My tribute to the Mirror State
Tasmania is the Mirror State.
We're always looking into things.
No seriously, you would not believe the number of Reviews underway into all sorts of social issues and service failings. You also wouldn't believe how
many very good Reports lie gathering dust on a shelf somewhere for want of the will and the money to implement their recommendations.
It occurred to me that many of the organisations and projects that I've reported on in this Blog are either struggling to find the resources they need to deliver the outcomes they had hoped for, have already collapsed, or are under funding threat despite having demonstrated significant success.
Similarly, many of the social issues we've canvassed haven't progressed far enough to ease suffering. For some, such as suicide prevention, another review/consultation process has commenced before we've even seen the report of the first.
So I've decided as my own (ironic) tribute to the Mirror State, to Review & Report on the status of all of the major issues or programs that I've covered here since 2005.
Northern NEWPIN(6/6/05) - The program itself continues to deliver wonderful outcomes for its members, but it’s future is uncertain as it is yet to secure recurrent funding.
Northern Suburbs Community Centre (6/6/05) - Continuing to meet the needs of many northern suburbs residents.
Ravenswood District & Community News(6/6/05) - Now part of the Ravenswood Neighbourhood House programs. Doesn’t appear to be published with any regularity anymore.
Suicide Prevention(23/8/05) - Still no report from the Tasmanian Parliamentary Inquiry two years on from receiving evidence from Sally and Jane! The current DHHS Community Consultation is continuing, but I imagine we are still some time away from recommendations let alone funded initiatives. Who has, and who will, pass over in the time we wait?
Mayfield Youth Action Group(26/12/05)- No further funding. Specific Mayfield activities have ceased (but the need for them hasn’t).
Corporate Social Responsibility(14/2/06) - A huge disappointment given that a primary ambition of mine (and the original reason for this site) was to grow corporate philanthropy in Launceston. Whilst I’ve personally witnessed some incredibly generous individual donations recently, for all intents and appearances corporate giving in Launceston remains poor compared to mainland standards, and certainly none of the projects I’ve promoted have been fundamentally assisted, let alone delivered, by a business White Knight! Congratulations to those who continue to give quietly and regularly (including the much maligned Gunns), but we really need to create a stronger tradition of giving amongst medium sized businesses (5-25 employees) if we are going to achieve the human and community potential inherent in this City. It's our town; all our responsibility.
Neighbourhood Houses (14/2/06) - The 33 Neighbourhood Houses in Tasmania continue to provide services on a shoe string budget. They meet the needs of some constituents very well, but will never be able to achieve the full range of Strategic Objectives required of them by the Tasmanian Government without the funding for a higher level of service and professionalism. That funding need not, and should not, be solely the responsibility of Government and is just the sort of social program that would lend itself well to business support.
LYNX(12/7/06)- Continuing with the loyal support of LIONS and committed volunteers. Providing a much needed option in the wake of the disappointing pull out by Youth Insearch, but constrained in what they can achieve by both funding and resources.
Launceston City Mission’s Ashley House (20/1/07) - Progressing under the capable management of City Mission and Rotary. A great response to the initial appeal but more financial support needed to cover the capital cost.
Blokes United(30/1/07)- The Blokes are meeting regularly but they still have no funding for meaningful programs and no home base/workshop. The dream of a Men's Centre remains just that.
14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso (13/2/07) - Going beautifully. His teachings are more relevant and meaningful than ever, but of course Tibet is still not free!
Primary Health Reform(5/4/07) - The most controversial issue I've covered on the Blog, it is proving to be a political quagmire eg the anxiety about the closure of Ouse and Rosebery Hospitals. My position remains that the State has to put more money into Acute care and prevention/health promotion activities, and the Commonwealth needs to take responsibility for these mainly aged care rural facilities. Just don’t look forward to a well designed Tasmanian health system anytime soon.
One Care/Phillip Oakden House(5/6/07) Lost. Phillip Oakden House is closed. 3 public palliative beds are being provided at St Lukes Hospital on an interim basis but there’s no guarantee the service will ever return to the building the community lovingly created for the purpose.
Ashley Youth Detention Centre Reform(13/7/07)- No announcements from Government yet about what, if any, recommendations will be adopted.
