Log in

Forgot your password?
You are here: Home / UrbanGrowth, SMDA & RWA Plans & Activities / Human Services Plans / Redfern Waterloo Human Services Plan Phase 1 / Community Speak Out on DHSP until 11 November 2005

Community Speak Out on DHSP until 11 November 2005

During the Consultation REDWatch set up a Speak Out Page and encouraged people to make comments on the DHSP. The material below was posted during this time and we have supplied it to the 'Reforming Human Services" section of the RWA so that these comments are part of the formal feedback to the DHSP. During the consultation drafts of some submissions were posted. While these are referred to below we have only posted the final submissions and changed the links so they point to the final submissions. We have established a new "Speak Out" page for any ongoing community feedback on the DHSP.

Speak Out about the RWA Draft Human Service Plan

The RWA is conducting a consultation about a proposed Human Services Plan (HSP) for Redfern Waterloo until Friday November 11 2005. Please share your comments and with us about the Draft HSP as well as passing them on to the RWA.

This consultation is based around people making their comments directly to the RWA and the RWA deciding what then needs to be changed in the Plan. REDWatch thinks it is also important that people share their comments and concerns within the community so others are aware of the issues being raised and can also make their comments on these matters. This page has been set up to allow people to post comments regarding the RWA's draft HSP. You can post your comments on the HSR, post what you have sent to the RWA, ask questions and respond to what others have said on this page.

Information about the Draft Human Services Plan can be found from the following links:

The Draft Redfern-Waterloo Human Services Plan is available in printed form from the RWA office or a pdf file (288Kb) can be downloaded from is available from http://www.redfernwaterloo.com.au/other/draft_human_services_plan.pdf

The RWA also produced a “Redfern-Waterloo Update October 2005” which summaries some of the key elements of the Plan. It is available on the RWA site but as the file is very large there is also a smaller text version is on the REDWatch site at www.redwatch.org.au/RWA/humanservices/hsp051014/051014rwa.

The RWA have also posted what they think will be the Frequently Asked Questions at http://www.redfernwaterloo.com.au/faq/faq_human_services.htm . If you have suggestions for alternate FAQ’s you might like to let the RWA and us know.

The initial media release about the draft plan can be found at http://www.redfernwaterloo.com.au/other/media_human_services_plan.pdf

The Initial REDWatch Update about the draft plan can be found at http://www.redwatch.org.au/update/update051014  

Comments to the RWA on the Draft Plan can be posted at http://www.redfernwaterloo.com.au/feedback/draft_hs_feedback.php  .

Remember - The RWA want all comments by Friday 11th October 2005

There will be a Public Information Forum about the Draft Human Services Plan on Saturday 29 October 1.30 – 3.30 pm at the Redfern Town Hall 73 Pitt Street, Redfern

The views expressed in this section of the site do not necessarily reflect the views of REDWatch. The views are those of the authors and are posted here to encourage debate and discussion about the RWA Draft Human Services Plan within the community. Please only post under your own name unless there are good reasons to post anonymously.

Please remember that you may not post material which is offensive, slanderous and against the law. REDWatch will have to remove any such material from the site.

ARE YOU BEING ROBBED? - South Sydney Community Aid on the Draft Human Services plan

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-10-24 09:22
The Redfern Waterloo Authority has released their Draft Human Services Plan for Redfern and Waterloo and our community members have grave concerns for the future of human service delivery in Redfern and Waterloo.

South Sydney Community Aid Coop Members have identified several areas of concern in the newly released Redfern Waterloo Authorities (RWA) Draft Human Services Plan for the communities of Redfern and Waterloo. As for implementation there is a complex hierarchy of advisory groups to the RWA, senior officer's implementation groups of NSW government departments and CEO'S group and cabinet subcommittee. There is little representation of the community and Non Government Organisations (NGO'S) in the RWA committee and none in all the layers above. Nor is there a formal role for Commonwealth and Council participation. Overall there is little evidence of any integration happening in service delivery unless you count the threat of consolidation of NGO'S.

A Quick Overview of the Draft Human Services Plan’s issues of concern.

