***Check against delivery***

Introduction

Good evening and thank you Professor Glenn Withers AO for your introduction.

Before we begin I would like to acknowledge and pay my respect to the elders of the

Ngunnawal people past and present and to any Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

people in attendance tonight.

It is a privilege to be here with you today presenting the 2016 Cunningham lecture.

Kenneth Cunningham’s contribution to Australia as a teacher, serviceman, and an

educational psychologist was outstanding and it is fitting that this lecture is given

annually in his name. However, it is also somewhat daunting to have been invited to

speak, but also a great honour.

This assignment has taken me on a memory trip down the highways and byways of

my educational and professional life. On searching for information about Kenneth

Cunningham one of the references was Professor William Connell’s history of the

ACER (The Australian Council for Educational Research) 1930-1980. This took me

down another path as I thought about Professor Donald Spearitt, Professor Ray

Debus and Bill Connell. Some of you in the audience tonight will remember, and or

like me have been taught by, these giants of Australian Education. In my Honours

year, in 1969, at the University of Sydney I was privileged to participate in a seminar

series conducted by Bill Connell. We were given a book to read, I think from memory

it was every fortnight, for example C.P.Snow’s Two Cultures, Fulbright’s Arrogance

of Power, Robert Jungk’s Brighter than a Thousand Suns. We would go to the

1

Connells’ home – have dinner and then discuss the book – Bill used to say ‘You

need to be able to debate and discuss topics outside your area of speciality and I am

going to make you argue to the roots of your intellect’ – and he did – I used to come

away invigorated and challenged. Would that all my lecturers had been so inspiring.

From 1970 until 1987 I taught psychology, ending my tertiary teaching days at

Lincoln Institute of Health Sciences (before Lincoln went to LaTrobe).

Some of you may remember those days when inter-library loans took at least three

months to come and journals were always months old by the time they got on the

library shelves. When the article finally arrived you wondered why on earth you had

ordered it. Or the horror when the one you had photocopied for the princely sum of

6d a page, and filed in a manilla folder, when opened sometime later consisted of

black grit on yellowed paper, and was totally useless.

We have come a long way since then, now e-journals are available immediately at

the click of a mouse. Instant sharing of knowledge, research and collaboration

between researchers and social scientists across the globe is now not only a reality

but common practice.

Background in ageing

As I mentioned, in the late 1970s and early 80s, I was teaching health science

students and becoming more and more interested in the study of gerontology. I was

also acutely aware and increasingly unsettled by the fact that the baby boomers were

reaching the peak of their adult lives, and that policies were not in place to deal with

2

the impending increase in the number of older people that would occur in the ensuing

40 or so years.

This concern led me to pursue an interest in gerontology, to co-develop the first

gerontology post-graduate diploma in Victoria, and to introduce courses in

gerontonology and life cycle development into the undergraduate health science

courses. There was a degree of resistance to this and I remember being questioned

by the clinicians in physio, OT, speech and the other departments - ‘Why

gerontology? We already have geriatrics’. And my response was, ‘why child

psychology and early childhood development when we already have paediatrics?

These students need to know about the well elderly not just well children!’.

These battles to promote issues affecting older Australians would prove to be

ongoing when I entered the political arena, particularly in the Senate. I was

concerned that people, especially women, were being forced to retire at 65, when

many had not saved enough for retirement or could clearly benefit from extending

their working years.

In 1990, the Minister for Social Security at the time had given an undertaking to

remove age discrimination from all existing federal legislation. Nothing was done.

Frustrated with this climate of inaction and prompted by the numerous

representations I had received from public servants and statutory office holders, who

were being forced to retire at 65, I introduced a private member’s bill into the Senate

in 1992 to abolish compulsory retirement in the Australian Public Service.

3

In 1992, the Government response to the House of Representatives Standing

Committee for Long Term Strategies Report gave in principle support to ending

compulsory age retirement. This was not acted on.

In 1993, Senator Bolkus indicated that the Government intended to act but the

Attorney General’s Department was working towards a comprehensive age

discrimination policy. So we waited.

