tag:theconversation.com,2011:/global/topics/budget-2014-9460/articlesBudget 2014 – The Conversation2016-07-10T20:41:11Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/615742016-07-10T20:41:11Z2016-07-10T20:41:11ZCoalition scrapes through but Turnbull needs to alter course<p>The Coalition has – finally – fallen over the line and will form government following the 2016 election, though it is still unclear whether it has secured a majority in its own right. </p>
<p>The challenges Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull now faces are formidable. Although first-term governments often suffer a swing against them, the closeness of the result means the Coalition needs to reflect on what went wrong during its first term in office. </p>
<h2>The first term</h2>
<p>Before the September 2015 change in leadership, polls suggested the Coalition was on track to be a one-term government. </p>
<p>Much of the damage can be traced back to the Abbott government’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-13/budget-2014-joe-hockey-slashes-spending-in-'budget-repair'-job/5446700">2014 budget</a>, which outlined deep cuts to projected spending in health and education, the introduction of a Medicare co-payment, cost increases for medicines on the PBS, hardline changes to the welfare system, and the deregulation of university fees. </p>
<p>The Coalition’s ability to sell these measures to the public was weakened by the fact they were not part of the Coalition’s 2013 election commitments. Tony Abbott had also <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/then-and-now-the-abbott-governments-broken-promises-20140514-zrcfr.html">explicitly ruled out cuts</a> to education and health prior to the election. </p>
<p>Having campaigned continuously against the Labor government for breaking its pre-election commitment not to introduce a carbon tax, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-02/lewis-and-woods-this-ship-of-state-may-not-be-seaworthy/5934046">this breach of trust so early proved disastrous</a>. </p>
<p>The government remained committed to many of these changes throughout its three years in office, although it was unable to secure their passage through the Senate, while the states were vocal opponents of the cuts to health and education. </p>
<p>In opposition, Abbott was never a particularly popular leader <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-17/tony-abbott-disapproval-rating-at-record-high/4430808">with voters</a> – even when the Coalition was well ahead of Labor. The 2014 budget and an inability to get key measures through the Senate, combined with persistent internal rumblings over his leadership style and claims that his chief-of-staff Peta Credlin <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-04/ian-mcdonald-slams-abbotts-obsessive-advisers/5134000">exercised too much power</a>, further <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/prime-minister-tony-abbotts-popularity-plummets-to-depths-that-saw-julia-gillard-ousted/news-story/cd9392624be6dde35bcb232c2eaca94f">eroded his approval ratings</a>. </p>
<p>By September 2015, after 15 months of consistently bad polling, the government was sitting on an electoral precipice, paving the way for Turnbull’s successful leadership challenge. </p>
<p>This resulted in an <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-22/malcolm-turnbull-led-coalition-in-election-winning-lead-newspoll/6793482">immediate poll boost</a> for the Coalition. Turnbull recorded a significant lead over Opposition Leader Bill Shorten as preferred prime minister. </p>
<p>Turnbull’s statement to the media on the night of his successful challenge signalled a change in the direction of the government and its style of leadership. He <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2015/sep/14/tony-abbotts-leadership-under-pressure-as-mps-gather-politics-live">emphasised</a> he would lead a “thoroughly liberal government committed to freedom, the individual and the market”. He said Australia needed to be “agile”, “innovatve”, and “creative”. </p>
<p>He also foreshadowed a more positive approach to government, exemplified by his claim that there “has never been a more exciting time to be an Australian”.</p>
<p>However, <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/federal-election/approval-decline-of-turnbull-mark-1-and-turnbull-mark-2-in-synch/news-story/47a7cadbe08c95463d5720419d296a14">Turnbull’s lead over Shorten</a>, and the <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll-malcolm-turnbull-coalition-lose-lead-to-labor/news-story/481794644ea4fc1cb898cb7189fd84b0">Coalition’s lead over Labor</a>, eroded in the eight months between the leadership challenge and the beginning of the election campaign. </p>
<p>Some decline was always likely, given the high expectations of Turnbull. Nonetheless, the situation was worsened by the relative lack of concrete policy proposals to give substance to his positive rhetoric. </p>
<p>Turnbull also endorsed the plebiscite on same-sex marriage and <a href="https://theconversation.com/malcolm-turnbull-and-his-emissions-trading-scheme-shadow-48198">ruled out an emissions trading scheme</a>, which sat uneasily with his promise to run a liberal government and his past support for reform in both areas. It also created a perception that he was beholden to conservative forces within the Coalition. </p>
<p>The government then made a series of politically questionable moves. It proposed <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-30/turnbull-looks-to-correct-tax-failure/7284314">reinstating state income tax</a>, sent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/08/gst-increase-is-best-chance-to-deliver-income-tax-cuts-scott-morrison-says">mixed signals on increasing the GST</a>, and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/medicare-architect-hits-out-at-privatisation-plan-reports-20160209-gmpe0r.html">floated changes to the Medicare payment system</a>. Whatever you think of these changes, they were always going to be controversial. And, perhaps unsurprisingly, the government ended up retreating from them. </p>
<p>Floating then abandoning policies was a strange move in the lead-up to an election. It made the government look less positive than Turnbull had indicated it would be. It alienated those in favour of the changes who were disappointed by the failure to adopt them. And it left the government vulnerable to a scare campaign that its real agenda was to introduce these changes if it were re-elected. </p>
<p>These developments, combined with the release of a series of major policies by Labor and an increase in Shorten’s approval ratings, allowed the opposition to <a href="https://theconversation.com/labor-moves-into-dead-heat-with-coalition-57813">regain a lot of the ground</a> it had lost when Turnbull became leader. By the time the election was called, it had a serious chance of victory.</p>
<h2>The campaign</h2>
<p>The negative aspect of the Coalition’s campaign was to attack Labor as a threat to the <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/labor-threatens-economy-morrison/news-story/674c6a62422541e0628ae4cc7f1234e7">economy</a> and to <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/turnbull-warns-property-prices-will-fall-under-labor-negative-gearing-policy-20160219-gmyq2k.html">house prices</a>. Policies on negative gearing and company tax were the main targets. </p>
<p>The Coalition ran a <a href="http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-malcolm-turnbull-launches-boats-scare-campaign-to-counter-bill-shortens-medicare-attack-20160622-gpowxd.html">scare campaign against Labor on “border security”</a>, arguing it would weaken its asylum seeker policy, leading to an influx of refugees. It <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/26/election-2016-malcolm-turnbull-stability-coalition-liberal-party-campaign-launch">repeatedly warned</a> against the dangers of a “Labor-Green alliance” and emphasised the need for stability, particularly in the wake of Brexit. </p>
<p>There was also an attempt to appeal to the “Howard battlers” through the controversial “fake” (or, as it turned out, not-so-fake) tradie advertisement and by exploiting the <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-the-victorian-governments-dispute-with-the-cfa-about-and-how-will-it-affect-the-election-61631">Country Fire Authority dispute in Victoria</a>.</p>
<p>The positive aspect of the Coalition’s campaign was oriented around the idea of “jobs and growth”. This was linked to its central policy proposal, which was a A$48 billion company tax cut. </p>
<p>However, the Coalition put forward few other major policy proposals during the eight-week campaign. </p>
<p>With five seats still close to call, the election saw the Coalition lose a net of 11 seats, and suffer a two-party-preferred swing of 3.36% in the lower house.</p>
<p>It would be particularly concerned at its loss of support among the so-called “<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-what-happened-to-john-howards-battlers-20160705-gpywp2.html">Howard battlers</a>” in the critical marginal seats of Lindsay, Macarthur and Macquarie in Western Sydney. Economic security is likely to have been a key concern for these voters.</p>
<p>Although the theme of jobs and growth was presumably designed to allay this concern, ultimately, the Coalition failed to make a clear and convincing case for how its policies would actually achieve these goals. </p>
<p>Other than its large company tax cut, it did not spend much time outlining in detail what its policy priorities in office would be. Combined with the cuts to spending originally outlined in the 2014 budget and the “<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/budget-2016-tony-abbotts-zombies-add-billions-to-malcolm-turnbulls-first-budget-20160502-gok2hr.html">zombie</a>” measures still in place, this left the government vulnerable on the issue of economic security. </p>
<p>In this context, it’s not hard to see why Labor’s campaign over Medicare privatisation may have cut through. </p>
<h2>The second term</h2>
<p>Although Turnbull has been returned to office, he faces considerable challenges. </p>
<p>Despite calling a double dissolution to flush out micro-parties and produce what it hoped would be a more manageable Senate, the election did not achieve this goal. Although the final composition of the chamber is not yet known, it looks like the government will need the support of an assortment of nine crossbench senators to get its bills through. </p>
<p>As things stand, it seems likely they will oppose major cuts in politically sensitive areas such as family payments, health and education. This means the Coalition will need to moderate its approach or face another three years of stalled legislation. </p>
<p>The failure to win a more decisive victory also means that major government decisions are likely to be viewed through the prism of Turnbull’s leadership, particularly given the continuing presence of his more conservative predecessor and his supporters on the backbench. </p>
<p>Turnbull’s weakened leadership position will make it more difficult to resist pressure from more conservative Coalition MPs on social and environmental issues. The prospects of him realising his aim of leading a genuinely “liberal” government look fairly remote. </p>
<p>The Nationals – who had a relatively good election, increasing their vote and, in all likelihood, their representation in the parliament – are also in a stronger position within the Coalition than they were after 2013. <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-nationals-play-cabinet-promotion-politics/news-story/c1b9c7eeaec5ca073458a83e181b3857">Reports suggest</a> they are using this to push for an additional position in cabinet.</p>
<p>The plebiscite on same-sex marriage, if it goes ahead, is likely to be a catalyst for propelling these internal tensions into the public domain. <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-24/election-2016-coalition-mps-can-vote-against-gay-marriage/7540988">Some conservative MPs</a> have already signalled they would vote against same-sex marriage rather than abide by the results of the plebiscite, which <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll/more-australians-back-change-to-allow-samesex-marriage/news-story/1f645f84cb458c9648d9e80f0d564592">polling</a> suggests is likely to back reform. </p>
<p>Although there would probably be sufficient support in the lower house to get the bill through even without a unanimous Coalition vote, the spectacle of Coalition MPs voting against the results of a plebiscite the government insisted on holding would be damaging. </p>
<p>Finally, perhaps the most significant longer-term challenge arising for the Coalition from the 2016 election is the prospect of other parties on the right eating into its vote share. The <a href="http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseStateFirstPrefsByParty-20499-NAT.htm">national first preference vote</a> for major parties in the lower house was around 77%. This means minor parties and independents attracted more than 20% of the vote (and the figures in the Senate are even higher). </p>
<p>Just under 10% of the nationwide vote went to the Greens, but that leaves a sizeable portion which went to other parties on the right/centre-right. The Nick Xenophon Team received just over 21% of the vote in South Australia and picked up the seat of Mayo from the Liberals. </p>
