Strong Voices

This episode of The Independent Assessment was recorded on Friday the 27th of March.
Welcome to The Independent Assessment, a podcast produced by Radio 1 RPH in partnership with
Advocacy for Inclusion. I'm Sarah Guise. And I'm Craig Wallace. The Independent Assessment takes a
look at disability issues in Canberra, beyond the parliamentary triangle. Join us as we dive into
reform, politics and culture with curiosity and a sense of humour. There will be pop culture,
there will be nerd culture, there will be disability culture, there will be Canberra chat and there
may even be Scottish pirate metal. But what there won't be is official positions from organisations
because you can get that somewhere else. This month's topic is Strong Voices,
why we need voice organisations to be strong amidst a lot of white noise, disruption and identity
politics. Our guests are Corinne Dobson from ACT Shelter and Josh Analsak from Meridian.
But first, before we turn to our long conversation with our guests, each month we offer our
independent assessment on the worlds of politics, culture... Disability in Canberra,
with a patronising medical model verdict on the month that was. First of all,
I want to acknowledge our wonderful producer, Sarah Dyes, who is stepping in for Seymour, who is on
leg this month. Sarah, how is March panning out for you? Craig, this is usually one of my favourite
times of year because it's usually this sort of beautiful moment where the heat of a Canberra
summer has disappeared, but we haven't quite got into the depths of a Canberra winter yet.
But I've got to say, it's not really panning out that way this year. It feels like there's just
been a steady and increasing stream of bad news. And the weather that's been hot up until a weird
cold snap today when we're recording is surely convincing even the most avid denier that climate
change is real and present. Yeah, you'd have to hope so, Sarah. Look, I think a lot of people are
feeling the same. either kind of, you know, unsteady or just not sure what's going to be coming
next at the moment. People just, it's hard to predict what's going to be on the news every night.
So look, I think this might be a good time to kind of chat about some things that are actually
making us happy and grounded at the moment. Should we start off with some culture highlights,
Sarah? Yeah, sure. And I have to admit, so far as culture goes,
I've been cocooning a lot this month. So I find that when things are like this,
I like to curl up on the couch with Aduna and the cat and watch some of my old favourite shows
because they kind of give you that, you know, the sort of emotional reaction you're going to get
from them. There's no surprises. So I like Midsummer Murders because you get to potter around
English villages. It's a wonder there's anyone left in the Cotswolds, but everyone's home in time
for tea and crumpets and nobody's done anything weirdly violent or anything.
It's all just very English. So that's where I've been at on the television front this month.
I've also got a bit of music into me this month. I think... know,
music's got a real power to sort of heal and uplift. And I was also lucky enough to go and see the
Canberra Symphony this month, who were playing the Elgar Variations,
which I won't horrify you all by singing, but you would definitely recognise it if you've heard it.
It was a really great concert and it was really nice to sort of walk out of there thinking, ah,
music is nice. Isn't it wonderful that in a town the size of Canberra, we're lucky enough to have
an orchestra, even though all these people need to hold down day jobs when they're not performing
all these amazing concerts. It's still pretty amazing that we get access to some really great
music. It is. That's lovely, Sarah. Are you like into, is it Elgar?
When he got into the sort of pompous military period or is that, does the stuff he did before
actually work for you or a bit of both? I think probably the before actually. I like the gentler,
more sort of English countryside inspired sort of things rather than, you know,
the whole pomp and circumstance, brass bands and tassels sort of things.
Yeah, yeah. Well, if you're into that, I've been listening a bit to Russell Torrance's program. on
ABC Classic FM in the mornings just for relaxation and resetting. And he kind of,
that's been his pitch, a mix of kind of eclectic and modern,
but the kind of theme is, you know, that kind of peaceful, grounded music.
On a lighter note, I've been watching some streaming as well. And I've been getting into,
but for all possibly the wrong reasons, Scarpetta. which is streaming on Prime Video.
So it's based on the books by Patricia Cornwell, who's kind of like a forensic serial killer.
She writes about that world. And unfortunately, what they've gone and done in the Prime Video
version of it is they've got some great actors like Nicole Kidman and Jamie Lee Curtis and said to
them, your job is to sort of produce. the sort of ticks and quirks of these characters and just
show them as characters. So you've kind of got this laughable thing that almost feels like a skit,
but that is watchable if you're interested in the books but doesn't tell a story. I'm oddly ripped
by it while realising how on earth did Patricia Cornwall actually let this happen.
Honourable mention to something that is actually... know, a bit more nourishing, is the podcast 13
Minutes to the Moon.
It's wonderful music by Hans Zimmer, just really lifts you, but also it's telling the stories from
Apollo to the Artemis missions. And within a scope of not just this is about the tech bros creating
something, it's about what could we reach for if hundreds of thousands of people worked on a common
goal. and ran for it. Like it's telling that story as well. And it's a story about something
government did that actually worked. Sarah, aside from that, some great music,
is there anything else that gives you comfort or even optimism at the moment?
I'm trying to find silver linings in things as everybody's looking down the barrel of,
you know, $2.50 a litre on petrol prices and all these sorts of things. But the silver lining of
that is there's definitely an increase in people taking public transport and riding their bikes and
walking and using their electric vehicles and being grateful for their solar panels and all of
these sorts of things. So I like to think this potentially, you know, sparks a more useful
conversation about actually renewals are a huge part of Australia's power grid. And that's a good
thing. It's, you know, this is proof is in the pudding stuff, not sort of hypothetical,
oh, well, you know, fossil fuels will last forever. We don't never need to worry about that. Well,
actually, the geography of the Strait of Hummers isn't improving anytime soon. And we're really
fortunate that we do have, you know, a lot of renewables in the power grid and more coming.
And in Canberra, we've got things like electric buses and things that do make things slightly more
possible. Yeah, I love those kind of moments where you kind of get a range of things happening in a
touch of public conversation and it changes the way people are coming at it. My thing that kind of
feels like that a bit this month is the discussions we've been having about disclosure of mental
health issues in the workplace following the release of a report by the Australian HR Institute.
they went and talked to a stack of business leaders and human resource managers who said, look,
you know, we're just a minute, we exclude people with mental illness who disclose. And MHCC,
I think for the credit, came in and had a really good media session on the whys and wherefores of
disclosure in the workplace that wasn't just you've got a duty of care to go and tell us about it.