In 1994, The McLeod Report reviewing the Public Service Act concluded that

compulsory retirement should be excluded from the revised Act. Result – still no

action.

We had an election in 1993, my 1992 bill lapsed, and I resubmitted it in 1995. It was

not brought forward by the then Government for debate.

I was given the task of developing the Government’s preparations for the

International Year of Older Persons. Never one to look a gift horse in the mouth, I

lobbied hard for us to remove the compulsory retirement age for Commonwealth

Public Servants and Statutory Officeholders. The former was achieved in 1999 and

the latter in 2001. The Age Discrimination Act took a little longer and was enacted in

2004.

In my advocacy, lectures and political battles involving the affairs of older people

over the years, I have had in mind that the concerns of those older people would one

day become mine and that of the enormous cohort of baby boomers born after World

War II. Self-interest is always a good motivator!!!!

4

Focus of this lecture

Baby boomers aged 65 and over make up approximately 15% of the Australian

population,1 and the 2015 Intergenerational Report has projected that the number of

boomers to enter this age range will more than double by 2055.2

Little did I know when I provided the abstract and title for this lecture that Adam

Graycar (who unfortunately can’t be here tonight) had used the same title for a

speech in June 1988 and he sent me a copy (produced on a typewriter in pica!).

In the abstract to this lecture, I referred to Paul McCartney’s famous song ‘Will you

still need me’ which he penned in 1966, at the age of 24, when the oldest of

Australia’s baby boomers were just turning 20. Despite Paul contemplating turning

64, for most boomers then it was probably the furthest thing from their minds, and for

most of them would have seemed an impossibility.

Indeed, they had been immersed in the ‘youth culture’ in the 60s, and exposed to

popular cultural references at the time expressing the exact opposite, with famous

lines like ‘forever young’ and ‘I hope I die before I get old’ saturating our radios.

But the demographic clock stops for no one and for many years it had been ticking

away in the background until we finally saw some major age reforms beginning to

emerge in the 1980s, but it had taken far too long.

5

Social surveys and studies about the older pre-war generations had been conducted

since the 1950s, and even earlier in Britain and America.

How can we learn from the past to meet the demographic challenges and

opportunities now and in the future?

As social scientists, researchers, economists and demographers, what can we do

better to achieve much needed outcomes and timely change for the ageing cohort of

baby boomers?

Earlier today at the Annual Symposium, you discussed the impact of social science

on public policy. We know that social science is a powerful discipline, which is able to

fill the gaps in our knowledge about ageing. It is able to inform and guide public

policy, as well as drive change that is both far-sighted and appreciative of the past.

In this lecture I want to spend some time looking at what social scientists were saying

about ageing generations from the 50s. How does this compare with how the cohort

of ageing boomers are doing now? How can we do better at ensuring evidence

based outcomes?

Early Social Science Perspectives

Pat Jalland, in her book ‘Old Age in Australia: A History’, published last year, refers to

the various social science surveys and studies that had been conducted from the

1950s in Australia on our older pre-war generations.

6

The Hutchinson Report of 1954, 50 years ago, was the first major social survey of

older people in Victoria and described by Jalland as, ‘the first detailed report on the

subject in Australia’.3 Among other findings, the report identified issues regarding the

inadequacy of the age pension and recommended abolition of its harsh means test. It

drew the link between old age, retirement and poverty, and noted the particular

vulnerability of older women, who were more likely to be in poverty and living alone in

their old age. It considered Australia’s early retirement system ‘wasteful, costly and

demoralising’,4 recommending that those, ‘fit and willing to work’ should be

encouraged to do so.5 It is ironic that it is still the message of Susan Ryan’s Willing to