<p>Pauline Hanson’s One Nation received just over 9% of the first-preference Senate vote in Queensland, 4% in NSW, and just under 4% in Western Australia, which is likely to be enough to secure <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-punching-bag-pauline-hanson-attacks-the-media-after-senate-win-20160706-gpzjpw.html">three to four Senate spots</a>. </p>
<p>While One Nation’s support is not at the level it was at in the late 1990s, the Coalition will be wary of losing more conservative voters to Hanson at the next election, particularly as anti-immigration parties gain popularity around the world. </p>
<p>However, if the Coalition moves too far to the right to counter this, it is likely to alienate more moderate voters who are opposed to Hanson’s views on immigration and other issues. </p>
<p>Although there are a number of distinctive factors at work in South Australia that contributed to Xenophon’s success, the fact his relatively new party won Mayo shows that it is not just parties on the far right that can potentially pose a threat to the Coalition. </p>
<p>This is a further reason for the Coalition to rethink its policy approach. The Coalition’s first term in office got off to a disastrous start after the cuts announced in the 2014 budget. Although it retreated from some of the most controversial measures, subsequent budgets also contained significant cuts, while <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/anu-modelling-shows-how-the-2016-budget-really-affects-your-hip-pocket-20160511-gosewj.html">modelling</a> showed the poorest 20% of households were most adversely affected by the 2016-17 budget. </p>
<p>Proceeding with significant cuts to benefits and services in the Coalition’s second term risks further alienating voters who are already troubled by a growing sense of economic insecurity, particularly those who are drawn to anti-immigration parties that exploit these concerns. This is likely to become an even bigger issue in 2018 when the government faces the prospect of negotiating a new hospital funding agreement with the states. </p>
<p>For this reason, adopting a more moderate approach to cuts in its second term is likely to be politically advantageous for the Coalition, as well as necessary if it is to avoid deadlock in the Senate. </p>
<p>Moderating these cuts would further delay the return of the budget to surplus, which would cause the government some immediate political damage. However, this is likely to be outweighed by the damage the Coalition would face in marginal seats if it went to the next election with policies that heighten voters’ sense of economic insecurity. </p>
<p>Whatever strategy the Coalition adopts, Turnbull clearly faces a tough road ahead. Whether he can be the first prime minister since John Howard to see out a full term in the job will depend on whether he is able to adjust his approach and develop the political skills needed to manage the internal tensions within his own party, an unwieldy Senate and the electoral challenges associated with an increasingly <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-2016-reveals-the-end-of-the-rusted-on-voter-and-the-death-of-the-two-party-system-61373">fragmented party system</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61574/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicholas Barry is affiliated with the National Tertiary Education Union. </span></em></p>How did the Coalition go from a resounding victory in 2013 to the edge of electoral defeat?Nicholas Barry, Lecturer, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/383032015-03-04T19:26:13Z2015-03-04T19:26:13ZBrian Schmidt: why funding science infrastructure is essential<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/73742/original/image-20150304-31835-1p9i631.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Murchison Widefiled Array might not look like traditional infrastructure, but it's just as essential to scientific research.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murchison_Widefield_Array#mediaviewer/File:MWA_32T_Tile.jpg">Natasha Hurley-Walker/Wikimedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When you see the word “infrastructure”, the first thing conjured in most people’s minds is roads, bridges and rail. These are, after all, the most visible portion of the A$100 billion of infrastructure that the nation is currently investing in. </p>
<p>But there is another kind of infrastructure that is just as critical to Australia’s economy and future which you probably haven’t heard of. That is the national infrastructure that underpins our scientific research and development. </p>
<p>Over the past decade the nation has invested <a href="https://education.gov.au/national-collaborative-research-infrastructure-strategy-ncris">A$2.5 billion in national research infrastructure investment</a> across a diverse range of 27 facilities. </p>
<p>These include <a href="http://www.mwatelescope.org/">telescopes</a> that allow astronomers like myself to undertake internationally significant scientific research. As well as leading edge imaging devices that enable companies like Cochlear to remain at the <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/gene-therapy-may-boost-cochlear-sound/story-e6frg8y6-1226894551186">forefront of their industry</a>.</p>
<p>Another example is the <a href="http://www.imos.org.au/">Integrated Marine Observing System</a>. This provides valuable observations used for predicting everything from where the wreckage of missing Malaysia Airlines <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/flight-mh370">flight MH370</a> may have drifted, to information used to predict the seasonal forecasts so valuable for Australia’s farmers. </p>
<p>Much of this infrastructure was provided through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (<a href="https://education.gov.au/national-collaborative-research-infrastructure-strategy-ncris">NCRIS</a>) announced in 2004 by the then Minister for Education, Science and Training, Julie Bishop. It was an innovative five year program that strategically invested in research infrastructure in a coordinated way across the nation. </p>
<p>Widely applauded <a href="https://education.gov.au/2010-evaluation-national-collaborative-research-infrastructure-strategy-ncris">across the sector</a>, the initiative lost momentum under Labor starting in 2011, when it was not funded.</p>
<p>Instead, a band-aid solution was applied in 2012, funded by money destined for universities, to keep facilities from <a href="https://education.gov.au/collaborative-research-infrastructure-scheme-cris">shutting down</a>. This piece-meal approach was extended through a short-term program to fund operations available for the 2013-14 financial years.</p>
<h2>Framework for science</h2>
<p>Many scientists have commented on the loss of the strategic value embedded in the original NCRIS program, including myself and <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/opinion/research-will-dry-up-without-funding-stream/story-e6frgcko-1226665836544">Peter Doherty</a> in 2013. </p>
<p>However, the community was positively reassured when in 2014, as part of its first budget, Minister Christopher Pyne announced <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/science-funding-snarled-by-stalled-education-bill-20141215-127efd.html">A$150 million for NCRIS</a> for 2015-16 to allow the research infrastructure of the nation to continue to operate. And, very importantly, this created a path to the future by initiating <a href="http://docs.education.gov.au/node/36773">Review of Research Infrastructure</a> chaired by <a href="http://philipmarcusclark.com/">Philip Clark AM</a>. This panel is expected to provide an interim report in a few weeks and deliver its final report in May. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73746/original/image-20150304-31835-1rlh0tc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=484&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Integrated Marine Observing System deploys floats like these to monitor global ocean temperatures. Some of its funding comes from NCRIS.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://imos.org.au/newsitem.html?&no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=485&cHash=4e31de6d867900b6c61b4008faee676b">Alicia Navidad/CSIRO</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It is the supreme hope of the research community that this report will once again provide the framework for a long-term strategic investment strategy for the nation that the government can invest in. </p>
<p>It is therefore almost unthinkable that the community now finds itself on the verge of calamity. The A$150 million of funds, promised in the 2014 Budget, have not been released by the Government due to the release being linked to the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/christopher-pynes-senate-ultimatum-pass-higher-education-reform-by-march-20150128-1300gx.html">passage of the Higher Education Bill</a>.</p>
<p>There is less than five months until insolvency for some facilities, and no sign that the higher education reforms will pass, despite their support from the higher education sector. Thus panic is beginning to creep into many of 27 research facilities, with key members of staff becoming increasing unsure of their future. </p>
<p>As they should be. Some facilities will need to start terminating their employees at the end of the month to ensure their balance sheets add up in June. These are highly skilled workers whom you cannot just recruit with an advert on Seek, so we are already losing significant capacity. </p>
<h2>Funding science into the future</h2>
<p>Catastrophe is if we still do not have a resolution before the 2015 budget in May. At this point it will be necessary for a wholesale winding down of the nation’s scientific infrastructure capability. </p>
<p>And just like if a key infrastructure provider, such as Telstra, needed to shut down and quit providing services, the damage will be immense. This will not just be to the facilities themselves, but to the nation as a whole, through the effects on the A$30 billion of R&D spent each year and the 35,000 people which depend on the infrastructure provided. </p>
<p>Higher education needs to be reformed, although I am concerned by the <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/students-should-not-shoulder-financial-burden-of-research/story-e6frgd0x-1226946302089">current proposal</a>. However, my discussions with cross bench senators suggest that the prospects of any higher education reform package passing the Senate before May are low. </p>
<p>This is why the <a href="https://www.science.org.au/research-alliance-invest-research-and-translation">Research Alliance</a>, a group of scientific, research and university bodies, today have written an open letter calling on the prime minister Tony Abbott to honour the government’s commitment to this infrastructure program.</p>
<p>Our national research infrastructure needs an urgent solution independent of the higher education reform package, and I beg the Senate and the government to find a solution. </p>
<p>The cost of not doing so will dwarf the A$150 million one-off payment this year.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/38303/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brian Schmidt is Chair of Astronomy Australia Limited, a not for profit company that receives funds, including those from NCRIS, to invest in National Astronomy Infrastructure. He is a non-executive director of the Australian Wine Research Institute, which has received funding as part of past NCRIS programs. His research is funded by from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>The government is holding crucial science infrastructure funding hostage until its higher education reforms are passed by the senate.Brian Schmidt, Distinguished Professor, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/374822015-02-17T19:04:42Z2015-02-17T19:04:42ZHidden cost of increasing drug co-payment poses a high risk<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/72228/original/image-20150217-18500-7fa16r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A rise in the co-payment for medicines may lead to an increase in the rates of discontinuation for some drugs.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/58725530@N07/5652875366/in/photolist-4iUhsN-4iUgZW-4iUgB9-3PeHtR-9BwsUo-5RWzu2-5HSZ9g">Michael Cheng</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Apart from proposing a co-payment for visiting doctors, the last federal budget also contained a proposal to increase the level of co-payments for medications. The government seems to have given little attention to the effect this policy would have on the long-term health of the nation.</p>
<p>Australians buying medicines listed on the <a href="http://www.pbs.gov.au/pbs/home">Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme</a> (PBS) have been required to make a contribution to their cost since the 1960s. Currently, many of us <a href="http://www.pbs.gov.au/info/healthpro/explanatory-notes/front/fee">pay the first A$37.70</a>. Pensioners, the unemployed and those receiving a range of disability benefits have access to a health-care concession card, which reduces this co-payment to A$6.10. </p>