Pokies Reform(10/9/07) - No progress yet in either Tasmania or mainland Australia, but it’s early days. The current review provides a focus for activity, but whether the ultimate report leads to real reform or more mirror gazing remains to be seen.
Clearly this is a disappointing litany of failure, and these are only those issues that I've been free to canvas on this Blog.
Progress in this city is well and truly dead; and so I suspect is the Grassroots Launceston Blog.
Although I've had some good traffic over the years, one would have to objectively conclude from the total lack of progress on these important issues that continuing this Blog is a waste of time. Even though it's always been secondary to me to actually taking action on issues, I can't justify spending future time Blogging that could be better used helping individuals directly.
And so for now, I suspect this is my last post. I've taken a good, long, hard look at myself in the great Tasmanian tradition - but unlike Government I've decided that I want to do something more productive with my future !!!!! :-)
Read the full Post!
Trying to ease Pokie pain - My submission to the Social and Economic Impact Study of Gambling in Tasmania
The Tasmanian Department of Treasury and Finance has engaged a Consultant, the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies, to undertake a Social and Economic Impact Study into Gambling in Tasmania.
Written submissions were invited from the public to inform the study, which is due for completion in March 2008.
The scope and objectives of the study appear to have been strategically set to ensure that the Consultant doesn't actually provide commentary on their findings or specific recommendations. None-the-less a well designed study should expose the suffering caused by this trade, particularly with regard to the poker machine industry, and the hollowness of claims that the industry has a net economic benefit to Tasmanians. It will hopefully provide a strong platform on which to campaign for meaningful reform to the control and administration of gaming in 2008.
National Council of Women Launceston have put in a submission to SACES informed by their successful "Both Sides of the Coin" forum and I've independently submitted the following to add weight to NCW's campaign and encourage SACES to produce a rigorous and well thought out study.
Re: Social and Economic Impact Study into Gambling in Tasmania
I am writing to express my concern about the social impacts of gambling in Tasmania, particularly with respect to problem gambling on poker machines.
As and an interested citizen I have sadly witnessed at first hand the human suffering caused to affected individuals, their families and the wider community by problem gambling.
From empirical observation I believe the prevalence of problem gambling has increased with the decision to extend poker machines into licensed hotels circa 1998, because it essentially engages and enslaves a different demographic of psychologically vulnerable people who would not previously have had ready physical access to poker machines. This is true because in my experience people who become addicted to poker machines are not people who gamble excessively on other forms of gaming, but who have become mesmerised and seduced by these machines after being exposed to them for at critical times in local venues. Obviously I’m not in the position to explain the psychology of such addictions but I have no reason to doubt the testimony of addicts that the machines filled a personal void in their lives by offering them the illusion of participating in socially acceptable and exciting entertainment.
But this is not entertainment and nor is it socially beneficial. What benefit is there in people losing their dinner money, or family rent, or dignity, as I have observed? What social benefit is there in people being driven to commit crime to pursue a form of gambling that the well referenced Productivity Commission report into Australia’s Gambling Industries (1999) has already exposed as attracting 42% of its revenue from problem gambling?
I would argue that the industry and Government are morally culpable and potentially legally liable, for knowingly putting such a dangerously addictive product onto the market and in over supply. Given this background knowledge why has the Tasmanian Government allowed, and why does it continue to allow, this product to be sold in the two most socio-economically disadvantaged suburbs by SEIFA index in my City of Launceston (namely Rocherlea and Ravenswood)?
If it does not know now who is contributing to the turnover in poker machines in these two suburbs and their disposable incomes, I would urge your study to find this out and inform them. I think you’ll find that the money is coming from local people with limited disposable incomes. People who we do know are statistically less advantaged in terms of personal transport and who wouldn’t normally have had ready access to poker machines if the current Tasmanian Government hadn’t extended licences beyond the existing Casinos. Fortunately for those in Rocherlea who cannot afford a car, they now can be encouraged to walk to the Rocherlea Tavern by an advertising balloon that informs them the new gaming room is open from 8 am everyday.
Clearly the addictive nature of poker machines and their obvious social disbenefits aren’t obvious enough to the Tasmanian Treasurer for him to implement a rollback of poker machine licences. The assumed reasons are the alleged economic benefits to the State, operators, hotel licensees and hospitality staff that accrue through poker machine addiction.