Work Report launched in May of this year, 60 years on!! The poor living conditions of

some older Victorians was also recognised, and paired with the recommendation for

building smaller homes for the elderly as opposed to the continued expansion of

large institutional nursing homes.6

The Henderson Report of 1970-75, forty years ago, noted an increase in the poverty

of older people in Melbourne, with those over 65 and single women over 60 being

the, ‘largest single identifiable group of people in poverty in Australia’.7 More

appropriate accommodation and subsidised housing for the elderly was

recommended, along with greater assistance for carers at home and increased home

care services.8

The McCleay Report of 1982, over 30 years ago, reiterated this need for increased

home care, reflecting earlier findings about older people’s value of independence and

preference to age at home and remain in the community, which ran counter to the

government’s continued investment in nursing homes at the time.9

7

It is disturbing to note the ongoing nature of many of these issues for today’s older

population. Concerns of the ageing baby boomers today such as appropriate and

affordable housing, the barriers of age discrimination especially in employment, the

vulnerability of older women, and the desire of most older people to remain in the

community and receive support at home, are echoed in the narratives of these early

social science reports.

However, as we will discuss later, the situation of the baby boomers now is also

vastly different from that of pre-war generations due to their particular lived

experiences and changing conditions.

Who is, or are all of us, responsible for the repetitive nature of the recommendations

and the length of time that passed before we saw any major social policy action?

With respect to aged care it would not be until the mid-late 1980s that major social

reforms would restructure the aged care system to increase home care services for

older people. Even then, changes were slow, inadequate, and out of sync with the

rapidly ageing cohort of baby boomers and increasing demand. Jalland quotes

Kendig and McCallum’s bleak observations in Greying Australia 1986:

There is no advocate with the political clout to compete with the nursing home

industry. Unless the political will can be mobilized to improve services, there will be

more misuse of expensive institutional care in dealing with non-critical patients,

inadequate care of older people at home, and continuing heavy burdens on

daughters and other carers.10

8

In between the 1954 Hutchinson Report and McCleay Report of 1982, there were

numerous other social surveys and reports conducted in NSW, Victoria and other

states, often reiterating and reinforcing earlier findings and recommendations that

would not be implemented, or were implemented decades later.

Jalland and others have pointed to particular social and political forces of the time

that have acted to impede the translation of social research to policy. I quote:

The outcome of many admirable reports on aged care up to 1980 was woeful. As

Anna Howe observed in 1990: “From the mid 1970s to the early 1980s, some 8000

new private nursing home beds were established ... The total outlays on nursing

home care in all sectors increased more than fivefold between 1972 and 1982”. She

argues that the many policy failures and abortive inquiries were partly due to the

inability of bureaucratic solutions to solve complex structural problems. As Dr Sydney

Sax saw it, the earlier enquiries were conducted by officials who were “lacking in

political clout”.11

I have some views about the delay in implementation and translation which I will

return to later.

The economic downturn of the 70s, and high unemployment rate, also diffused the

50s campaign for increasing the male retirement age, pushing the matter further

down the agenda for the government at the time.12

In relation to the Hutchinson Report, Jalland observes that, ‘though the report was

published as a book, little effort seems to have been made to promote and distribute

it, perhaps due to the adverse press response’.13

9

Social science has recognised the value of examining history to inform the present.

The reflections that have been made about the political, social, economic and media

forces standing in the way of major social change in the 20 th century certainly carry a

timely reminder for us to be aware of these influences as we develop policy for the

21st century.

In addition to these extraneous forces, there are also lessons to be learnt in terms of

the acts and omission of those of us in the social science disciplines. How can we

ensure that our research provides an evidence base for policy and is acted on?

Challenge to social scientists

Are we outcome driven?

Do we take our research and sell it to government and relevant stakeholders? Do we

make an effort to insert ourselves into other courses and disciplines that affect older

people such as urban development, financial planning etc.?

Do we make appropriate connections, outside social science circles, to fuel debate

in our research, to gather interest and excite the curiosity of others?

Baby Boomers

Despite the ongoing nature of some issues, it is important to recognise that the

generation of older baby boomers are a distinct cohort shaped by their particular life

experiences, values, expectations, opportunities and social, economic and cultural

10

conditions. And these differences must be factored into policy responses to issues of

ageing in our present time.