And, you know, I wouldn't judge anyone. for where they wind up on disclosing,
particularly if they've got multiple disabilities happening and they're, you know, needing to be in
lots of spaces. But I think what's been started by this is you can control this.
You don't have to, but there's a reason to think about it. And maybe it's liberating if you do.
So I just found that debate about a really difficult topic, one that kind of, I think,
got people talking and thinking in a different way. Sarah, I think it's probably time for a
politics assessment. I'm not actually sure I want to do this, but I think we have to.
Do you want to start us off? I think we're all thinking about the South Australian election.
I mean, it's talk about proof is in the pudding, watching the polls and One Nations rise and...
Even going further back, the Teals winning and the last federal election really was a three-way
thing. It's not two-party preferred. But now we've had the first electoral test of whether this
sort of general unease and dissatisfaction in the community and sort of leaning towards One Nation
is actually going to convert. And it looks like it has and will.
Now, whether they hang on again is another thing. That's certainly, they haven't done as well as
they did in Queensland when they won all those seats. But when they won all those seats, they
didn't hold on to them. So, I don't know, perhaps there's some hope that this won't turn out to be
a longer term thing. But it certainly seems, even if they don't hold on to sort of seats in
parliaments, even if they're not a real contender in the Farrah by-election. Even just being in
the mix, it's kind of giving voice to some of these conversations where you think you've won on a
sensible debate on racism, on immigration, on ableism, on all sorts of things,
and yet all of a sudden, you know, it feels like we've jumped back 30 years or more.
What do you think? Yeah, yeah. Well, the first thing I'd say as an election, there was a huge
Anthony Green style hole in my television. I've never wanted him to come on and say,
actually, they haven't won seats, but they've won a lot of votes and we need to talk about that.
So, yeah, I actually think there's a thing about sober realisation here that actually a lot of
people can vote for you and you don't get into parliament and we still need to reckon with the
consequences of that. I think we've been lucky that there are... know, mature people saying,
let's find out what's going on without going on a kind of deep dive into the hellscape of the worst
ideas of One Nation and populism. So, you know, not automatically reaching out to try and
understand ableism, transphobia, racism, nativism, the kind of Christian white methodology and all
the rest of it. but also maybe asking some questions about the culture wars. You know, Peter
Malinowskis did it really well on election night. I think, you know, Ursula van der Leyen's speech
was really kind of fortunate and timely. But it does mean that we must talk about the things that
are driving people to despair as they ruminate in sort of the suburbs and in the traffic jam.
So a few people were saying this on election night, but not enough. So housing affordability.
the ruinous state of our hospitals, the quality of our transport and road links,
declining wages, particularly right now, and what that means for sort of household costs.
And I think the stress of being constantly on call to employers and to the kind of universe through
the social media spaces and places. You know, what's making people angry and sad?
And despairing, if you layer that on top of what Four Corners had to tell us about the really quite
broken state of our media, disaggregation, the role of AI,
you know, mischievous players, I think the story is we need to be curious about where this is
happening, where the trauma points are, but we can no longer say we don't care.
that this has happened. It's just going to be something we can park in a mental compartment and not
sort of address again. So do you have any additional assessments,
Sarah? Is there a local pressure here in Canberra that maybe we want to kind of leap to from that?
Yeah, it's a good point. And I really like the way you sort of framed that. Craig, and I really
hope the federal opposition gets its ducks in a row and starts thinking sensibly about some of
these issues in engaging with people in a realistic sort of a way. But in Canberra,
I think... The pressure we should talk about is transport. We've seen a renewed interest in whether
low-cost buses would provide some relief to people who are doing it tough, including people who
are juggling housing, healthcare, food, dental, costs of raising children.
And that links to some of the transport pressures we were talking about last time with Living
Streets and the Public Transport Association. And there's also a lot of pressure on people using
cars due to the fuel shocks. We saw the Legislative Assembly debated a motion about 50 cent bus
fares. The minister... came back with sort of, well, you know,
it's not just about a cost, it's also about capacity and says the government's trying to do
something about, you know, more frequent services, which I think, you know,
if you're going to do cheaper, you also need to do more frequent. Speaking to colleagues at work,
you're definitely already seeing more people on the buses and it's a cheekbone jowl out there, so
you can't just pile more people on. But you've also got to think about how to sort of target things
and New Zealand has come out and they're doing things through their tax system to give low-income
people and sort of people with families. So I guess it would sort of be the equivalent to our sort
of FTB Part A or B or whichever one it is and making adjustments there that sort of really help
people. But, yeah, I think that sort of... That sort of thing is something the government really
needs to think about. Canberra is an inherently sort of spread out city by design.
So when it gets to it's really expensive to drive, public transport's your only option or not being
able to do things like get to medical appointments, I think that's potentially an issue here.
You're so right. But having a mature conversation, I don't know, like I'll bring our guests in on
this and when we sort of turn to them a bit later. I was quite sort of shocked by the kind of
response that said, oh, well, we can't look at really low cost, you know, buses because what will
happen is, you know, people will just climb on board and they'll be overloaded. I mean, it just is
so counterfactual. But I think when you say that to people, they just go, actually,
there's some other reason. They automatically go, this isn't why they're doing that piece of public
policy. There's no relationship to anybody's experience on a bus. And it's very...
Well, I found it very jarring. It's very funny. You're right, it's hilarious in some ways,
isn't it? We'll make it cheaper and people will use it. I'm like, oh, well, there's a thing.
Absolutely. Does it affect your rating? What's your rating for the month? It's our assessment. Oh,
look, I would really like to go higher, but I don't think we can do better than frail and fragile
and, you know, requires close monitoring because... A risk of imminent demise towards a worse
rating. So it's frail and fragile for me. Yeah, yeah. I've done a frail and fragile and something.
We usually just kind of do the frail and fragile and assume the treatment regime. But I'm actually
saying it needs some pharmacological and other interventions. Like it needs counselling, but it'll
also need some direct support at this time to get us through.