<p>Following <a href="http://www.ncoa.gov.au/report/phase-one/part-b/7-4-the-pharmaceutical-benefits-scheme.html">recommendations of the National Commission of Audit</a>, the <a href="http://www.humanservices.gov.au/corporate/publications-and-resources/budget/1415/measures/health-matters-and-health-professionals/35-90114">2014 budget contained a A$5 increase</a> in the general level of co-payments, from A$37.70 to A$42.70. To date this budget measure has not been passed by the Senate. In early December 2014, <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/12/04/pbs-co-pay-delay-cost-millions-dutton">then-health minister Peter Dutton indicated</a> the government intended to legislate the change in 2015.</p>
<p>Our research suggests that, if implemented, this rise may lead to an increase in the rates of discontinuation for some medications. </p>
<h2>Unknown impact</h2>
<p>Australian studies on the impact of co-payments on the use of medications have been surprisingly rare. <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pds.1670/abstract;jsessionid=57D0CB1010A8DD3F7490D3CB21D7691C.f03t02">Research published in 2008</a>, which used Australia-wide PBS prescribing information, showed that co-payment increases a decade ago resulted in a “significant decrease in dispensing volumes” for many types of medications.</p>
<p>But there hasn’t been much direct research on the impact of the higher out-of-pocket costs on long-term use of common medicines by people who don’t have a concession card. This may be because this research requires data-linkage to track individual usage of medications over time. </p>
<p>In a <a href="http://www.healthpolicyjrnl.com/article/S0168-8510(15)00006-8/abstract">study to be published in the international journal Health Policy</a>, we focused on the impact of non-concessional co-payments on drug use using information collected for the Australian Hypertension and Absolute Risk Study
(<a href="https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2010/192/5/cardiovascular-risk-perception-and-evidence-practice-gaps-australian-general">AusHEART</a>). The research involved collecting clinical information on patients aged above 55 years when visiting a GP, in order to assess the perception and management of cardiovascular disease risk in Australian primary care.</p>
<p>Our study focused on a subset of 1,260 people who were taking cholesterol-lowering drugs known as statins, which are among the most commonly used in Australia. There’s <a href="http://www.cochrane.org/CD004816/VASC_statins-for-the-primary-prevention-of-cardiovascular-disease">compelling evidence that statins are effective</a> for preventing cardiovascular disease, and that non-adherence leads to <a href="http://journals.lww.com/lww-medicalcare/Abstract/2005/06000/Impact_of_Medication_Adherence_on_Hospitalization.2.aspx">increased hospitalisation rates and greater medical costs</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=540&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=540&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=540&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=679&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=679&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/71694/original/image-20150211-25684-15ewxhp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=679&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Authors</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We linked clinical information collected during GP consultation with PBS administrative records on long-term medication use in order to find out what caused these people to stop taking the pills. We found that those who didn’t have a concession card were around 60% more likely to stop taking the medication. Along with being a smoker and a new statin user, this was one of only three factors that had a significant impact on long-term use.</p>
<h2>Which way forward?</h2>
<p>Many types of statin medication have historically cost much more in Australia than other countries. For instance, a <a href="https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2010/193/3/expiry-patent-protection-statins-effects-pharmaceutical-expenditure-australia-0">2010 study</a> comparing the cost of Simvastatin in different places found Australia paid more than four times more for this drug than in England.</p>
<p>To address this discrepancy, the Rudd government introduced a policy of <a href="http://www.pbs.gov.au/info/news/2010/11/Expanded_and_Accelerated_Price_Disclosure">accelerated price disclosure</a> in 2010. The policy bases future drug prices on actual cost to pharmacists. As these are often much lower than official prices, the cost of many generic drugs has been falling. </p>
<p>While the cost of statins in Australia is still higher than in other countries such as England and New Zealand, many of these medications now cost less than the non-concessional level of co-payment; 40mg Simvastatin, for instance, is just under A$12. </p>
<p>Falls in prices like this reduce the out-of-pocket costs for general users, which is likely to improve adherence to medications. Drugs like statins generally require long-term use to effectively reduce cardiovascular disease and prevent premature death. Our study shows increases in drug prices are likely to have the opposite effect. And <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pds.1670/abstract;jsessionid=57D0CB1010A8DD3F7490D3CB21D7691C.f03t02">the 2008 study</a> mentioned above shows this may hold true for other medications as well. </p>
<p>Such findings have implications for future government policies regarding co-payments. Clearly, when considering a policy that will increase drug costs, the government needs to consider more than just direct financial impact. Potential downstream costs, such as changes in number of hospitalisations, and health impacts, such as the policy’s effect on the risk of premature mortality, should also be considered.</p>
<p>Our results suggest that reducing the cost of statin medications may not only save taxpayers money, it may also save their lives.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/37482/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Philip Clarke receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emma Heeley, John Chalmers, and Rachel Knott do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Apart from proposing a co-payment for visiting doctors, the last federal budget also contained a proposal to increase the level of co-payments for medications. The government seems to have given little…Rachel Knott, Research Fellow in Health Economics, Monash UniversityEmma Heeley, Senior Research Fellow (Neurological), George Institute for Global HealthJohn Chalmers, Emeritus Professor at The University of Sydney & Senior Director, George Institute for Global HealthPhilip Clarke, Professor of Health Economics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/353112014-12-10T02:30:46Z2014-12-10T02:30:46ZBack to the future with Coalition attacks on Medicare bulk billing<p>In the government’s latest “scraping away the barnacles” of unpopular and blocked policies, prime minister Tony Abbott and health minister Peter Dutton have announced they’re abandoning the plan to have doctors charge a $7 co-payment for consultations. Facing a massive backlash from both the medical profession and the public, the budget measure was facing almost certain defeat in the Senate.</p>
<p>Abbott and Dutton have outlined an “optional” co-payment, which makes doctors responsible for charging it. It reduces the rebate doctors receive for treating patients by $5 and freezes it until July 2018. General practitioners can pass on this cut by charging patients who do not have health-care (concession) cards and are aged over 16. </p>
<p>Both versions of the co-payment policy are just the latest stoush in long battle over bulk billing, which lies at the centre of Medicare, and the scope of universal health coverage in Australia. Bulk billing – where general practitioners bill Medicare directly without charging patients upfront fees – has, in fact, played an unusually prominent role in Australian health policy conflicts. </p>
<p>“Free” access to the gatekeeper role of general practice enraged conservative critics of Medicare from the start. At the same time, defenders of Medicare treat it as a line in the sand; any attack on bulk billing is equated with an assault on Australia’s public health system.</p>
<h2>A doomed policy</h2>
<p>The original policy, announced in the <a href="http://www.budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/glossy/health/download/Health.pdf">May budget</a>, was complicated and poorly explained. Here’s a brief summary of what it entailed. </p>
<p>From July 1, 2015, previously bulk-billed patients would pay $7 towards the cost of standard medical consultations and out-of-hospital pathology and imaging services. Some patients – including children under 16 and health-care card holders (low-income earners and pensioners) – would be exempt from the co-payment after their first ten visits in a calender year. </p>
<p>In effect, the structure of bulk billing would remain intact. Doctors could still bill Medicare directly, but their patients would have to pay the $7 co-payment. If they charged the full amount, general practitioners would receive an additional $2 in the rebate from the government. The other $5 raised by the co-payment would go into a Medical Research Future Fund, which would start disbursing the interest it garnered after it had collected $20 billion.</p>
<p>The policy was <a href="https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2014/200/7/copayments-general-practice-visits">attacked from all sides</a>. Defenders of Medicare saw it as another round in the Coalition’s attempts to undermine universal coverage. And the Australian Medical Association (AMA) – long ambivalent about bulk billing – criticised the complexity of the arrangements, and demanded the exclusion of vulnerable people. </p>
<p>Australia already has one of the <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/AH14087.htm">largest and most complex set of co-payments</a> for medical services in the developed world. Proponents of a “price signal” for health seemed ignorant of the bewildering array of price signals already faced by anyone with a serious and continuing illness. </p>
<p>And no one, including the government, has proffered any modelling to justify the claim that a co-payment would make the system more efficient, rather than just add to the existing obstacle course. </p>
<p>Even the medical research community seemed either bemused and embarrassed by the linking of the co-payment to a new Medical Research Future Fund. This move, which seemed calculated to divide medical groups, confused the government’s message that the measure was part of its program of “budget repair”. </p>
<p>It was hard to find anyone with a good word to say about the policy. And its doom in the Senate seemed certain. </p>
<p>An official report released in September showing federal government spending on health <a href="http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=60129548871">has been declining</a> – and will fall further with cuts in transfers to state hospital systems – made the justification for the change look even more fragile.</p>
<h2>Back to the future</h2>
<p>So how is the new policy likely to be received? The AMA has always been comfortable with co-payments, but not with cuts in the rebate. Its national president, Brian Owler, has described the announcement as a “<a href="https://ama.com.au/media/government%E2%80%99s-new-co-payment-model-%E2%80%98mixed-bag%E2%80%99">mixed bag</a>”. </p>
<p>The “optional” co-payment ends the administrative nightmare of charging concessional patients for just their first ten visits. It also removes proposed co-payments on pathology and other diagnostic tests.</p>
<p>But it remains a cost shift from the government to individuals, with doctors squeezed in the middle. It may have severe effects on the viability of practices in poorer areas where general practitioners may not feel they have the option of passing on the rebate cut. </p>
<p>The odd thing about this saga is that <a href="https://www.newsouthbooks.com.au/books/the-making-of-medicare/">we have been here before</a>. In 1996, the Howard government froze GP rebates. Over the next three years, this squeezed doctors’ incomes, which fell almost 20% in relation to average weekly earnings. </p>
<p>One result was a slow abandonment of bulk billing, not out of ideological hostility, but to maintain practice incomes. Bulk billing had been at a high of 80.6% of services in 1996, but fell to 68.5% in 2003-04. The shift was even greater in areas with fewer general practitioners, especially in remote and rural places.</p>
<p>A political backlash developed; the government faced hostile criticism from doctors, the AMA, and patients. The response was “A Fairer Medicare”, launched in April 2003. It brought in new subsidies for bulk billing in rural and remote areas and incentives for bulk billing health-care card holders. </p>
<p>Opponents argued it was nothing of the sort; health-care card holders were only a minority of those in need, and the policy continued to push general practitioners out of bulk billing. The Senate, controlled by Labor and the Greens, blocked “A Fairer Medicare”.</p>