•No outcome / performance indicators
•No evidence to support a move to precinct model for youth services
•A Charitable Trust with private donors control
•No distinction drawn between small local and large general NGO'S and no NGO lead agency
•The presentation emphasises the negative rather than the positive attributes of the community
•Nor is credit given to those activities that are already successfully under way by NGO'S (eg Community Safety Plan, ATSI community justice group)
•It implies the need for better facilities and the capacity building but there is no indication of where the funds might come from (except for the charitable trust/private donors.)
•No news on a community health facility

Questions that need to be answered!!!!

1. Why was the Education Department the only Government Department targeted in the report? This is related specifically to the stated focus on local school literacy and numeracy levels and school attendance and retention rates.
2. Does this mean that the Alexandria Park Community School is a failure? The report identifies this situation clearly at the time of the delivery of the report.
3. The proposed Redfern Waterloo Trust will compete directly for the private sector donations with the NGO's in the area. Currently any organisation has the right to approach any DGR Registered organisation in the area to make a donation. Why the duplication?
4. Is the Charitable Trust a means of raising money from the Private Sector to finance the redress of Government agency service delivery shortfalls?
5. Why were Government agencies core functions specifically excluded from the review of Human Services in Redfern, Waterloo?
6. Where is the accountability and transparency for Government agencies to at least the same standards as those imposed on the NGO'S.
7. Why is the Redfern Waterloo Authority setting up a Human Service Delivery model that does not fit in with the rest of the State?

If your answers to these questions cause you concern please contact your local members:
Kristine Keneally MP, Phone: 9314 2339 Email: Kristina.Keneally@parliament.nsw.gov.au
Clover Moore MP, Phone: 9265 9229 Email: Electorate.Office.Bligh@Parliament.nsw.gov.au

From: South Sydney Community Aid Spring Newsletter 21/10/05

Some initial comments on the Draft Human Services Plan - Geoff & Lyn Turnbull Redfern Waterloo Issues Updates 25.10.2005

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-10-26 10:20
There seems to have been a good response to the focus in the Draft Plan shifting from the service delivery of NGOs to the responsibility of Government to provide core services at a level commensurate with local needs. Government has recognised that they need to do much more in the area to address the area’s human services needs. They need to implement policies in Redfern Waterloo that have been on departmental books for quite some time, but which have not yet been implemented in Redfern Waterloo. Yes, there are some new aspects to the plan, such as the commitment to greater integration of departmental programmes which seem not to have been tried elsewhere in NSW, but there are also existing policies which should have been rolled out into the area quite some time ago and which the Plan says now will be.

There is concern that there are no performance indicators and time frame for them to be delivered by. The rolling out of the Plan will require the relevant government departments committing the necessary funds within their existing budgets to implement the programs proposed. There is considerable unease that the resources may not flow quickly enough to implement the grand plan that the Government’s Human Service CEOs have signed up to.

This is not just the usual cynicism. On the day the Draft Plan was released DoCS was being strongly criticized by the NSW Ombudsman for not being able even to meet its obligations for following up at risk notifications statewide and yet DoCS will have a key roll in overseeing aspects of the Redfern Waterloo Human Services Plan’s implementation even though its Director General admits DoCS is grossly understaffed (see http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/one-in-ten-babies-reported-to-docs/2005/10/15/1128796715153.html ). A couple of days later the SMH ran the story “NSW in the sin bin on mental health” which said “NSW is one of the country's worst performers on mental health” http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/nsw-in-the-sin-bin-on-mental-health/2005/10/19/1129401317073.html . This was from an independent report which criticized the under resourcing of mental health programs around Australia including NSW. This health issue affects Redfern Waterloo more profoundly than in many other areas. The Department of Health will have to find significant extra resources if it is to adequately address this and other health issues in Redfern Waterloo as will the Department of Housing to deliver on its side of the Joint Guarantee of Service (JGOS) which remains the laughing stock of public tenants who have had cause to deal with it.