Now it's time to introduce our really patient guests who've been listening to all this and
hopefully getting something out of it on the way through. Corinne Dobson is the CEO of ACT Shelter,
the ACT's peak body for housing justice. She has more than two decades in policy and leadership
roles across the community sector at ACT and national levels, including roles with ACT-COS and
with ACOS and in peak bodies spanning housing. public health, mental health and refugee rights.
Corinne has a long-standing and passionate commitment to social justice with experience in refugee
advocacy, human rights and justice system reform. Welcome, Corinne. Hi,
Craig and Sarah and Josh. And Josh Analsak is CEO of Meridian ACT,
which provides health and social support services for people of diverse sexualities and genders.
He has worked across the not-for-profit, public and private sectors and is also a volunteer board
member. He is driven by his values and committed to continuous improvement and fostering innovation
wherever he goes. Welcome. Thank you. Great to be here. Now for our first segment with you guys,
we call this one Build Your Own Social Support Package. Now imagine where your NDIS...
assessors and we're building your social support package. So tell us about a hobby skill or
interest you have that might surprise people or maybe it won't. And let's see if we can add it to
your virtual imaginary social support package. Who wants to go first?
I mean, the answer to that is neither of you. So I'm going to... We're both frightened of this
assessment, I think.
Who has time for hobbies?
Great point, Josh. I can go first, if you like. I think mine might be,
as Josh just kind of referred to, it's a little bit more of a bit of a lapsed kind of hobby,
I suppose. So I've always been, from a very young age, very musical.
And I have played a number of instruments, but especially guitar and flute.
And I've also played bass guitar and double bass. And I've been in lots of bands. It was always,
from a young age, music was always a... really integral part of my life. So I think,
though, I've found in the last few years and probably really the last decade, it has just really
been squeezed out of my life, which is certainly not intentional. I think for me,
music has always just been a really important way to just kind of zone out from everything else to
completely be absorbed in something that I... I love doing and it's been a really important thing
for me. I think also probably with, not that that's the reason I do it, but it has always been an
important thing for, I think, my mental health and wellbeing as well. So I really do want to,
you know, revive that side and really pick up particularly probably guitar as well.
That's probably always where I've classical, I've played a number of different. forms and jazz and
rock and all sorts of things, but really classical guitar is really my love.
It's very hard to do, but I really want to do that again. And probably,
look, I think what I'd like to have as part of my plan is also probably some support for some
equipment. Some new equipment will be good. Yeah, I think it's just for me, music's just something
that I've, it's always been there for me and something I'd like to. To do more of. I think the
research is with you on that one, Corinne. Much research on the mental health benefits of music for
all of us. Yeah. What about you, Josh? Mine's a hobby I want to get into, but haven't made the time
to do so yet. And that's sewing and making my own clothes. Over a hot summer,
I've become a bit of a fan of a skirt or a collet or, you know, something that makes it a bit easy
for me to move. But I'm a tall and... man and can't find stuff that meets my needs.
I also need, you know, something to help me focus and stop and be mindful. And,
you know, having a sharp needle close to me was something that would do that. So I'm really wanting
to get into sewing, getting patterns and making clothes. Yeah. Do you like particular fabrics and
patterns or are you more modern? I wouldn't describe myself.
Simple, simple. Block colours, black, you know, I like black. Trying to change the wardrobe a bit.
My partner has previously described my fashion sense as National Party's MP and that hurt a little
bit. So looking to judge it up. Maybe lose the Akubra.
I thought you were going to say with the black that you were, you know, channeling Melbourne or
something. It's just easy, right? It hides the stain pretty well.
Is that National Party MP in Parliament House or National Party MP out in the city somewhere?
Yeah, that's the question.
Now, this is a bit of a segue because I can't think of anything else that kind of leaves in there.
I know when I'm kind of doing things like ironing or things that are a little craft task, I'm
listening to music or... something on television or sort of playing an audio book or whatever is
there. Is there something either of you'd like to share with us that kind of, you know, makes you
even more grounded in those moments that, you know, you could recommend to our listener? When I
want to focus at the moment, chill me out as well as focus. I'm loving the Bridgerton soundtracks.
There's just something about strings and pop music that's coming together that,
yeah, hits all the right notes for me. Yeah, look, I think for me, sometimes if I'm really trying
to focus, I actually don't like to listen to music then. But when I'm trying to relax,
I think lately, I don't know, my tastes are quite... but I think I've probably been listening a bit
to hard rock and metal, and that might just be the angry side of me coming out with some of the
things going on. So, yeah, I can't think of anyone in particular, but that's probably been more on
my playlist lately. Belting out a few noisy tracks sounds very cathartic.
Yeah, it does. At this point, I can't make a nice little join, but I'm just going to say that this
brings us to today's topic, which is strong voices. why we need voice organisations to be strong
and focused amidst a lot of white noise, disruption and identity politics.
And we've been talking about some of the disruption over the past half hour. So if you've missed
the first part of the podcast, it is pretty busy out there right now. Josh and Corinne,
is it getting harder for you to connect with people above all the white noise? And how do you try
and reach above the noise, the media silos, even the disinformation that's out there?
Yeah, look, it's definitely, it is definitely a challenging, I think, environment to be doing that,
that advocacy. There's, you know, I mean, obviously it's a challenging media environment. We've
seen the fragmentation of media. It's a very, it's a very polarized political environment as well.
I think people are often gravitating toward their own. sources of information so we get you know
that kind of echo chambers and so on and so forth I think in that context it's really important
that you you need to engage in a lot of different ways I think to reach people it's certainly a lot
more complicated than it used to be I think in getting some of the messages out but I also think
that you need to be speaking with with authenticity and also, you know,
connecting to lived experience with what your messages are and grounding it in evidence as well.
So look, it is a very, there's a lot of noise. It is often challenging to cut through.
And I think also there is a lot of, I think certainly say in the housing space,
but not just in the housing space. You know, we're often a voice amid a lot of very well-resourced
and loud. voices from industry and other vested interests and so on. So that definitely presents
some real challenges. But I think always as well, I've always thought that in the advocacy we do
that solidarity is a really important part of that as well. So for me, it's always collaborative.