<p>With a federal election looming, John Howard appointed Tony Abbott as the new Minister for Health, gave him an open cheque book and a mandate to remove bulk billing as an electoral issue. </p>
<p>“Medicare Plus” restored the level of all general practitioner rebates, with extra incentives (which remain in place) to bulk bill children and pensioners. The restoration led to a return of bulk billing. And by 2006, it was back to 78% of services. Tony Abbott used these bulk billing figures to proclaim himself “Medicare’s greatest friend”.</p>
<p>Will the latest changes meet the fate of “A Fairer Medicare”? The Abbott government’s changes will be introduced by regulation, avoiding an immediate Parliamentary vote. But they can be reversed by a Senate vote when Parliament reconvenes in early 2015. </p>
<p>The exclusion of some low-income groups and children may make the new policy more palatable to the cross-benchers who will decide its fate. But the freeze of the rebate and long-term pressure to abandon bulk billing mean neither general practitioners nor many of their patients will be appeased.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35311/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jim Gillespie receives research funding from NHMRC and WentWest/ Western Sydney Partners in Recovery.</span></em></p>In the government’s latest “scraping away the barnacles” of unpopular and blocked policies, prime minister Tony Abbott and health minister Peter Dutton have announced they’re abandoning the plan to have…Jim Gillespie, Deputy Director, Menzies Centre for Health Policy & Associate Professor in Health Policy, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/309112014-09-16T02:27:33Z2014-09-16T02:27:33ZWould you risk losing your home for a few weeks of work?<p><em>Tony Abbott <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/2014-06-23/visit-north-east-arnhem-land">is spending this week in North-East Arnhem Land</a>, part of his <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/abbott-calls-for-new-era-of-engagement-with-indigenous-australia-20130810-2rony.html">long-held hope</a> “to be not just the Prime Minister but the Prime Minister for Aboriginal Affairs”. We asked our experts: what stories does the PM need to hear while he’s in the Top End?</em></p>
<p>If you were unemployed and living in a small community with few jobs around and someone offered you a month of work, you’d jump at the chance – right? Not necessarily, if you didn’t want to risk being left worse off or even homeless as a result.</p>
<p>Weighing up whether to take casual work is a common dilemma facing unemployed or underemployed Australians. In the communities we often work with across the Northern Territory, Indigenous people are sometimes approached to work as short-term consultants with industry, government bodies or researchers like us.</p>
<p>Yet such job offers can be riskier – and costlier – than you might think.</p>
<p>Take the example of Lisa (a real person, though not her real name). She recently turned down an offer of four weeks of work because, with no ongoing job prospects, she couldn’t have afforded the six-week <a href="http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/waiting-periods">break after the job ended</a> before she could start claiming unemployment benefits again. Indeed, if she told Centrelink she had a short-term job, they would cut her payments immediately, usually several hungry weeks before her new pay cheque arrived.</p>
<p>More importantly, she could lose her welfare-linked house, as she had seen happen to friends. Better to stay on the dole for now and do a bit more training, than risk losing the roof over her head.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Yy5bjFxtWp4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A Centrelink video on reporting employment income.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>(Editor’s note: The Conversation contacted the Department of Human Services to ask about the rules and waiting periods for payments being reduced or cut, which you can <a href="https://docs.google.com/a/theconversation.edu.au/document/d/1c8mqH4xNUzw5KlueeROMS5YJw0YZ0FacO_wz4GJiNxU/edit">read here</a>.)</em></p>
<h2>Signs of change in the Territory</h2>
<p>Administrative rigidity is one of the reasons <a href="http://theconversation.com/closing-the-gap-on-indigenous-employment-not-quite-10426">Indigenous employment rates in the Northern Territory have changed so little in recent years</a>. In both the 2006 and 2011 censuses, the proportion of working-age Indigenous people in some form of employment remained at about 36%. This is in a job market where over 80% of non-Indigenous people have jobs.</p>
<p>During his stay in Arnhem Land this week, Prime Minister Tony Abbott will no doubt be asked about Indigenous employment. Canberra, as it has for generations, maintains the fond view that Indigenous people will eventually be drawn into the tax-paying workforce on the same terms as non-Indigenous workers. And for demographic reasons that drive rapid Indigenous growth in Australia’s capitals, their wish is probably coming true for Australia as a whole. </p>
<p>But are there signs of change in the NT where Indigenous people make up 30% of the population? The answer is a tentative yes. </p>
<p>While proportions of people in employment are unchanged, the nature of that work has changed. In 2006, 45% of Indigenous employees in the Territory were paid through [Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP)](http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/6287.0~2011~Chapter~Community%20Development%20Employment%20Projects%20(CDEP), a federal government scheme run primarily for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in remote, rural and urban areas. This scheme encouraged people to do practical community development work, rather than just receive the dole. </p>
<p>The CDEP program is gradually being phased out, covering just 18% of Indigenous employees in the Territory in 2011, but other sources of employment have taken up the slack. Indeed, growth in non-CDEP jobs between the 2006 and 2011 censuses was 69%, way above the population increase of 6%.</p>
<h2>Earning a living from a living culture</h2>
<p>Some interesting patterns are emerging in where jobs are growing in the NT.</p>
<p>While most jobs remained government-funded, the numbers of Indigenous people employed in mining and construction have increased, possibly because mining companies have adopted deliberate Indigenous employment targets. So too did the numbers employed in the cattle industry and forestry, where there have also been programs actively supporting greater engagement.</p>
<p>Another big increase has been the number of people saying they were earning a living from culture-based industries. </p>
<p>The NT has the highest proportion of professional artists anywhere in the world because of the demand for Indigenous art. Despite a dip after the Global Financial Crisis, art centres have developed new products and markets so that the industry is thriving, albeit with ongoing government support for art centres. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rD4VmDi-bZc?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Numbulwar’s Red Flag Dancers at the Top End’s annual Garma festival. Pictures provided courtesy of the Mulka Project.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Importantly, unlike Lisa’s intermittent offers of short-term work, art sales easily fit into a portfolio of income sources that do not interfere with the welfare payments that fill gaps between sales.</p>
<p>This category also includes cultural and natural resource management. Indigenous rangers manage fire and control weeds and feral animals. Such jobs have proved enormously popular because they also get people out onto country and allow them to <a href="http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Environment/Biodiversity/AboriginalLandSeaManagementEvaluation.aspx">pass on cultural knowledge to their children</a>.</p>
<p>There is also strong support from the wider Australian public for government to <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0023154">fund Indigenous natural and cultural resource management</a>, so there was great relief that these programs survived the recent budget intact.</p>
<h2>Bureaucracy is choking work opportunities</h2>
<p>Population movements also suggest that the potential Indigenous workforce is changing. While Indigenous people are highly mobile, and some list their “place of usual residence” as their <a href="http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/D8E0E0E3095431C7CA257BC7001396F6/$File/47350_2013.pdf">traditional country even though they may rarely get the chance to live there</a>, this practice is declining. </p>
<p>Instead, there is a gradual shift from remote sites to large communities; from these to larger towns like Katherine and Alice Springs; and a shift <a href="https://www.cdu.edu.au/the-northern-institute/research-brief-series">from these places to Darwin</a>.</p>
<p>But change is slow and policy will need to change still further if the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous employment is to close. Or perhaps we need to change practice as much as policy. </p>
<p>Australian National University academic Jon Altman suggests that CDEP could most usefully be replaced by <a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/08/10/rethinking-the-persistent-indigenous-employment-problem/">“basic income grants to individuals to promote productivity, enterprise and risk-taking”</a>. Indeed, it could be argued that unemployment benefits could be rebadged as basic income grants were they not so heavily bureaucratised that they inhibit enterprise.</p>
<p>So perhaps the solution to improving Indigenous employment is to look at greater flexibility.</p>
<p>In developing countries, a key feature of individual and communal resilience is a diversity of income sources. People who have a portfolio of income sources are more likely to prosper than those relying on just one. </p>
<p>Instead, the way Australian welfare payments are delivered actively discourages Indigenous people in remoter parts of the country from developing income portfolios. People like Lisa – capable, smart and keen to work – are punished for seizing short-term job opportunities that can build their CVs, expand their skills and give them the pride that can come with employment. </p>
<p>Rather than withholding welfare benefits for six weeks, we should be making it easier for her to say yes to a diverse mix of work – fostering entrepreneurial behaviour rather than driving dependency.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong><em>Further reading in this Abbott in Arnhem Land series:<br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/welcome-to-my-country-seeing-the-true-beauty-of-life-in-bawaka-31378">Welcome to my Country: seeing the true beauty of life in Bawaka</a><br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/pm-for-aboriginal-affairs-abbott-faces-his-biggest-hearing-test-31021">‘PM for Aboriginal Affairs’ Abbott faces his biggest hearing test</a><br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/well-connected-indigenous-kids-keen-to-tap-new-ways-to-save-lives-30964">Well-connected Indigenous kids keen to tap new ways to save lives</a><br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-crowded-homes-can-lead-to-empty-schools-in-the-bush-30971">How crowded homes can lead to empty schools in the bush</a><br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/indigenous-australias-rapid-rise-is-shifting-money-and-votes-26524">Indigenous Australia’s rapid rise is shifting money and votes</a></em></strong></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/30911/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Garnett receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a project looking at Indigenous measures of success in natural resource management</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kerstin Zander does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Tony Abbott is spending this week in North-East Arnhem Land, part of his long-held hope “to be not just the Prime Minister but the Prime Minister for Aboriginal Affairs”. We asked our experts: what stories…Kerstin Zander, Senior Research Fellow, Charles Darwin UniversityStephen Garnett, Professor of Conservation and Sustainable Livelihoods, Charles Darwin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/305092014-08-15T04:55:19Z2014-08-15T04:55:19ZFactCheck: do poor people drive less?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/56569/original/kjj4tz3s-1408069821.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=15%2C57%2C2545%2C1600&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Rich or poor, being stuck in traffic is always annoying.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shultz6/Wikimedia Commons</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>“The people that actually pay the most are higher income people, with an increase in fuel excise… The poorest people either don’t have cars or actually don’t drive very far in many cases.” – Treasurer Joe Hockey, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2014/s4066736.htm">ABC Radio</a>, August 13</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Do rich people pay more?</h2>