For education the Plan seeks to lift school retention rates and the level of literacy and numeracy to the state average. This is such a huge and necessary task that the RWA is considering asking the private sector to help fund literacy and numeracy programmes, as well as early intervention programmes such as subsidised child care places. This would appear to be an admission that not only are huge resources needed from the department of Education to address the problems in Redfern Waterloo but that the problem is such that this will need to be supplemented by new funds from outside government. This proposition has raised many eyebrows.

At least the Plan is getting to the heart of the problem. Government Policy and Government Departments have not been delivering for Redfern Waterloo for many years. If there is to be any real change they have to start addressing the needs of the area seriously. It is said that all the area has to show for the increased Government interest over the last few years is a new Police Station. The Government has to change this quickly by making sure the resources are available to make this plan work. Many are unconvinced that it will happen and suspect it is just another round of promises.

The initial focus of reforming NGOs, while still on the agenda, is at least in perspective now with government departments having to shoulder their responsibility as the lead agencies in lifting service delivery in the area. If history repeats itself, calls for increased government commitment and resources to address the problems of ingrained disadvantage will mean more government funding for the work NGOs do at the grass roots level.

Mind you NGOs are still very much in for reformation. Youth Services, which government have tended not to be good at and hence have left to NGOs, are to be the first lot of services to be reformed, co-located and turned into three one stop shops. However there has been no discussion within the youth cluster about the proposals or between the agencies to be combined. Many questions remain unanswered. How do you combine The Settlement, a community centre with its own act of Parliament, with The Redfern Community Centre? The community centre runs a wide range of programmes, not just for youth, as part of the City of Sydney’s services in the area.

Since the Draft Plan went to cabinet a decision has been made to disband the RWPP’s flagship Street Team. So what will happen to the services they provided? Will they go to South Sydney Youth Services with whom they were supposed to combine to provide support services or will this money go to provide the weekend and evening youth services proposed in the Plan? Even the proposal for a co-located Fact Tree and PCYC will not be straight forward as there will be a the need to find a new location for the combined service within 18 months when DoH resume the PCYC site as part of the Elizabeth Street Housing Redevelopment. There are many issues to be resolved in setting up the Plan’s new look youth services!

The draft Plan continues the push that integrating the back office functions of the handful of local NGOs can save a significant portion of the 20% allowed for overheads in the grants they receive. Coming up with cost effective OH&S and insurance arrangements for these agencies would probably contribute to more significant savings than integrating their back office functions. Agencies are also asking if they will get to keep any savings to cover other activities which are currently not adequately covered in their funding.

There is also growing concern about the RWA’s proposal to set up a trust to bring in private funds to the area. On one level agencies which already tap private funds feel that they will not be able to compete with the RWA’s program and that the RWA’s prospectus will only carry projects that suit the RWA’s priorities. In addition there is the concern that the projects that look sexy in an annual report will get funded, while others dealing with more complex issues like domestic violence will be difficult to fund.

It appears that the implications of RWA’s duel role as developer and service provider has not been considered in the administration of the proposed trust. The RWA will also be involved in approving development applications and deciding who gets what tenders. On the broader stage the Minister responsible for getting things done in Redfern Waterloo is also responsible, as Planning Minister, for approving major projects across the state. This opens up major probity questions which need also to be considered in setting up such a charitable fund raising venture. The last thing the RWA needs is any possible suspicion that developers are putting money into human service projects, in the absence of sufficient government funds, as a way of gaining consideration for their developments in Redfern Waterloo or in other parts of the state.

The myth that there were enough resources going into human services in Redfern Waterloo is at least dead. The Government programmes and the RWA’s proposed trust will both bring in new funds and hopefully better co-ordinated services to Redfern Waterloo. The fact that the funds do not come from a special budget allocation for Redfern Waterloo matters little – they confirm what many have said; that to solve the area’s problems there is a need for more resources and for the government to seriously implement their programmes.

We have heard little so far from the Aboriginal community about their reaction to the draft plan, other than that there is concern about how the information exchange procedures proposed between agencies will work. Ever since the colonisers arrived Aboriginal people have had their lives ruled by one government department or another. It is still DOCs with Police backup who turn up and take away kids, so there is real concern about how information supplied to one department might be used against people by another. This is an issue which will need to be handled carefully by the RWA. Another concern raised is that the wording of the Draft Plan makes it look like the RWA is planning to take over the local Blackout Violence program.