It's working. with others who have that commitment to social justice or to the issues that you're
advocating for and building those allies and alliances and working across difference.
And it is also at times being prepared to engage. with people who have very different views to you
as well. I think it's very important to do that. But yeah, I think there's a lot of different
challenges and a number of different ways to try and go about addressing those. There's not one way
of doing, certainly not one way of doing advocacy and not one way of being a voice organisation,
but it is, I think it's a lot more complex than it was, say, even a decade ago.
I have to agree with you, Corinne, both the volume and the volume of information that's out there
and particularly kind of what gets heard at a particular time makes it really hard to get messages
across or people to engage at particular times. And it's even harder to have nuanced conversations,
particularly when you're talking about a complex issue. But I think lived experience and elevating
voices of those impacted can really... through sometimes you don't actually have to necessarily
tease out the the smaller details when it's you know someone sharing their story or telling their
story and allowing people to connect not just uh with an idea or an experience but with a human as
well a person um that's very effective at at cutting through um there's also the benefits of you
know uh lots of different channels but it's how do you how do you filter it uh you know Many a
group chat where multiple social media channels and mainstream media kind of get filtered for me
and shared. I find that really effective about finding your people and the trusted voices and
tuning into them and then spreading the word. How do you make those sorts of decisions about whose
stories to share and who decides in the circle of trust and those sorts of things?
I think it... It's down to the person whose story it is about whether they share and how far they
share, right? And it's important that when people are sharing their experiences,
they're able to do so safely, able to provide consent for how that information is used and as much
as they can have control of it. I think it's also important. as an ally to a particular experience
or a particular community with an authorising environment from people with lived experience to be
able to step in and take some of the heat, particularly when things are contentious or there's
negative or stigmatising commentary that's happening around an issue.
It's a really important point, I think, and kind of links back to what you were saying, Corinne,
about the power imbalances that can exist with some of the vested interests that we are all human
and human stories connect well, but it's not a level playing field. No, I think that's right.
And I must admit that over, you know, in a range of different roles I'm in now, but also in other
roles I've been in in the community sector, it's always been something I've... with in terms of
making sure that we are elevating lived experience and people who are experiencing directly
whatever the issue that we might be talking about have voice. I'm always conscious. you know,
really aware of that notion of speaking on behalf of others can be quite problematic. But at the
same time, recognising that there is, you know, people when they put themselves out there as well,
it's important that they're supported to do so and there can be consequences for that. So really
trying to ensure that in... that concern around the challenges that people might face and the
potential consequences doesn't mean that we also shut those voices down, but how we can make sure
that that is part of the discussion, that it is actually given voice to.
And I think, you know, as Josh was saying, it does really give...
to what you're advocating for when you do ground it in that lived experience. And I'd always say,
I always think too, it's important to remember when, you know, when you're doing the policy
advocacy, it's about people at the end of the day and always bringing it back to that and making
sure that that and staying, you know. Keeping that front and centre of what you do is really
important, just to make sure that you're actually staying grounded in that as well. So, yeah,
I think that lived experience is a really integral part of what we do,
but there are challenges as well at times in that often quite combative and polarised political
context that we're in at the moment. I have occasionally gone lately, I'm like...
just need to reset and think about who the audience is. Like journalists sometimes think that your
job is to kind of sit there and feed them with instant noodle, you know, lived experience stories
and other stuff that they can just retell within a 24-hour news cycle and move on. I'm sometimes
like actually maybe, I don't know, is the job maybe to convince more of our people to go and
broadcast this when they're funning up to Thomas Emerson at the shops or whatever and just spend
less time just picking up people to be. Is that something that strikes a vein with you?
Yeah, I always am getting calls from media asking, case study do you have someone who can
illustrate this and I'm I'm very I mean firstly we don't just have people who are just just there
waiting for these kind of things but even if I'm very cautious about that because as you say it's
often just it can depend on the the approach and the media outlet but I don't really like that idea
of just having people who just kind of fodder and they just put out there without care and
attention and actually really taking on board what what they're saying and really understanding and
doing it in an empathetic way. So, yeah, I think that is something to think about.
I think recently we had, you know, in the ACT, we had the release of the Ombudsman reporting to
public housing repairs and maintenance. And, you know, as you know, it documented some quite
horrific, you know, what was going on in public housing, which was shocking and wasn't surprising
from my point of view and many others working in this space. It was really,
there actually was some really good media and we did get some stories from people who were living
this day-to-day but were speaking about it. And we actually don't always see that, particularly
when talking about public housing and public housing tenants. It's very stigmatised and there's
often a lot of assumptions made about people who are in public housing. It can be quite...
dehumanising. So I think that their voices were so powerful and effective in conveying the issues,
but it was done in a way, and I think this was an instance where it was done in a sensitive and
thoughtful way by the media, but of course that isn't always the case. And certainly,
yeah, I'm quite wary of where people's particular situations, particularly if they're very
vulnerable. situations where media just kind of want to feed on that in a way and it's just a story
and it's just colourful or whatever, but it's not really taking into account the impact that that
can have on people when you put it out there like that. I think you've got to be careful of the
role of stigma and prejudice and bias, even when not elevating lived experience voices. So we do at
Meridian a lot of health promotion work. For example, over the last couple of years,
there's been MPOX transmission in the community. That's required us to get messages out for general
awareness, but keep them quite tight and high level, lest we activate the pearl clutches and their
moralistic judgments around what people do in their private lives and with whom, but at the same
time having to get quite nuanced messaging out to community in a way that's able to be...
received right and the language that we use in uh in those is very different the messages are
similar but we use very different language to kind of get that get that out which i think goes back
to your point earlier craig about uh you know different audiences that that need to be reached More
than that, you've both gone to methods and unintended consequences, I think in a really useful way.
This is something we've done in advocacy for inclusion where we've had to take a long, hard,
sober look at are we putting too much time into just, say, broadcasting. So the kinds of things
where it's like I described as hitting a stone with a kind of rock over and over again and not
getting, like just putting out media releases, putting out pieces of static information, stuff that
goes into a void that people aren't responding to and listening to and whether you actually,
every now and again, do we need to just go back and say, look, we just need to look at the method
and we just look, is it hitting home? So I think, I mean, I think it probably depends on what it
is, what the issue is that you have. And I mean, it's probably hard to speak in general terms,
but I think you should always be thinking about the method in terms of you're looking at advocacy.