With respect to the operators, the Federal Group, the economic benefits would appear to be very real and undiminished by community debate about the morality of their trade.
I think that the net economic benefit to hoteliers and employees is less clear and deserves study within your current commission. Are hotels with gaming rooms really more profitable as a direct result of providing that product or are other factors influencing turnover (such as the shear fact that these venues have had an overdue make over)? Are they losing patrons who are turned off by gaming? Are they also losing potentially skilled employees who are uncomfortable with providing service in venues that knowingly profit from human suffering (in contrast to the ethics involved in the responsible service of alcohol)? I would urge you to rigorously consider these questions in the preparation of your Report.
Finally and most importantly in terms of your work, I look forward to you demonstrating the net economic disbenefit to Tasmania from gambling, particularly from poker machines.
The income to Government from taxation is readily calculated, but the financial costs are equally obvious to people working in the human services in this State.
For every social impact there is a direct and often quantifiable financial cost.
Some of these social consequences and their direct costs to Government include:
· Homelessness (eg crisis accommodation and support, outstanding debt to the State through unpaid public housing rent).
· Crime (to finance the addiction) (eg police, courts, prisons).
· Family breakdown (eg counselling, family court services, restraining orders, additional housing for new households formed as a result).
· Increased Alcohol & Drug use by gamblers and affected family members (eg counselling and treatment services, police, courts and prisons)
· Increased incidence of Family violence (trigger) (eg counselling, police, courts, prison)
· Negative Mental Health effects including Depression/Suicide (eg counselling).
· Negative labour market effects (eg decreased productivity, loss of skilled staff).
Given the finding that every problem gambler directly affects seven people, these costs are potentially multiplied many times throughout society.
This list is by no means exhaustive and I would implore you to be very thorough in your own analysis of the nexus between problem gambling, social impacts, and the direct and indirect financial costs to all levels of Government in Tasmania.
I note with some disappointment that the scope and objectives of this study do not require you to deliver recommendations to Government for the future management and control of gambling in Tasmania.
Despite that I hope that you will feel ethically compelled to make recommendations that follow as a consequence of your findings.
Such recommendations should include enhanced legislative protections of problem gamblers by both the Tasmanian and Australian Governments, including a mandated Code of Conduct that requires Federal Hotels to adhere to best practice in harm minimisation.
Reforms that I would particularly support include, but are not limited to:
· Rolling back the number of poker machines, particularly in socio-economically disadvantaged areas;
· Ensuring venues aren't allowed to employ psychological techniques (eg dim background lighting/absence of clocks) in venue design which are unethically intended to promote the hypnotic, timeless state experienced by many problem gamblers (i.e. "the zone");
· Ensuring that Poker machine manufacturers and venues limit the use of linked jackpots etc that promote excess gambling;
· Limit the cash changing facilities on poker machines to a realistic $200 maximum;
· Ban ATMs from venues or their immediate vicinity (750 m);
· Ban cash advances on credit accounts at venues or their immediate vicinity (750m);
· Ban rewards/loyalty schemes linked to Poker machine use;
· Adequately publicise the virtually unknown Tasmanian Government Exclusion Scheme, particularly the very good provisions for third party and Commissioner of Police exclusions (by mandating a variety of media and public education strategies that Federal Hotels must fund and employ as part of their license conditions).
· Ensure that Third Party exclusions are automatically granted subject to later Review so that relief can be immediate.
Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this Study. I look forward to reviewing your findings and trust that they’ll reflect a rigorous and critical examination of the harmful personal, social and economic consequences of this industry.
Yours sincerely
Alan Melton
Read the full Post!
A call to arms against the suffering caused by Federal's Pokies.....NCW Launceston's Forum on the Impact of Pokies - 19 September 2007
This issue is one we can't afford to ignore any longer. It causes suffering in this town every minute of every day. If you doubt it, consider the fact that studies show that at least $1 in every $3 that goes into the Pokies comes from a problem gambler. (Watch ABC 4 Corners of 10 September 2007 entitled "Hokey Pokie" online at
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/default.htm)
Time to put the spotlight squarely on Federal by supporting the National Council of Women Launceston's "Both Sides of the Coin" forum on Wednesday 19 September 2007.
Read the full Post!