<p>The first proposition here is that the people who pay the most fuel excise are those on higher incomes.</p>
<p>This statement can be interpreted in different ways. Excise is not income-related, so higher-income households do not pay more tax per litre for their fuel. But in terms of absolute expenditure, data show that higher-income households spend more, on average, on petrol than lower-income households. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6530.0Media%20Release12009-10?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6530.0&issue=2009-10&num=&view=">Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Household Expenditure Survey Data from 2010</a> reports that households in the lowest 20% of income spent an average of A$16.36 on petrol per week, whereas those in the highest 20% spent an average of A$53.87. </p>
<p>But those figures relate to households, whereas the Treasurer referred to people, so the household survey data aren’t capable of supporting or refuting the Treasurer’s claim if we take his statement literally. A per-person calculation of fuel excise would be very complex, and we probably don’t have data sets that are detailed enough to answer this question. </p>
<p>The other factor is the degree of discretion in spending. Wealthier households are, all else being equal, more likely to use their car for discretionary rather than essential trips.</p>
<h2>Do poor people own fewer cars?</h2>
<p>The Treasurer’s second main proposition is that the poorest people don’t have cars. </p>
<p>This statement is verifiable against motor vehicle ownership data, the best source being the ABS Census. The Minister’s Office <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/data">has provided ABS data on car ownership</a> relative to the <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/seifa">Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SIEFA)</a>, which measures relative household disadvantage. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56579/original/frn7gjtd-1408070412.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Car ownership broken down by relative household advantage. Red portions indicate households with no cars.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Treasury estimates based on ABS 2011 Census of Population and Housing tables from ABS 2033.0 Socio-economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) and www.censusdata.abs.gov.au</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Assuming these data are accurate, they show that roughly 65% of households in the lowest 10% on the SEIFA index own cars, in contrast to 83% of households in the highest 10%. Lower-income households thus own fewer cars, on average, than higher income-households. But note that even among these poorest 10% of households, a majority nonetheless own at least one car. </p>
<p>Furthermore, SEIFA primarily measures income and indicators of disadvantage, rather than “wealth”. A household or individual may have low income but not necessarily be poor if they own large assets. So SEIFA is not an ideal data set to directly compare poor and wealthy households. In a <a href="http://www.atrf.info/papers/2007/2007_Currie_Senbergs.pdf">Melbourne study</a> that considered “forced” car ownership among low-income households in Melbourne, the data showed that 72% of low-income households own at least one motor vehicle. </p>
<p>Finally, car ownership does not equate to use, and is thus only a very indirect indicator of fuel cost.</p>
<h2>Do poor people drive shorter distances?</h2>
<p>The Treasurer went on to claim that poor people “don’t drive very far in many cases”. This is much harder to ascertain, as there is no survey that measures national travel patterns. It is also not clear whether these shorter distances are defined as overall kilometres, or kilometres per trip undertaken. </p>
<p>Metropolitan household travel survey data are not generally provided by state transport departments in terms of income categories, if they collect such data at all. Moreover, there have been few recent Australian studies that have appraised this relationship using such information. The Melbourne survey cited above <a href="http://www.atrf.info/papers/2007/2007_Currie_Senbergs.pdf">also noted that</a> “low-income households make less trips than equivalent middle- and higher-income households”, but that “travel distance per trip generally increases with the number of cars owned per household, regardless of income group”.</p>
<p>Plenty of studies have also linked lower-income households with a range of disadvantageous travel circumstances, mainly because of the geographical locations of suburbs where poorer people tend to live. </p>
<p>In Sydney, for example, people in areas with higher proportions of lower-income households generally make more and longer trips than those in more affluent areas. Also, the bias towards cars over other forms of transport tends to be greater in less affluent areas. </p>
<p>As <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-5871.12001/abstract">this Brisbane study shows</a>, people living in areas with lower average incomes tend to drive more and further (principally for work), own older and less efficient cars, and face relatively higher costs for operating motor vehicles. </p>
<p>In terms of options to offset higher fuel costs by switching to other forms of transport, the distribution of high-quality public transport typically favours wealthier households within Australian cities.</p>
<p>A survey of the <a href="https://www.propertyoz.com.au/library/Energy%20Requirements%20of%20Sydney%20Households%20Jan%202004.pdf">energy requirements of Sydney households</a> showed that lower-income households have very high automobile energy use due to their high car dependence, but that higher-income households generate greater carbon emissions, because of higher overall consumption. In this context the government’s shift in energy taxation from carbon emissions to taxing petrol use seems to be socially regressive – many less wealthy motorists have no option but to take the hit.</p>
<h2>In summary</h2>
<p>So, what to make of the Treasurer’s statement? The terms he used are loosely defined, which makes them difficult to assess against the data. At a basic level, Mr Hockey didn’t say where the threshold is when considering who are “the poorest” people.</p>
<p>At a national scale his statement contains some verifiable truth. But at the scale of regions or cities, spatial factors such as the suburbs where people live and the transport links they use are much more important. </p>
<p>Finally, it is better to think of fuel costs in proportion to disposable income, rather than as absolute costs. We should also consider people’s access to alternative options such as buying a more fuel-efficient vehicle, or switching to public transport, walking or cycling. People with high discretionary income or who live in areas well served by public transport (and there is a significant overlap between these groups) will obviously have more options open to them, whereas poorer households who lack access to public transport might simply have to cut back on travel.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>“Higher-income people pay the most fuel excise”: conditionally true in absolute terms and as a general category, but not necessarily true as a proportion of income or of discretionary spending.</p>
<p>“Poorer people either don’t own cars or don’t drive very far”: unverifiable in any meaningful way. Car ownership is marginally lower in poorer households, but is nevertheless high right across the board, with reason to believe many poorer people are forced into driving long distances (mainly for work) by their geographical circumstances.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This is a good breakdown of the Treasurer’s statement and provides evidence to both verify and refute it.</p>
<p>It would be useful to describe the characteristics of the geographical locations that underpin the relationship between low income and disadvantageous travel circumstances. For example, why do people living in areas with lower average incomes make more and longer trips by car? Is it because these areas are traditionally in the middle to outer suburban ring and are comparatively poorly served by public transport and employment opportunities and services?</p>
<p>Another aspect to this issue is the socio-economic gradient across the rural-regional-urban divide. Much of the focus has been on cities, but low incomes and car dependence are also important issues in rural and regional areas. – <strong>Jennifer Kent</strong></p>
<p><div class="callout"> Have you ever seen a “fact” that doesn’t look quite right? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they really are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</div></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/30509/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jago Dodson receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Urban Research Infrastructure Network, Logan City Council, Springfield Land Corporation and Lend Lease Communities.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jennifer L. Kent does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>“The people that actually pay the most are higher income people, with an increase in fuel excise… The poorest people either don’t have cars or actually don’t drive very far in many cases.” – Treasurer…Jago Dodson, Professor of Urban Policy, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/269092014-05-19T04:56:25Z2014-05-19T04:56:25ZCrunch time: is the ABC really spread too thinly?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48817/original/v5bcv3jb-1400465738.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Maybe we should toast the ABC's strategy for the digital age.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Constance Wiebrands</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you want to capture a lasting image of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation at the height of its powers, it might be a good idea to take a screen-shot of the homepage of the ABC’s website. But do it soon. If you wait a couple more months, or a year, or two, the odds are the site won’t be as rich and layered as it is now, given the hit the corporation took in last week’s budget.</p>
<p>With <a href="http://about.abc.net.au/press-releases/abc-budget-response/">A$120 million</a> sliced off its base funding over the next four years, the ABC won’t be able to do all the things it does now. <a href="https://theconversation.com/scrapping-the-australia-network-affects-more-than-the-abc-26687">The Australia Network</a> – Australia’s international television service – will disappear with flow-on effects across news and current affairs and the ABC’s overseas bureau. An additional efficiency <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/13/budget-abc-to-get-106m-for-cancellation-of-australia-network-contract">dividend of 1%</a> means other services will go too. </p>
<p>Staff and programs will be cut. Some innovations will cease, while other initiatives won’t happen. And there’s the <a href="http://m.abc.net.au/news/article/id/254465/c/1/p/ABC,+SBS+funding+cut,+Australia+Network+contract+cancelled">distinct possibility</a> the cuts are just phase one of a grander scheme to diminish the national broadcaster.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=620&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=620&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48808/original/596knh9h-1400463173.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=620&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The ABC homepage.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ABC</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Take a look at the website and you’ll see a showcase for managing director Mark Scott’s vision for the ABC. As well as the staples of news and radio and television, it’s a mix of new products, platforms and apps. There are the multi-channel television stations, News 24, ABC Two and ABC Kids. There are the digital radio services, such as ABC Country and Jazz – and the latest offering, <a href="http://doublej.net.au/">Double J</a>. </p>
<p>There are the websites catering for general audiences, such as The Drum and niche audiences such as the soon-to-be defunded Ramp Up. There are internet-based television offerings such as ABC iView and the regional video storytelling site, Open. There is so much available you can find yourself hovering over it all, perplexed about what to sample next.</p>
<p>This is what a digitally relevant ABC looks like. The site proves that the ABC is savvy about social media and understands the potential of new platforms. It understands new media consumption patterns, or at least it’s trying to. The ABC seems to get that the worst thing it can do is stand still and that its role must be to lead, innovate and experiment. It has taken its <a href="http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00136/Html/Text#_Toc353360751">charter responsibilities</a> to cater for all Australians headlong into the digital age.</p>