And I think a different approach should be warranted for different issues or depending on what
you're trying to achieve. I do think without trying to sound in any way lowering expectations of
being defeated, absolutely not. But I do often think that social advocacy can be about saying the
same things over and over again. And sometimes change is slow or there are challenges to doing so.
So sometimes when you don't always get the outcome that you're seeking, I wouldn't automatically
assume that you're doing it wrong. So I would just sort of just make that point. But definitely,
I think it's always important to think about the method that you're using.
I think I find increasingly, I think you need to deploy a range of methods. So some of those
approaches that you mentioned, I actually think they still, depending on the particular issue or
context, they still have some value. But if you're relying on that alone, I think there certainly
are some. some limitations. So it just depends what you're seeking to do,
what the change, are you trying to shift community attitudes around an issue which is actually a
very complex and challenging thing to do? Or is it a very specific change that you're trying to get
in a policy or something where there might be quite a different, much more targeted approach that
you would take? Yeah, or just lay down a position knowing that maybe nobody's listening right now,
but you want to go back to it later. We felt that we were doing too much of that. and not enough
for the kind of let's just get people on the phone. Yeah, look, I think so too. Yeah,
and I think definitely you can do that. I think sometimes as well there are different audiences and
there are different people that you're trying to reach. I wouldn't underestimate too sometimes for
people who might be...
experiencing injustice, who are feeling they don't have a voice, that sometimes when you are saying
things out there in the public arena, that it can actually give people hope as well. They are
hearing their experiences being reflected out there and someone saying it out loud.
Now, you don't always get... That may not result in change. Having done a lot of refugee advocacy,
believe me, I mean, there's times where, you know, and I would be with people who just say, why do
we do this? Like, it's just so grim. Policies are terrible. Nothing is changing.
But for me, that's not a reason not to keep saying those things. And I also, I think at those times
too, it did provide hope for others, including for people who might share those views who are
feeling disillusioned and sort of like, what is the point? And then they hear someone really just
encapsulating those views. But also for people who are in immigration detention who knew that there
were those out there really campaigning. Now, did it change policy? I don't know.
Often it didn't seem to be doing a lot. But that wasn't a reason not to do it. But certainly,
I mean, that was the space where thinking about how you delivered the... The message, what approach
you would take, for me, really you needed to tailor it for the audience that you were trying to
influence. So, you know, if you're talking to politicians who are sort of sitting on the fence are
going to take quite a different approach to what you might be when it's trying to reach the people
who might sort of share your similar views and so on and so forth, yeah. That's so bad. The comfort
that isolated people might take or silence people might take from the fact that you're doing it, I
hadn't sort of thought of it. Like, Josh, is that something that's kind of in your world? Yeah,
absolutely, right? For our communities, just hearing a message,
a story, or that something matters to someone that they feel very alone in their experience.
I agree with you entirely, Corinne, but I also understand where you're coming from, Craig,
in the, you know, is this an effective, like, is this the best way to be getting messages out,
you know, the static information and the media releases? And, you know, we've just discussed that
it is. I think what I want to chat about is the drivers that are leading to us having to make trade
-offs, right? Actually, we're working with really limited resources in terms of... advocacy often
you know no specific resources to do that so you you have to trade off is it is it this or is it
that um we're also you know when getting things into the public domain beholden to news cycles um
you know uh you can something's quite topical you know you get a call from a producer uh can you be
on air in 20 minutes and it's like oh actually today no but tomorrow let's let's have a a
conversation. This would be great. I'd really love to unpack it. And the moment's gone. You know,
it's the system isn't designed to get people the information that is beneficial to them or
beneficial in making change. It's, you know, that short snappy grab what gets them hooked.
Let's move on. That takes us into a kind of indirectly into a question I think about sort of
audience discernment and the decisions you make in real time. So I might ask and then we'll, Sarah,
I'll hand over to you to kind of get into the nuts and bolts of what flows from that. But is it
valid to see the role of voice organisations as helping,
thinking about external audiences, you know, people, officials, MLAs, influencers who don't
actually know an issue at all very well to accept entirely new or unexpected ideas or is the
communication task to find things that they already understand or empathize with and then open up a
conversation or do we need to do sort of both at the same time and what assumptions do you make
when you start josh there's a lot in that i'm happy to unpack a bit but can i start with you of
course um uh yes it is valid um I think it does require both while also like spinning plates on
your head as well.
I think people in positions of influence or decision makers,
particularly if it's kind of an area where they've got responsibility, I think there's an onus on
them to be briefed and open. But I think it's also effective communication requires understanding
where someone's at and then getting that interest, getting that and then taking it along. You know,
I think voice organisations have a role in translating a current context to a systemic issue.
So taking those opportunities where there might be something's blown up in the media or something's
quite topical in the assembly, taking that to bring it back to what's an established kind of
advocacy priority and advocacy issue and making sure that whenever there's that opportunistic
engagement, it's coming back to something. central and consistent. But then at the same time,
taking those opportunities or particular interest and then using that to capacity build, if you
will, around particular issues. Thanks, Josh. Corinne, persuasion or education or both?
Oh, look, I think it definitely is both. I think Josh put it really well.
Particularly, say, for example, if I am going to talk to different politicians for different
persuasions, like I usually, and I know I was so thorough about when I used to work federally, but
I actually really would want to understand them. I want to understand where they're coming from and
I want to see if there's some starting point, even if I know that they're actually going to have...
at a different position at the point when I walk in there than the position that I'm going to
advocate for. But I really would try and understand if there's a point of commonality and how to
persuade them, but, you know, but not to walk in and alienate them right from the outset.
At the same time, obviously, we, you know, you do seek to meet people where they're at,
but we are partly, I mean, we are in the... are trying to often shift views and we are trying to
seek change. So that might mean you're trying to take people to a different place and you have to
be thoughtful about how you do that. But certainly I think it's both. We are trying to,
I would say, by and large, and again, it might depend on the issue, what it is you're seeking to do
with that specific moment, but generally it's definitely both. I think we need to be doing both.
