing of boarding houses;
the Commonwealth Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP)
to service the needs of men with mental illness; and;
2
3
•
hospitals and health services to take responsibility for appropriate
arrangements for accommodation when discharging patients from their care.
Notwithstanding claims to the contrary by the present Federal Government of falling
unemployment and a flourishing economy, large sections of disaffected men in
poverty remain in the Greater Western Sydney region and in rural and remote
communities. At Mt Druitt for example, as well as the homeless, there are men (and
women) in housing who do not have enough to eat, nor the wherewithal to get
nourishing food. There is no point in blaming globalisation for unemployment nor for
other related social ills, because they are directly due to the policies of successive
governments since 1983. A constant question remains, if unemployment is falling,
adequate social welfare resources are available and the economy is buoyant, why does
poverty continue to grow and why does homelessness persist.
3