<p>Look at poor old Fairfax Media if you want to see an organisation that took way too long to embrace new forms of media, while letting entrepreneurs march in and steal its business. Of course, the ABC hasn’t got the same commercial imperatives and its funds are mostly derived from taxpayers. </p>
<p>But there is equally fierce competition in public broadcasting for audience share and the ABC stands to lose dearly if it allows others to entice listeners, viewers and, nowadays, readers away.</p>
<p>It’s in this context that ABC’s Radio National Breakfast host Ellen Fanning’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTdO2XTrEvQ&noredirect=1">question to Mark Scott</a> last week was so interesting. She asked the ABC managing director whether his drive to spread ABC services thinly had made the corporation more vulnerable. It was a legitimate line of inquiry, given some of those services will inevitably be terminated. Scott’s answer amounted to a self-appraisal of his tenure:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The ABC would be much weaker today if we weren’t leaders in innovation, if we hadn’t paved the way to catch up television with iView, if we hadn’t gone down the multichannel road. I think as a broadcaster you have no alternative but to invest in the digital future of the organisation. </p>
<p>I think we would have been more vulnerable if we had just been an old-fashioned radio and television network with one TV channel, with only a couple of radio channels with no online and mobile presence. Our audiences would be smaller, we would be less relevant. We are relevant and compelling to the Australian public today because of the investment we made in the new.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48813/original/yw244jnj-1400465429.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mark Scott speaking at the National Press Club in 2011.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Alan Porritt</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The criticism Scott was responding to is not new. It was a resounding theme during David Hill’s term as managing director, from 1987 to 1995. In the mid-1990s I asked Hill much the same question, although then it had a sting in the tail because the ABC was accused of outsourcing its programming as a result of diversification and consequently losing some of its editorial integrity to commercial interests. </p>
<p>Back then, Hill’s answer wasn’t convincing. In fact he didn’t last much longer in the job. But Scott’s answer now has credibility. The ABC has had no choice but to experiment and create and expand. It would have been easy not to but that would have been a reckless strategy. </p>
<p>In addition, as Scott will happily tell you, at least two of these innovations – iView and News24 – were largely built on efficiency savings, although this glosses over the frustration felt by program-makers in other parts of the ABC about the way their budgets were cut to build the TV news channel.</p>
<p>The downside of running so many things on wafer-thin resources is that when a 1% efficiency dividend is imposed the most likely result is the closure of entire services. So now the ABC has to decide what to cut. Many of the new products have proved to be winners and have filled a niche. Several have harnessed the potential of the new technology to create new purposes for the national broadcaster.</p>
<p>ABC Open has captured Australian stories in engaging and accessible ways and given remote communities a new voice. The Drum online created a new forum for informed opinion, breaking the near-monopoly and the closed-shop of the newspapers’ opinion pages. Double Jay refocused the output of Dig Radio, although bringing new broadcasters on staff just a month before the budget may not have been the brightest idea. It’s hard to imagine the ABC now retreating from these bold ventures.</p>
<p>Presumably the government has not forgotten that <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/tv--radio/an-eye-to-history/2008/11/17/1226770322718.html?page=fullpage">famous quote</a> from within the federal Coalition that the ABC represents “our enemies talking to our friends”? It would be wise not to underestimate the affection held for the ABC as the <a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/12/18/trust-in-media-abc-still-leads-telegraph-takes-a-hit/">most trusted and respected</a> media organisation in the country. </p>
<p>I would suggest the public already senses that axing the Australia Network looks like a gift to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, which lost its bid for the service under the Gillard Government. As Scott told Fanning:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We have the overwhelming support of the vast majority of the Australian public and when [the government] considers our funding future they should consider the very important role the ABC plays in the lives of millions of Australians every day.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/26909/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Dodd is a former broadcaster with ABC Radio National and reporter with the 7.30 Report and does occasional freelance work for the ABC.</span></em></p>If you want to capture a lasting image of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation at the height of its powers, it might be a good idea to take a screen-shot of the homepage of the ABC’s website. But do…Andrew Dodd, Program Director - Journalism, Swinburne University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/267392014-05-15T01:51:31Z2014-05-15T01:51:31ZNo country for new games<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48553/original/hn5b9cpb-1400117135.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48553/original/hn5b9cpb-1400117135.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48553/original/hn5b9cpb-1400117135.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48553/original/hn5b9cpb-1400117135.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48553/original/hn5b9cpb-1400117135.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48553/original/hn5b9cpb-1400117135.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48553/original/hn5b9cpb-1400117135.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">League of Geeks, whose upcoming game Armello recently ran a successful $300,000 crowdfunding campaign, are one of many Australian game studios to receive government funding in recent years.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">http://leagueofgeeks.com/</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As part of the Liberal government’s slash-and-burn budget on Tuesday night was the <a href="http://www.kotaku.com.au/2014/05/government-pulls-funding-for-aussie-video-games-industry-in-federal-budget/">surprise announcement</a> that the Australian Interactive Games Fund was to be cut, effective immediately. </p>
<p>First announced in 2012, the Games Fund was designed as an accelerator for the Australian games industry, allowing studios to produce new intellectual property that would be retained in Australia. </p>
<p>A$20 million was originally provided by the fund, set up by the previous government, of which only A$10 million had been spent. According to <a href="http://gdaa.com.au/gdaa-bewildered-by-governments-decision-to-axe-game-industry-fund">a press release</a> by the Game Developers’ Association of Australia, the cut was made with zero consultations with the industry. </p>
<p>Unsurprisingly, the news was met with an outcry from both current and prospective Australian developers, not least of all those who were planning on submitting to the fund in the upcoming months. <a href="http://www.kotaku.com.au/2014/05/government-funding-for-games-pulled-the-australian-games-industry-reacts/">Various</a> <a href="http://www.computerandvideogames.com/463566/australian-games-industry-responds-to-interactive-games-fund-axing/">outlets</a> <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/games/game-developers-cry-foul-as-axe-falls-on-screen-australia-fund-20140515-zrco5.html">reached</a> out to local developers and industry members for comment, all of whom were scathing of the decision. </p>
<p>Yet, the Games Fund was not perfect. While it provided some with amazing opportunities not previously afforded of game developers in Australia, others were concerned it did not provide enough resources for new or emergent developers, focusing instead on supporting those that already had some industry experience — a concern perhaps validated by the appearance of the same interviewees again and again in the above hyperlinked articles. <a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/game-on/2013/01/25/funding-success-what-the-industry-thinks-of-the-federal-government%E2%80%99s-20m-games-fund/">A feature written early last year by Dan Golding</a> captures the wide range of responses, hopes, and concerns the Games Fund drew from people. </p>
<p>The dismantling of the Games Fund then, while both infuriating and distressing, is not the most violent blow this budget strikes against the future of games productions in Australia. Rather, it’s the budget’s much broader attack on young and poor people for the sake of a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/13/abbotts-first-budget-uninspiring-and-a-far-cry-from-the-rhetoric-of-crisis?CMP=soc_568">rhetorical “budget emergency”</a> (while putting aside even more money for offshore interment camps and military hardware) that fills me with the most anxiety for the games that will now not just move overseas, but simply never exist.</p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48556/original/c9p7p62d-1400117806.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48556/original/c9p7p62d-1400117806.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=904&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48556/original/c9p7p62d-1400117806.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=904&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48556/original/c9p7p62d-1400117806.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=904&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48556/original/c9p7p62d-1400117806.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1137&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48556/original/c9p7p62d-1400117806.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1137&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48556/original/c9p7p62d-1400117806.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1137&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Nyarlu Labs’ Forget-Me-Not.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Screenshot by author</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Like every nation’s games industry, Australia’s has an ingrained problem of homogenisation. In the articles linked above, an overwhelming number of the interviewees are men. This is not surprising, considering that a survey of the local industry as it stood in 2011-12 frighteningly showed that <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/arts/blog/Daniel-Golding/Who-makes-videogames-Australia-gender-130627/default.htm">only 8.7% of those in the industry are women</a> — which, at least, is a higher percentage than Tony Abbott’s front bench. The Games Fund, while an incredible and hard-fought-for opportunity for those already making games in Australia, did little to broaden the scope of <em>who</em> makes games in Australia. </p>
<p>Though, significantly, those who are “in the industry” and those who are simply “making games in Australia” are two very different things. Australia has a rich undercurrent of students, artists, young people, and hobbyists creating and sharing games, often beyond the borders of what is commonly considered “the industry”. </p>
<p>Individual projects such as Brandon Williamson’s niche but critically acclaimed <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/forget-me-not/id419572408?mt=8">Forget Me Not</a> or Alexander Bruce’s incredibly successful <a href="http://www.antichamber-game.com/">Antichamber</a>; student games like <a href="http://www.rabbit-rush.com/">Rabbit Rush</a>; and games being made in the spare time of those with other full-time jobs such as <a href="http://pmpygame.com/">Push Me Pull You</a> point to a much broader ecology of Australian game creators than just those employed by an industry.</p>
<p>It is this broader ecology of game creators that has just begun to emerge in recent years with the proliferation of more accessible means to both produce and distribute games, that this budget most violently attacks. </p>
<p>By making health care, education, and unemployment support unobtainable to vast swathes of the nation’s youth, not only will creating games become unviable for many, it will not even be considered as a possible avenue of creativity. </p>
<p>Even further: creativity will not even be considered a viable avenue for many once those safety nets that any respectable nation owes its citizens are dismantled. Who has time to be creative when your own government is willing to let you starve to death? The culture’s creative output remains the domain of those who can afford to be creative.</p>