Yeah. I'm going to segue to what different people expect of you and how hard that is with,
you know, meeting the needs of your community, for voice organisations that are member-based,
then that's a different thing as well. of your funding entities, which might be government,
might be individual donors, might be community, like a whole range of things. And government
itself, you know, the ACT government's on a big let's consult everybody push, but sometimes that
feels a bit like everybody's on every committee, but where's all of that going? Is it getting
harder to sort of balance all these different things that different sort of groups need and want
from you? Yes.
Yeah, look, it is. Absolutely. I mean, you know, without going into all the specifics of our
situation for shelter, we're in a dire funding situation. So we're on one hand, we're trying to.
to sort of get some funding from government. But at the same time, we haven't refrained from that.
I've been quite clear that we'll continue to be a strong, independent, constructive,
but at times critical voice when necessary on housing policy. And then also we do have,
I mean, I must say having worked in the housing space previously and... back here into where we're
at now in the ACT, it is actually quite a challenging space in our sector. There's not a uniformity
of views and agendas. pulling in all different directions. And so I think for us,
we have to be very clear about what our mission is, which is,
you know, we're the peak body. So for us, we're the peak body for housing justice. So we really
always need to come back to that. But doing so, it is challenging.
And I think you have to be very thoughtful in how you navigate all those different and complex
relationships. at times and this will include for me it's included people in the sector where we've
adopted a position that they have not been happy with but for me it's important they do understand
where we come from that we have that engagement that we have good lines of communication but But we
need to be clear about this is what we are here to do. So we're going to focus on the needs of
tenants and, you know, at the end of all, people who are experiencing housing disadvantage are
people who are homeless. And, you know, that may not work with, say, a business model for a
community housing provider. And we understand that, but that is where we're coming from.
So that certainly with government, there is a lot of pressure, I think. Look,
I think. So many organisations, ACT Shelter, wouldn't be the only one where we are so strapped for
funding. It's a very, you know, we don't have guaranteed or secure funding. So, you know,
do you go out and bite the hand that feeds you? I think certainly from when I started in the
sector. And I think the changes were very much there. But there has been quite a shift, I would
say, in advocacy and the willingness of people to speak out in a very...
I don't want to say strident way, but in a really clear social justice focus. I think it's,
I wouldn't say that's across the board, but certainly there's been a bit less willingness,
I think, to really, to go there at times. So it's really challenging.
And yeah, I don't know if Josh has any, you know, reflections on that, but I certainly think it is
a difficult, I think you've really hit on something that is a very difficult thing, you know, for.
voice organisations at this time? Is it getting harder? Well, I think everything's getting harder
at least for Meg. But I think at times it can be really challenging to balance the needs of
community alongside expectations of government or funders or whatever's paying the wage.
But I think it's about expectations and they're hard to set, right? But being clear,
I think being accountable is really important. And accountability can be really hard,
right? Particularly when you can't achieve something, you kind of can't get the win, but being open
and transparent about that. And then I don't like, yeah. Even though I just said everything's
getting harder. I don't like harder. I think it can be challenging at times. It can also be really
easy at times when everyone's on the same song sheet. And that's beautiful, right?
But it's that balance of authenticity, you know, kind of obligations. But being clear about your
mission, your purpose and community can be really helpful.
You know, when you were saying before, Corrine, you know, ACT shelter and housing justice,
you know, that. That is crystal clear, right, but can mean different things in different contexts.
But if you keep coming back to that concept, then it's solid, right? It gives you room to move and
respond, yeah. And I guess in the space of voice organisations, you're often not the only voice.
I remember... Back in my public service days when I sort of moved into, well, this happened in
disability before that in multicultural affairs, you know, the new minister comes in and they want
to know who the peak body is, and then they're terribly just surprised to discover that there's
actually multiple voices in this space. And it's a lot more of a Venn diagram than a neatly aligned
set of mutually exclusive boxes. And how do you find that sort of juggle?
So at Meridian, we did our strategic plan last year and we looked at our values and decided to dive
a bit deeper into our values. And one that we drew out, it's been implicit in our work since the
beginning, but we really wanted to draw out was self-determination for community or for voices,
right? You know, there's work that we do.
communities that constitute us and who we represent, but that's not always the case.
And so while it can make the stakes higher in terms of advocacy,
you know, there's more work needed for collaboration. That shouldn't stop us allowing voices to
rise, particularly when, you know, a voice organisation might not be the best.
positioned to be speaking or that community says, no, we speak here. And it does create a complex
environment because it says, who's the one person you talk to? But there needs to be many voices.
When I've worked in the national space, it's a really hard balancing act between what are the big
strategic priorities that need to be achieved alongside elevating lived experience that is unique
uh despite kind of shared things and it you know just the smallest thing can become a become a
wedge it's um it's really easy to get to get splintered on a on a message which is essentially the
same just because of you know a little gap a little gap there so um that just requires you know
communication collaboration and you know having shared understandings of of what um what the
outcome that sort is what the reform is and and bringing others along, but then having space to
elevate voices and recognise that there'll be nuance to those voices. Yeah, I think Josh makes some
great points there. I think that, I mean, for me, you know, and I'm probably thinking about this,
I'm drawing on some of the work that I've done at that national level. I think that having a range
of different organisations who might be advocating in a particular area, generally for me that was
a real strength in our sector. I mean, it was particularly when we worked in a collaborative. and a
collaborative way and with those kind of strategic alliances, which we did. And I know actually
Craig was involved in some of those campaigns, things like Raise the Rate. We'd have things like
Everybody's Home. But where there's a number of people, a number of different voices in the space
might have slightly different emphases. But also you do need to allow, and I do think it's
important when you do that, that there will be some... There may be some points of difference.