These are just a few of the issues that we have heard raised and we are sure there are many other concerns that we haven’t heard. Hopefully all these and other concerns will be taken up in peoples’ responses to the RWA. The question is will there will be time for the RWA to take such comments on board in the 11 days between when responses need to be in and when the RWA hopes that cabinet will be able to sign off on the final Human Services Plan?

Ideally we would like to have seen greater emphasis on cluster groups, agencies and the community discussing the issues and being able to make responses from these discussions as well as the individual responses. We would have liked the RWA to have the time to come back come back after submissions had been received and let the community know what the RWA was told and the way they propose altering the plan, but there is no time to allow this. Hopefully one day someone will listen – you have to allow time for the community to be involved in a number of different ways if you want them to own the outcome!

Human Services Plan [Draft]

Posted by Ross Smith at 2005-10-28 03:59
The draft plan lacks outcomes, benchmarks, and specific details, even more so in the case of the Government Agencies.

It singles out the Education department as being a sub-standard performer with no mention of other Government Agencies/Departments and their performance levels achieved in the Redfern Waterloo area.
This is despite the Education Department's closure of the public schools throughout the Redfern Waterloo area and the opening of a new centre of excellence called Alexandria park Community School.

It describes a "Trust" or "Charitable Foundation" to be set up for the purpose of attracting extra private sector funding into the area. This in itself is a tacit admission that there already is a shortfall of Government funding for core functions such as Education, Health, Policing, and infrastructure such as Affordable/Public Housing etc.
What the true situation will be like when the RWA dramatically increases the population density of the area under its Redfern Waterloo Plan is a whole new ballgame.

The Trust fund has the ability to steer private sector money towards those projects/programmes given endorsement by the RWA and the Trust through the stated intent to publish a list of 'suitable projects'for donors to direct their donations towards.

The Trust fund has the potential to adversely impact on those small local NGOs who already do access the private sector for quite significant slices of their total funding, especially if those organisations decide not to become involved with the RWA agenda.

The Trust fund is a duplication of an already existing system of private sector benvolence whereby the donor decides all by themself as to who or what they wish to support by donation. If the group/organisation already has DGR/PBI status then the donation is 'tax deductible'.

The Trust fund opens up the issue of the perception of, or potential for, the ability of a donor to acquire a tax deductible licence to exceed current planning laws anywhere in the state of NSW.

The Human Services Advisory Committee that is meant to provide oversight for the implementation and on-going development of the Human Services Plan operates behind closed doors.
In the interests of perceived transparency at the very least the minutes and members attendance details should be made available and also posted on the RWA's website. [for those matters considered 'commercial confident' etc there is the ability to move the meeting into 'camera' and then resume normal function as neccessary] From the very outset the community was told that it was to be their plan and they would be able to at all times make comments and have input.

The announced importance placed on Memorandums of Understanding, CEO Agreements and other shiny pieces of paper sound nice until the phrase "subject to budgetary restraints" appears. This historically has happened when Government Departments have been held accountable for lack of visible performance at the coal face of reality. What is different this time?

There is a distinct lack of specific planning for 'on the ground' service delivery to the community.
There is a huge potential for a lenghty ongoing phase of committees and report preparation with the attendant delay in service delivery.

In summary, besides the 'Charitable Foundation' what makes this social engineering experiment any different from its myriad failed predeccessors?

South Sydney Community Aid - Response to Redfern School Sale - 31.10.2005

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-11-01 07:10
The local Community Services currently operating and being delivered to the community from the Redfern Public School site have not been consulted or given any advice regarding the sale of the old Redfern Public School to the Federal Government's Indigenous Land Corporation. There is also no mention of the current Human Service Delivery being offered by South Sydney Community Aid Multicultural Neighbourhood Centre, The Aboriginal Resource Centre, the Benevolent Society (SCARBA), the Montessori Play Group, the Redfern Computer Centre and South Sydney Youth Services 'Street Beat' and the Factory's bus.