<p>Cutting off the Games Fund demonstrates that the Liberal government has no interest in supporting an existing vibrant and maturing creative industry. Attacking the younger and lower classes of the nation by gutting a wide range of social services demonstrates that the Liberal government has no interest in the creative and cultural future of the nation.</p>
<p>__</p>
<p><strong><em>Update</em></strong>: Christian McCrea wrote a series of tweets after I posted this column that I think dig a bit deeper into some of the issues I merely touch on here, so I have compiled them <a href="https://storify.com/BRKeogh/christian-mccrea-s-response-to-my-conversation-col">here</a> if people would like to read them.</p>
<p><strong>Disclosure</strong>: I taught some of the students who worked on Rabbit Rush</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/26739/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
As part of the Liberal government’s slash-and-burn budget on Tuesday night was the surprise announcement that the Australian Interactive Games Fund was to be cut, effective immediately. First announced…Brendan Keogh, PhD Candidate, Game Studies, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/266312014-05-13T10:25:07Z2014-05-13T10:25:07ZMerging ‘back-office functions’ is bad news for the museum sector<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48363/original/rwr6sv9j-1399976365.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The National Museum of Australia is one of several organisations whose back-room operations will be merged. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP IMAGE</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After a sustained period of slimming down under the previous Labor government it looks like the GLAM sector (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) has still not achieved its target weight. </p>
<p>Even before the announcement of the 2014 Budget, there were “budget bad news” leaks flying around in the media. <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/budget-2014/axe-to-fall-on-70-federal-agencies/story-fnmbxr2t-1226913908274">One of them</a> has proved correct and will have major ramifications for some of the nation’s biggest cultural institutions – and deliver a saving of A$2.4 million over four years. </p>
<p>The “back-office functions” of the National Archives, the Film and Sound Archive, the National Gallery, National Library, National Museum, Old Parliament House and the National Portrait Gallery, all Canberra-based collection agencies, <a href="http://www.budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/bp2/html/bp2_expense-05.htm">will be merged</a>. </p>
<p>Presumably the “back office” includes things such as pay roll, human resources, and security. I am sure that many in the sector will welcome true efficiencies in these domains – especially if they free up resources for the core business of the national cultural institutions: conserving, curating, researching and, perhaps most crucially, providing access to the nation’s irreplaceable cultural collections.</p>
<p>What’s clear, though, is that there is no consensus yet on what exactly is meant by the “back-end” functions. Might they also include conservation labs, collection registration and digitisation services, visitor evaluation and marketing? </p>
<p>Moves to consolidate these functions have been mooted in the past and fought fiercely by directors protecting their own patches. The sector is, of course, not immune to internal competition and rivalries. </p>
<p>Speaking of which, it’s notable that the Australian War Memorial is not on the list of institutions to be “merged”. Yes, it’s administered through another part of the government, the Department of Veterans Affairs, but perhaps the upcoming suite of centenaries around the first world war and the transformation of Anzac Day from day of mourning to what historian <a href="http://www.monash.edu.au/research/people/profiles/profile.html?sid=234&pid=2614">Graeme Davison</a> called an “inclusive national festival”, means that its role is seen as more “civil sacred” than cultural?</p>
<h2>Pros and cons</h2>
<p>What will happen when all these historically evolved – and some might say somewhat eccentric – institutions are forced into some kind of one-size-fits-all administrative structure? That structure, let’s not forget, will also have to look after the unique architectural heritage buildings that house these institutions.</p>
<p>Taking a Pollyanna approach, I can see there may be some benefits in terms of transparency, governance and ethics. Inclusion of Indigenous and other groups might be better supported through a single platform. </p>
<p>On the negative side I foresee a homogenisation of approaches as a range of institutions are locked into limited service providers for exhibition design and for the development of websites, apps and digital content. </p>
<p>If conservation labs are centralised we may see a return to out-moded “value neutral” conservation. That term describes the tendency to treat all cultural objects as equal, defined by Eurocentric concepts of what is valuable. It’s something that occurs when knowledge sharing between curators, researchers and communities is not enabled and encouraged. </p>
<p>Finally it is not difficult to imagine a more pervasive political and government influence over curatorial policy, exhibition approaches and development plans as this diverse group of institutions are corseted into a single annual reporting, budgeting and strategic planning framework.</p>
<h2>Whose responsibility is our heritage?</h2>
<p>The merging of museum administrative functions will be the latest step in a concerted trend away from viewing public investment in culture and the humanities as the responsibility of government. Increasingly, philanthropy is treated as the appropriate source of financial support – and the “community” is given the responsibility of caring for its heritage. </p>
<p>Of course communities, in all their diversity, are indeed the rightful custodians of their cultural heritage – but simply being identified as a “community” (often problematic in itself) doesn’t come with a chequebook, and access to the time, skills and resources that enable at-risk cultural material or places to be cared for. </p>
<p>For instance, in the related part of the heritage sector that protects cultural and natural heritage places, the government is currently consulting on its draft <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/australian-heritage-strategy">Strategy for Australia’s Heritage</a>.</p>
<p>A single strategy that sets out a national approach to cultural and natural heritage is a long-awaited step forward and the fact that the community is central to the strategy is positive. But the strategy includes a financial commitment to only one national heritage place, Port Arthur, and focuses on the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/minister/hunt/2013/mr20131104.html">Green Army program</a>, as the main source of support for Indigenous and other forms of heritage. </p>
<p>The Green Army is essentially a work for the dole program to employ 16-24 year olds. This may be a good thing for heritage in some circumstances – but it is a stretch to imagine how such groups can care for the breadth and complexity of Indigenous and other community heritage that may need special care.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most important trend in the GLAM and heritage sectors over the last decade or so has been the provision of digital access to collections and new modes of public participation. We’ve seen a move away from culture and heritage as the preserve of “experts” and the democratisation of history making. </p>
<p>These changes are transforming how communities relate to their past, giving new forms of access to people outside metropolitan areas, to the young and to the elderly. </p>
<p>This work relies on strong institutions that have the resources to care for our cultural materials, to make their collecting strategies bold, to be independent and critical of prevailing orthodoxies. </p>
<p>A one-size-fits-all administration system is unlikely to be a comfortable outfit for the sector.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/26631/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tracy Ireland currently receives funding from Air Services Australia. She is affiliated with Australia ICOMOS.</span></em></p>After a sustained period of slimming down under the previous Labor government it looks like the GLAM sector (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) has still not achieved its target weight. Even before…Tracy Ireland, Assistant Professor Cultural Heritage, Head of the Discipline of Humanities, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/256522014-04-24T01:53:06Z2014-04-24T01:53:06ZPension reform and the ‘budget crisis’: a less than mature debate<p>Treasurer Joe Hockey last night stepped up his <a href="https://theconversation.com/means-testing-and-co-payments-part-of-fixing-the-budget-hockey-25878">rhetoric</a> on the the need for heavy government spending cuts, singling out the A$40 billion age pension cost as “much more than we spend on defence, or hospitals, or schools each year”.</p>
<p>Some <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/economics/pension-age-on-fast-path-to-70/story-e6frg926-1226889586494#mm-premium">reports</a> have suggested the pension eligibility age is to be lifted to 70 for everyone born after 1 January 1959, taking effect by 2029, in next month’s budget. Whatever the detail of the measure, it looks as if the rise in the pension eligibility age is a done deal. </p>
<p>So what happened to the “<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/13/joe-hockey-hints-at-raising-pension-age-to-70-and-changes-to-asset-rules">mature debate</a>” that the treasurer called for just a few weeks ago? Because a mature debate on the question of retirement incomes - of which the age pension is one dimension - is certainly needed. </p>
<p>The population is ageing rapidly and it is quite right that the implications for <a href="http://archive.treasury.gov.au/igr/igr2010/report/pdf/IGR_2010.pdf">public policy and public financing</a> are thoroughly interrogated and options explored.</p>
<h2>Several options are on the table</h2>
<p>It may be that the government considers the recent <a href="http://www.pc.gov.au/research/commission/ageing-australia">Productivity Commission</a> and <a href="http://grattan.edu.au/publications/reports/post/game-changers-economic-reform-priorities-for-australia/">Grattan Institute</a> recommendations are sufficient. Both institutions support a pension eligibility age of 70, and the Grattan Institute a superannuation preservation age of 70. In addition, John Daley, CEO of the Grattan Institute, in March published <a href="http://grattan.edu.au/static/files/assets/a4e30491/227_daley_oped_australian_ausperspectives.pdf">a strong defence</a> of the increased pension age policy particularly focusing on the benefits to the budget and the labour market. </p>
<p>Daley argues that increasing both the pension and superannuation preservation ages is the best option for achieving a budget balance. Other tax reform possibilities are largely ruled out, although in the Grattan Institute paper on <a href="http://grattan.edu.au/static/files/assets/ceacf10a/801_Balancing_Budgets.pdf">balancing budgets</a>, a GST increase to 12.5% is advocated in addition to wider retirement income reforms including reduced superannuation tax concessions and widening the pension assets test to include the family home. </p>
<p>But the focus on expenditure measures for solving the “budget crisis” by the Grattan Institute in its March policy brief<a href="http://increasing%20the%20age%20pension%20age%20%E2%80%93%20busting%20the%20myths/"> </a><a href="">Increasing the Age Pension age – busting the myths</a> stands in contrast to other perspectives on fiscal sustainability, such as that of the Treasury Secretary Martin Parkinson, who canvassed more broadly both the <a href="http://www.treasury.gov.au/%7E/media/Treasury/Publications%20and%20Media/Speeches/2014/Fiscal_sustainability/Downloads/Sydney_Institute_2_Apr_2014.ashx">revenue and expenditure options to boost productivity and innovation in a recent speech</a> - and for that matter, the Grattan Institute’s own broad suite of ideas in its <a href="http://grattan.edu.au/static/files/assets/ceacf10a/801_Balancing_Budgets.pdf">Balancing Budgets report</a>.*</p>
<h2>Nice in theory…</h2>
<p>Whether the increased pension eligibility age will be effective in achieving a balanced budget will depend on whether older people will be able to obtain and maintain employment until 70. </p>
<p>In the Grattan Institute’s recent policy brief, Daley points to <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6238.0July%202012%20to%20June%202013?OpenDocument">ABS data</a> showing that most people over 65 who are not working have chosen not to - because they have reached retirement age and are eligible for a pension or superannuation. </p>
<p>But this glosses over the substantial other factors that have contributed to retirement decisions. For retired people who have held a job in the last 20 years (<a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6238.0July%202012%20to%20June%202013?OpenDocument">using the same ABS data, table 6</a>), 13% were no longer working because they had lost a job, a temporary job had finished, or they could not find a job. A further 23% had retired because of own sickness, illness or disability with 4.5% retired to care for someone ill, disabled or elderly. These factors account for around 40% of retirement or leaving the workforce decisions. </p>