I think you would hope that you're coming around and together on some of the core issues,
but there can be some differences and that doesn't need to be a problem. Probably I can reflect on
a few examples where, you know, you do have to be mindful that sometimes governments can capitalise
on those areas of difference and they can... seek to have a little bit of a divide and conquer
approach, that can happen. But I think that, you know, I think we're, you know,
our sectors are our best when we work in that collaborative way. But as I said, that doesn't mean
that we have to be in unison on everything. And, you know, I think in the housing space,
I mean, I said before, there is some very... you know, sort of very well resourced, you know,
industry groups in this space. There's a range of different people. I think they all have a role to
play. I mean, I have a dialogue with all of them, but we might be quite clear. We disagree on some
areas and that's okay. And some areas we actually, we might agree with. So I'm not averse to
engaging with where we do have alignment, property council or say the business chamber or whatever.
There'll be many issues where we don't agree. But we have a dialogue with all of those different
players. But certainly in the community sector, I think we're at our best when we're working in
that collaborative way. So within that kind of dialogue and risk adjustment and collaborative
practice, when do you just make the call to say, look, no one else is talking about this or saying
it. It's necessary to say it right now. And to take the thing that nobody's talking about and
actually put it on the table in the centre of the room. Corinne, I'm thinking a little bit about...
your recent writings, which basically called out a lot of the narrative around housing
affordability is about this as a planning supply issue. Well, actually, it's the tax treatment and
it's all the fundamental stuff that's wrong. And we've now got a moment to talk about that. I mean,
you may not see it in that way because that's actually, it's a foreseeable policy treatment.
It's kind of about when do you make the decision to just go, I'm going to say the unpopular thing.
the thing that nobody wants to hear because it's really tricky and to just land it and see where it
goes? I don't know. I think I might be someone a little bit inclined to do that. You know,
like I do, particularly if I think, look, I mean, you have to be careful when you do. You have to
be thoughtful about it and feel that it is grounded in. Either it might be around lived experience
and you know that there are people who, for example, are experiencing a lot of housing issues and
it needs to be spoken about or, as you say, it might be around... I mean, I think here in the ACT,
we've recently been doing quite a bit on... planning and talking about supply and just that
singular focus that housing supply is a problem. Well, that's like increasing housing supply is the
key issue. And what we have to do is just get rid of the regulations, the tax settings,
the planning regulations and so forth, and just allow for more development. And that's going to fix
housing affordability. And it's been a really powerful narrative that has taken hold even in some
parts of our sector. we've been pretty clear that that's not something that we see is grounded.
It's certainly not grounded in the evidence and it's very clear that there's a lot of other, it's a
distraction from some of the other really fundamental structural issues that we see that are
driving housing inequality and the lack of affordability for low incomes. So I think when you do
that, I mean, certainly around planning and you mentioned around tax reform,
you need to know what you're talking about. And you need to be prepared to,
I mean, I recently did an interview just the other day around the housing and our stance on the
capital gains tax discount reform. And, you know, I probably had an interviewer who was not really
very favourably disposed to our position and was sort of put a lot of the points of view that you
would hear from, say, the Property Council and others, but I was prepared for that, you know.
So I think that when you are going to take on a position that you might feel like you might be a
bit out there or, you know, be clear about why you're doing it and that there's a sound reason for
doing it, but know that you're probably going to get some resistance and push back and be prepared
for that and be armed with some of those particular arguments and so on around why it might be,
you know, why that may be misguided thinking. So, yeah,
I think it is important to be willing to sometimes go against the current. If there's a compelling
reason to do so, then, yeah, I'm not frightened of doing that, but it can be a bit daunting as well
at times. Yeah, go hard and disrupt. I think, you know, if there's a risk to harm to people or
there's actually harm occurring that needs to be challenged, you absolutely need to be calling this
out. When the moment arises, right, when it's topical, when things are about to... know, the status
quo is about to move the wrong way. You need to be able to come out and be bold and strong and then
just reinforce it and challenge those narratives. It's timing. It's also about capital as well,
right? Not the kind of capital we need to fix the housing crisis,
but political capital as well. Because I wanted to give you both an opportunity to talk about any
relevant intersections between or requirements for Canberrans with disability within the advocacy
that you're working on at the moment or the goals that you're striving for are the ones that look
like ones with the immediacy that we're talking about or risks or long-term goals.
Is there something that you want to kind of say to our listeners with a disability that they should
be focusing on and communicating? A red hot one right now. Thanks,
Craig. So currently the ACT government is doing consultation on sex work law reform,
so laws around sex work. There are many sex workers with disability in the community in the ACT,
and I'm sure it's a topic for another podcast, but accessibility of sex work services to people on
the NDIS. It's a highly stigmatised... issue and it doesn't need to be.
Sex work is work and we need to remove all the barriers that exist around it.
We've been hearing from community for a really long time that sex workers feel that they have to
choose between working safely and working illegally. There's a Your Say survey open now,
open until early next week, so I'm not sure when the podcast is published. Hopefully the moment
doesn't pass. on sex work law reform and encourage people to have a look and check that out.
Yeah, look, I think that issues around disability cut across so much of what we do.
whether it's looking at even at the moment we've been looking at planning reforms and just the
design of those has some quite significant consequences potentially in relation to disability.
The issues and probably one that's sort of been more recently on the agenda is around public
housing. There is just so, so many issues there. We know that people with disability are
disproportionately represented among public housing. tenants. And I think the government has a real
responsibility to ensure that housing is accessible, that it's appropriate,
and it supports people to really live effectively in their homes. So that's a really big area that
I think, and I know that we've been engaging with AFI, Craig, on that one. And I think for us,
an important part of... whatever we do in this space is actually to engage with disability people's
organisations and make sure that that's how we're working on that.
In the homelessness, I mean, you know, I could talk probably for ages on that.
I'm not going to do it, but like there are just so many issues in terms of homelessness services,
but also things like crisis accommodation, which really, again, the accessibility issues in those
is... There's a lot, a lot of work to do there. And I could start on the private rental market and
all the issues there. I know, again, Craig, that AFI are looking at doing some work in that. And I
think there's certainly a lot more to do there. Yeah, that's a lot. I don't know if I've really
singled out any particular one. That's just one thing. But I think just making sure that those
issues are being considered in the discussion. Certainly, I think around more easily in the
planning reforms, we would like to see some of those issues elevated more and given more focus.
So, yeah. Well, that wraps up our main discussion. Before we let you go,
we've got one more segment. This one is called the One Minute Planning Call.