The only organisation mentioned in Minister Sartor's Press Release was that Murawina Long Day Care Centre will stay and the introduction of the Exodus Foundation into the Old Redfern School site in six months time.

South Sydney Community Aid Multicultural Neighbourhood Centre currently offers Human Service delivery to over 200 people per week. We have not been consulted and we have not been able to get any feedback about our current tenancy at the site from the Redfern Waterloo Authority and we're also unable to get any information from the Indigenous Land Council about whether we're staying on the site.

While we believe that the introduction of an Aboriginal School of Excellence onto the Old Redfern Public School site is wonderful for Aboriginal Youth in our community. We'd like to know what's happening to our Tenancy.

Relocating a Neighbourhood Centre such as ours would take a lot longer than six months to find suitable affordable premises. We have been located with the Aboriginal Resource Centre for more than 30 years. South Sydney Community Aid Multicultural Neighbourhood Centre is 38 years old and originally sponsored the Aboriginal Resource Centre. We continue to provide a high level of support to the ATSI community who think of South Sydney Community Aid Multicultural Neighbourhood Centre as their local Neighbourhood Centre with individuals and families coming into the Centre on a daily basis for information, group work, referral and support.

Why have we not been consulted and embraced in the current plans for the School along with our partner agencies offering Human Service delivery at the Old Redfern School site? If we are included in the current plans for the site why haven't we been consulted about this?

Is the Federal Governments Indigenous Land Council aware that we're here?

As anyone who could give me this information today is either not at work, un-contactable or in a meeting, I'd really like the Hon Minister Sartor, Robert Domm, Aldo Pennini from the RWA or someone from the Indigenous Land Council to respond and come and meet with us urgently to let us know what's going on with our current tenancy at the Old Redfern Public School site.

Jan Leach
South Sydney community Aid Coop Ltd
Multicultural Neighbourhood Centre
Ph: 9319 4073

The Settlement Management Committee

Posted by Anonymous User at 2005-11-03 04:21

2 November 2005

Mr Aldo Pennini,
Director Reforming Human Services
Redfern Waterloo Authority

Dear Aldo,

The Settlement Neighbourhood Centre will not be providing a detailed submission on the Draft Human Services Plan for the following reasons:

1. The time frame for responses is inappropriate for democratic organisations, especially those, like the Settlement, which have volunteer management committees. Government agencies dealing with NGOs should begin by respecting their work and governance structures, rather than allowing themselves unlimited time and expertise to prepare reports, leaving none for preparation of community responses.

2. The Draft Plan wrongly confines its attention and language to the “efficient” provision of “services”. The Settlement takes an altogether broader view, which recognizes the importance of services, but also the social and physical landscape of our district, and its vibrant mix of communities. We also see:

• communities and groups which are sites of historical and cultural identity;
• communities and groups which are capable, self-determining, autonomous yet collaborative;
• communities and groups which are sites of dissent and resistance.

3. When we talk about Redfern-Waterloo we are not merely talking about best ways of delivering commodities (“services”) in a market place, we are talking about challenging and transforming the context for the benefit of all. The Settlement supports a society of social justice, and we expect from the RWA a serious challenge to the privileging arrangements which run along lines of race, class, wealth, gender, age, disability and sexual orientation, and which result in the present inequalities in health, housing, education, employment, law.

4. The Plan leaps to the conclusion, uncritically and resting unsoundly on one research document (which also confines itself to the language of “services”), that “integration of services” will produce improvements. There is almost no examination of the value of diverse provision in a diverse and changing community, and no examination of unifying strategies that are not based on location – alternatives to the precinct model.

5. We have been told that no substantial changes will be made to the Report. Dropping everything to respond to the major defects of this Plan when we know none will be rectified is hardly good time management

6. We have been told that the end result of the implementation of this Plan will be the “better management” of around $2million per year, the majority of which comes from the disbandment of the Street Team. Even if major benefits could derive from this restructure, the percentage gain in dollars or services will be infinitesimal in comparison with unmet need in our area. We are better off, in our view, getting on with the job in hand than responding to a Plan with such paltry intent.