<p>They relate to two major challenges for the older workforce. The first is obtaining and maintaining employment in later life. The data suggests that regaining a job is difficult for many if a job is lost, precipitating a decision to retire. <a href="http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/age-discrimination-exposing-hidden-barrier-mature-age-workers-2010#Heading78">Age discrimination barriers</a> are more significant than either the Productivity Commission or the Grattan Institute acknowledge in their reports. </p>
<p>The second challenge relates to capacity for work. The argument most often posited is that life expectancy is now much longer than it was when the <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/94713ad445ff1425ca25682000192af2/8e72c4526a94aaedca2569de00296978!OpenDocument">age pension was introduced</a> over 100 years ago, with an eligibility age of 65 for men and 60 for women. So the logic goes that it makes sense to lift the eligibility age. Daley calls this a “pretty obvious reform”.</p>
<h2>Harsh realities</h2>
<p>But life expectancy (mortality) is not the only consideration. Health status (morbidity) is also important. We can look to two professions, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/national/nurses-battling-their-own-medical-crisis-20140223-33agr.html">nursing</a> and <a href="http://www.workcoverqld.com.au/education/articles/queensland-teachers-most-stressed-workers">teaching</a>, as examples where we would think working to 70 would be quite possible but clearly this will be a serious challenge based on the current experience. </p>
<p>People working in occupations requiring physical inputs (<a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6324.0Main%20Features32009-10?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6324.0&issue=2009-10&num=&view">see ABS table</a> on occupations with highest injury/illness) will struggle to keep working until 70, but we cannot discount the stresses and strains in other occupations such as teaching where work has <a href="http://w3.unisa.edu.au/hawkeinstitute/cwl/documents/AWALI2012-National.pdf">become very demanding</a>. </p>
<p>Work-life balance issues become more sharply defined with age. We might be living longer but this doesn’t mean we are the same at 65 or 70 as we were at 35 or 40. Work intensification stemming from increased productivity requirements may pose a real barrier for many older workers regardless of overall health status. </p>
<p>With large numbers of workers not being able to access a pension until 70, the outcomes will be more reliance on other pensions and benefits. The default for some will be the disability support pension as suggested by both the Grattan Institute and Productivity Commission. This adds adds a layer of an eligibility requirement of “impairment” for income support on to the pension income and assets test. A long-term project of governments is to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/21/australias-unsustainable-welfare-system-to-be-overhauled-says-minister">reduce reliance</a> on this payment and again a new round of <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-20/disability-pensioners-may-be-reassessed-kevin-andrews/5400598">review of eligibility</a> is under way. </p>
<p>The later pension eligibility age will mean many older workers in their sixties will be forced on to unemployment payments – the <a href="http://www.acoss.org.au/images/uploads/ACOSS%20Newstart%20Brochure%202013.pdf">low Newstart allowance</a> at a mere $A250 per week. This will widen <a href="https://newmatilda.com/2014/04/15/cut-super-concessions-not-pension">older age penury</a> and heighten <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/middle-class-hard-working-and-homeless-20140407-368w7.html">the risk of homelessness</a>. </p>
<p>The government and the institutions advocating for a later retirement age have largely not engaged with these difficult and complex factors that are relevant to public financing for an ageing population. As such, the logic for raising the pension eligibility age as a solution to the “budget crisis” is deeply flawed and is setting up future governments for other social and economic “crises” down the track. It is a shame that the “mature debate” is over before it even began.</p>
<p><em>*The wording in this paragraph was amended post publication.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/25652/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Veronica Sheen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Treasurer Joe Hockey last night stepped up his rhetoric on the the need for heavy government spending cuts, singling out the A$40 billion age pension cost as “much more than we spend on defence, or hospitals…Veronica Sheen, Research Associate, School of Social Sciences, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/244912014-03-17T13:24:10Z2014-03-17T13:24:10ZBudget 2014: will Osborne cool or fuel the housing market?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44096/original/mz94g7zw-1395054142.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=3%2C76%2C2560%2C1383&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mental block: Osborne has conflicting motives over housing</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8669212624/">κύριαsity</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Britain is home to an increasingly dysfunctional housing market. The risk is that a chancellor trying to lay the foundations for a 2015 election victory will struggle to find the balance between the short and long-term priorities needed to deliver a solution.</p>
<p>This year’s budget is a critical milestone on the road to the European elections, the Scottish Referendum and primarily next year’s general election. It is an opportunity to signal intent to the markets and the voters and a chance to put specific policies on a better track. With the housing market such a critical economic and political consideration in George Osborne’s calculations this week it’s no surprise it formed the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/16/george-osborne-garden-city-ebbsfleet-budget">centrepiece of his weekend media rounds</a>. But what might he do and, perhaps more importantly, what should he do?</p>
<p>After a lengthy downturn, <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/13/uk-house-price-idUKBREA2C00920140313">house prices, lending and building are all on the rise</a> in a highly regionalised housing market dominated by unique, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26006214">unaffordable London</a>. Interest rates remain historically low and important interventions such as Help to Buy are stimulating the demand-side of the market. </p>
<p>At a more structural level, the UK cannot build enough houses to meet demand or social need, public resources for housing and infrastructure are highly constrained, and frustrated would-be home-owners are contributing to a growing (and normalising) rental market. A dysfunctional housing market has wider implications by distorting our understanding of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/budget-2014-how-good-politics-can-trump-good-economics-24439">economic recovery</a>, frustrating labour mobility and reinforcing inequality through the inter-generational transfer of wealth.</p>
<p>Many analysts would argue that, in order to combat these challenges, we need a settled housing system with stable long-term real house prices, a vibrant rental market with institutional investment and a focus on delivering more affordable housing and support for those on low incomes. But housing policy is too often driven by short-run electoral considerations. It can come down to a pretty simple sum: are the insiders who feel wealthier from rising house prices or able to access help-to-buy opportunities more important politically than those who lose out from shortage and rising prices? They probably are.</p>
<h2>Garden cities</h2>
<p>What do we know so far? This weekend the chancellor has stated that Help to Buy One – equity loans for new build - are to be maintained until 2020. This intervention is a de facto interest-free loan for five years worth up to 20% of the value of the property and is a major fillip to the new build sector. Osborne has also (re-)announced the ten year plan to develop a garden city new town at Ebbsfleet involving an initial 15,000 homes. Further new towns are also possible.</p>
<p>The Help to Buy policy can be interpreted in different ways but I think is best conceived as a recognition that supporting the new build market is the least bad option economically for an essentially political choice being made by the Treasury. It probably also suggests that the days of the untargeted and inflationary <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/mortgages/10343793/Help-to-Buy-Key-questions-answered.html">Help to Buy Two</a> are numbered.</p>
<p>The Ebbsfleet proposal would make a modest but welcome contribution to new supply in the South East in the long term. As part of a wider programme of well-planned sustainable communities, this may help address the supply deficit, or at least be part of the solution, but it is a long term response to an immediate crisis.</p>
<p>What else might be in the red box? Widely discussed in recent months have been a national <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/it-wont-just-be-the-super-rich-hit-by-a-mansion-tax-9171397.html">mansion tax</a> on high value properties and also a tax on housing speculation aimed at foreign investors. The latter, widely discussed in the autumn, may be more likely than the former, if not at this budget. The Bank of England has also tentatively <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mark-carney-admits-foreign-buyers-put-house-prices-out-of-banks-control-9132362.html">floated ideas about intervening to stabilise the housing market</a> on the demand side – we may hear more about these.</p>
<p>Might there be additional resources for new affordable housing? Recent policy in England has led to the provision of state-backed guarantees to reduce the cost of landlord borrowing and two rounds of the <a href="http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ourwork/affordable-rent">affordable rent programme</a> (based on higher rents and also requiring higher rents on a proportion of existing properties to help meet the cost of cutting subsidy). Meanwhile, the focus of the state has to an extent shifted into supporting the new private rental market and there has a been a weakening of the established regime that allowed new affordable/social housing to be constructed when negotiating planning permission for private new supply.</p>
<h2>The long game</h2>
<p>What might Osborne actually do that would be genuinely useful? First, do more to loosen borrowing caps for councils so they can invest in new housing (like they have done successfully in Scotland) but at the same time reverse or tighten the Right-to-Buy policy (at the very least on newer homes). </p>
<p>Second, in a rising market, government should tighten up the viability test that private developers have been able to use so successfully, reducing significantly the number and proportion of social and affordable units associated with private sector sites with planning permission. </p>
<p>Third, government should consider wider discussion as a statement of intent regarding <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2014/mar/14/budget-2014-britain-recovery-durable-george-osborne">John Muellbauer’s recent call</a> for a national land bank and also for a clearer discussion on both housing taxation and regional economic policies. This should also be linked to the <a href="http://www.ifs.org.uk/mirrleesReview">Mirlees review proposals</a> on systemic tax reform (within which housing and land are pivotal).</p>
<p>Housing policy is a long-term game and fundamentally needs political consensus, as well as buy-in to a wider strategy that can be agreed for, say, ten years. Without this, the danger is of a combination of political short-termism, the increasingly unhelpful unintended consequences of localism and regional imbalance, no end to chronic under-supply and further market volatility.</p>
<p>As we take stock of the details of the budget, that balance between the short and long run will be crucial in discovering where Osborne’s economic, and political, motivations really lie.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24491/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kenneth Gibb currently receives research funding from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, Shelter Scotland, the Scottish Government and the Wheatley Group. He is a management committee member of Sanctuary Scotland housing association.</span></em></p>Britain is home to an increasingly dysfunctional housing market. The risk is that a chancellor trying to lay the foundations for a 2015 election victory will struggle to find the balance between the short…Kenneth Gibb, Professor of Housing Economics, University of GlasgowLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.