We would love you to imagine you're part of the NDIS and you get to organise a quick assessment of
anyone you choose and talk about it on the phone for a minute or two. If you could assess anyone...
the world and put them on an improvement plan, who would it be and what would you put in their
plan? Josh? Not long and hard about who it would be. I think it needs to be me.
At the moment, I need some serious capacity building about time management.
And I think that's just more about having more time in the day. I think I'm speaking to something
that's less about me and more about the... the environment in which I'm operating at the moment,
which is just calling on a lot. But, yeah, it's me that I'd pick and it would be about structure
and capacity building for myself. Absent a magic wand to give you four extra hours in your day.
I'd take two extra business days for an extra weekend day.
Perfect. What about you, Corinne? Gosh, with Josh just saying that, I think I really should put
myself forward too. Yeah, for much similar reasons,
although I suspect, Josh, it is. so about just not having enough time in the day, right?
Yeah, look, I thought of a different, I really struggled to think of, like, there were so many
potential people, you know, I thought about Gina Reinhardt, I thought about Carl Sandiland,
I thought about the housing system itself. But I think, I mean, I'm someone who does,
I think the, you know, all the things that have been going on in the Middle East and in world
affairs has been a bit hard to get away from. I think where I see that there is a real need for a
behavioural support plan quite urgently is probably Pete Hegseth, the secretary for war,
I think, which is, oh, that title just makes me shudder. But, you know, the former,
I think it was a Fox News host, ardent supporter of Trump. Yeah, look, I think just some of his...
some of his rhetoric, some of his press conferences lately have really demonstrated there is a
serious need for some, I think, a behaviour support plan that includes some de-escalation training
and support to help manage conflict, probably some structured supported engagement with civilians
just to help understand the real impact, real world impacts of some of the statements that he makes
and the policies, probably also some communication supports that he needs just to help that,
you know, reduce that reliance on that very militarised language in situations where it's probably
not therapeutically indicated. And yeah, look, I think overall, I think Pete's in need of a pretty
intensive behaviour support plan and I think... quite urgently. So that's who I would suggest.
I think you're onto something there, Corinne. You might not be the only one in the US government
that needs a bit of help there. Maybe we can take some of their toys away until they learn how to
play nicely with others.
Thank you both for joining us today. We really appreciate you taking the time and sharing all your
views.
And a sincere thanks to our guests, to Corinne and Josh, for putting aside a fair bit of time,
a bit of extra time than we actually thought because the conversation was so interesting and also
for your fellowship. Speaking of Pete Hegseth, I can almost hear like the sound of drums or some
kind of rumbling. In the distance, is there something? There's like an elephant coming towards us,
Sarah.
Well, I think it might be the elephant in the room that's with us. Each month,
we end off by naming the issue that no one is talking about, but everyone should be.
I'm nominating the impacts of the fuel shortage, perceived and real on disability supports.
More than 500 service stations across Australia have now run out of petrol. There's shortages in
both diesel and general gas for cars. And we've now had two meetings of national cabinet focused on
the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz. An obvious question, I think, for advocates like...
me and other organisations, is to ask, are we back in the COVID era and needing to stand up some
arrangements for people to get services and maintain supply issues? So this is like a question I
think requires some reach out to our sector. So we actually went out to people in the disability
community and said to them just to take the temperature, are you concerned about the impacts of the
fuel shortages? What are you hearing from your immediate networks? People actually told us that
they're not seeing at the moment their services stop, but they are starting to have conversations
about anticipated shutdowns. So, you know, the kinds of conversations people are having with a
transport provider or with a service is, well, can we plan ahead for this trip,
this social support trip, maybe in the next couple of weeks? People starting to think about what it
might mean if they have to cancel. appointments or if there's issues around the organisations of
shifts. Secondly, the other thing people are talking about is are we just going to see the cost of
everything go up, but especially freight items which are delivered to people,
so things like package meals, health item deliveries, et cetera. My verdict is we need to keep an
ear to the ground on this one. We need to ensure that we actually got good messaging.
in information going out that we don't create the problem before it starts, but we're aware that it
might. Sarah, what's running towards us that you're seeing? I'm nominating something they're
calling the long middle this month. This comes from a piece in The Guardian written by Janice Chen
that a friend posted because it really resonated for her with her experience.
It's about people who are... terminally ill so sort of in that space where as the author observes
you know if you've got cancer and you survive people are excited if you're about to keel over
people are sad but if you're terminally ill and you're not going to be cured but you're not keeling
over anytime soon you sort of get stuck in this limbo now and it sort of raises this sort of really
interesting question that medical science has gotten us to a point where people can sort of have
longer lifespans, even if not cured, but the sort of social and cultural aspects of how we deal
with illness and death and dying. haven't really caught up.
So it's sort of leaving people stuck in this sort of, do you treat it as every day is worth
grabbing onto? How do you plan for children, for work,
for all sorts of things?
How does that leave you in your sort of interactions with friends and colleagues and what to say?
Yeah, I thought it was a really interesting article and it really struck me as a conversation that
I think needs to be had more openly. Sarah, this reminds me of friends I had at uni in the early
90s in HIV, around the time they were getting the first sort of combination treatments,
but people weren't sure that there was going to be a future. So you had people kind of going, Do I
continue saving? Do I continue sort of planning for the future? It was like a liminal transitional
space in their lives. And then you'd kind of catch up with those people and it wasn't a bad
outcome, but you kind of catch up with them. And actually some of them had really free-flowing
careers that I envy. Other people would kind of wish that they'd had more direction and decision
-making and consciousness of a need to do that at a different point in their lives. Like it's a
real phenomenon. Yeah, that's a really good observation. Not a new thing, but perhaps a different,
appearing in a different format with progress in medicine. Well,
I think that wraps us up for today. Thank you everyone for joining us on The Independent
Assessment. We'll be back next month with more shenanigans. If you'd like to get in touch in the
meantime, you can contact us on theindependentassessment at gmail.com.
The program is produced by Radio 1 RPH in partnership with advocacy. for inclusion and is made
possible with support from the Community Broadcasting Foundation and the Aspen Foundation.
See you next time.