7. In our view this Draft Plan should have commenced with an objective assessment of the immense unmet need in our area, and a frank admission by Government of the extent of its ability to meet it. Instead, the Plan consists of the compulsory “restructure” of services delivered by NGOs, the goodwill and volunteer effort of which the Government relies on, and vague, motherhood-style statements of intent by government agencies that have no new funds, staff or facilities to implement them, or publicly accountable reporting.

8. The Plan is a band-aid over a gaping wound at best, scapegoating of the hard-pressed volunteer sector at worst. We expected better after all the hype produced to justify the passage of the Redfern Waterloo Authority Bill.

The Settlement has a century-long tradition of both independence and cooperation. We will work with any government or non-government agency to improve services to the disadvantaged of our area. We will support changes to the organisation of service delivery where they can be proved to bring genuine improvement. But we will oppose any moves to “rationalise” services when this means loss of the ability to design and get funding for tailored programs for particular (sometimes quite small) groups of high need people whose needs have been failed by government services. We will work against “one stop shops” where that means “one size fits all”. We will continue to assert that the RWA has been given immense powers to improve the life opportunities of people living in some of the greatest concentrations of disadvantage in the country, and has so far failed to produce a Plan capable of making more than a cosmetic difference.

The Settlement Neighbourhood Centre Management Committee

Draft Response to Draft Human Services Plan from Redfern Legal Service

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-11-03 14:08
The Redfern Legal Service has been preparing a response to RWA's Draft Human Services Plan on behalf of a consortium of local Redfern Waterloo human service agencies. This draft has been posted to allow the opportunity for broader comment and suggestions prior to the submission being finalised.

Due to the number of pages in the response and that it has been posted for comment we have posted the file at the following address which you will need to cut and paste into your browser due to the limitations of this web page:


You can also get to this page by clicking on "Have your say about Current Issues" in the Left hand side menu and the choosing "Draft Response to Draft Human Services Plan from RLS"

Please direct any commnets to Hellen Campbell at the Redfern Legal Service.

Replies to this comment

RLC response to RWA Draft human Service Plan

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-11-08 06:18
The Redfern Legal Centre has now finalised their response to the RWA's draft human Services Plan. The final version has replaced the earlier draft which was posted for comment.

For ease of access the file name has not changed so you can still follow the instructions above to view it. The final version has some comments added to the end about the Redfern School sale.

Sale of Government Asset at Community Expense

Posted by Ross Smith at 2005-11-05 15:13
The following short piece was originally written as a ‘discussion starter’. The subsequent disposal of the Redfern Public School site adds even more relevance to the theme developed in the piece - the sale of public property at the expense of the community and the use of ‘crocodile tears’ after the predetermined outcome has been achieved. Please remember that this site offers you the ability to post your comments and views.

Sartor’s Abandoned Generations

The ‘to be announced’ Human Services Review of the Redfern Waterloo Authority under the ministership of Frank Sartor has given a new meaning to the term “Abandoned Generations”.
In Minister Sartor’s vision it is the members of the community that are not currently youths or children, i.e. 85.33% of the population of the area covered by the Redfern Waterloo Authority, that form the Abandoned Generations. The needs of these people have been specifically removed from consideration under the current Review of Human Services.
The RWA said that they were going to, at some undetermined time in the future, look at the needs of the overwhelming majority of the residents of the area, those over the age of twenty four years.
In the interim the RWA will have overseen the moving into private ownership of the Rachael Forster Hospital site and the Redfern Public School site. When the need for Aged Care facilities is ‘discovered’ in the yet to be proposed Review of Human Services for the other 85.33% of the area’s population the RWA will be able to say “we recognise the need, but there are no available premises where the services can operate from”. The end result will be that those aged members of the community will be forced to move out of the area that they grew up in and abandon all their family, community and social ties. They will also be moving away from the support services and medical practitioners that they are familiar with.
Many of the healthy people in Sartor’s Abandoned Generations will be forced out of the area by the ‘innovations’ in town planning to be introduced by the RWA. These “innovations” will price accommodation out of reach of the existing population and thus finally achieve the designed result of the 1948 County of Cumberland Planning Scheme. This scheme was designed to create maximum opportunity for developers to build high-rise buildings, the units in which would sell for a lot more than the current community members could afford. To achieve fulfilment the current community would have to be replaced by a much more affluent one.
The RWA makes the ‘three card’ sleight of hand operator in a back lane look like an angel in the morality stakes. The three card operator’s success depends on giving the selected victim(s) a belief that they are on a winner. The RWA has failed to instil such a belief in the community, indeed it has acted in such a manner as to destroy any credibility that it initially claimed it wanted to generate.
The RWA’s choice of promoting projects for children and youth is a clever ploy to buy time. The RWA has a legislated ten year lifetime. The timeframe to measure the success of child and youth based projects is longer than the balance of the RWA’s lifetime. This gives the RWA the perfect excuse for achieving nothing on the Human Services front whilst it performs its real role of the cashing in of government asset, reducing government expenditure in the area and destroying the existing community to hand the developers a bonanza.

Elizabeth Rice Comments on Draft Human Services Plan

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-11-08 01:57
These comments on the draft HSP have been prepared by Elizabeth Rice. Elizabeth has previously worked with the Human Services CEO's on human services policy. She has been providing expert advice to REDWatch and some aboriginal groups on a number of human services and planning issues.

Elizabeth is looking for any comments on the draft from the local community. She can be contacted by email at erice@comcen.com.au .

As this is a draft and runs to a number of pages the document has been posted at the following link. Due to the limitations of this web page you will need to either copy the address into your browser or alternatively click on the “Have your say about current issues” left hand side menu item and then choose Elizabeth’s article.


REDFERN PCYC AT RISK - CLOVER'S eNEWS - 4 November 2005 - No. 271

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-11-08 05:46
As a result of the Government's planned private/public residential development on the Redfern public housing and Police and Community Youth Clubs (PCYC) site at Elizabeth and Phillip Streets Redfern, the PCYC will be forced to relocate to a new facility.

This week, the PCYC presented a proposal to City Councillors for a new, two-level facility at Redfern Park, as part of a 13.6m tall, three storey stadium, virtually the length of the football field.

The proposed complex is costly, includes substantial commercial and income generating components with the PCYC facilities, and flies in the face of Council's plans to increase accessible open space and playing fields for use by all the community.

The Redfern PCYC provides important recreation and sport activities for local young people living in the Redfern and Waterloo public housing estates.

Despite commitments from previous Housing Ministers and the Department of Housing for the PCYC to retain its current site, the Department of Housing seems set to sell the site for residential development, and has no clear proposals for a replacement PCYC in

This is a short-sighted Government asset sale to meet the needs of a chronically under-funded public housing sector. It follows the NSW PCYC's own asset stripping, which saw the sale of the Paddington PCYC in 2003 for an estimated $7 million, with a paltry $1.4M preserved in total to upgrade remaining PCYCs in our area, Woolloomooloo, South
Sydney and Maroubra.

If the State Government is not prepared to retain the PCYC in its current Redfern site, it could ensure a new facility in the old Redfern Public School. The NSW Department of Education and Training and the Indigenous Land Corporation (ILC) this week announced an
exciting project to transform the school into a centre of cultural, social and sporting excellence for Aboriginal youth.

The PCYC and the Aboriginal Centre would be a good natural fit. It is a practical solution to ensure the future of the PCYC that I suggested to the ILC and the Minister for Redfern-Waterloo earlier this year.

RLC response to RWA Draft human Service Plan

Posted by REDWatch at 2005-11-08 06:44
The Redfern Legal Centre has now finalised their response to the RWA's draft human Services Plan. The final version has replaced the earlier draft which was posted for comment.

For ease of access the file name has not changed so you can still follow the same instructions to view it which are repeated below. The final version has some comments added to the end about the Redfern School sale.

The file is at the following address which you will need to cut and paste into your browser due to the limitations of this web page:


You can also get to this page by clicking on "Have your say about Current Issues" in the Left hand side menu and the choosing "Response to Draft Human Services Plan from RLC"