We know, for example, that with rising life expectancies, Australian baby boomers

can now expect to live well into their 80s and beyond. That’s on average an extra 25

years more than their parents and grandparents’ generation.14 These additional years

of life, will have an enormous impact both on the baby boomer’s wellbeing and

younger generations.

Much has been said about the fiscal impacts of this ageing cohort and the pressures

it will place on our economy, public health, welfare systems and younger

generations. However, as my predecessor Susan Ryan argued in her 2014 keynote

address to the ASSA Symposium, we must stop wallowing in the language of ageing

‘tsunamis’, ‘crises’ and ‘catastrophes’, but instead face the demographic challenges

and opportunities head on.

We know that unlike the previous generation, Australians aged 45 years and over are

intending to work longer than ever before. The latest data from the ABS Retirement

Intentions 2014 survey show that 71% of persons intended to retire at the age of 65

years. This is up from 48% compared with ten years before. More people are also

intending to retire at older ages, 70 or over.15

Compared to the previous generation, older boomers are also likely to live many

more years free of disability. Therefore, instead of complaining about unsustainable

burdens, we must be thinking about how we can assist older workers who are in

good health and willing to work, to do just that, and to reskill if necessary. It is crucial

11

that governments and employers reimagine retirement, workplaces and work

practices such as flexible work options, mobile places of work, opportunities for

reverse mentoring.

We also know that the baby boomers are a diverse generation, with a greater

experience of cultural diversity than their predecessors. As a result of the high levels

of post-war immigration, almost 40% of all migrants from non-English speaking

countries are aged 50 years and over. This is much higher than the older generations

where only 18.5% of the 80+ population living in Australia were born in non-English

speaking countries.16 This will have implications on the kinds of services older people

will require, including culturally appropriate aged care services and health supports,

language services and policies appreciative of traditional networks, culture and

concepts of family and community.

Baby boomers also have much higher levels of education than the earlier

generations. The late Professor Graeme Hugo’s analysis of ABS National Health

Survey data and Census data covering roughly 25 years periods showed that 43% of

boomers had completed secondary school compared with just 6% of the previous

generation.17 Baby boomers are also continuing to engage in lifelong learning and

education, often at the tertiary level. We need to be thinking about how we can

support older people to engage in ongoing learning, apprenticeships, personal and

professional development as well as identifying early opportunities for reskilling

linked to employment.

The baby boom period was also characterised by rising rates of female participation

in both tertiary education and employment, leading to the advent of the two income

12

household. Although this has not translated to better employment outcomes and

earnings for women from both the baby boom and younger generations. In 2010,

79% of tertiary-educated women were employed compared to 90% of similarly

educated men. In 2009, women aged between 25 and 64 years earned 72% of the

earnings of men from the same age group.18

Following the introduction of no-fault divorce in 1975, the baby boom generation saw

rising rates of marital divorce and separation. In 2006, 19% of baby boomers were

separated or divorced, nearly double that of the previous generation.19

Older baby boomers will be less able to call on their family and friends to care for

them compared with the previous generation. In 1970 there were five people of

working age supporting each Australian over 65. At current trends this will fall to just

2.7 by 2050.20

The baby boom generation has high levels of home ownership and growing wealth.

The majority of Australians aged over 65 own a home outright. However, home

ownership is on the decline and the number of older boomers renting is increasing,

as it is with successive generations. The proportion of home owners over 65 fell from

78 per cent in 2002 to 71 per cent just nine years later.21

A recent research paper by the Swinburne Institute for Social Research has shown

that if you do not own a home by mid-life (45-49 years old) there was a strong

likelihood you would never own one. It also said that there are close to 426,000

Australians over the age of 50 renting either alone or with a partner. This figure is

forecast to hit more than 800,000 by 2050.22

13

The median wealth of people aged 65 and above has surged more than 60 percent

since 2001.23

Furthermore, wealth among the baby boomers is not evenly distributed, and home

ownership is a major determinant of social-economic wellbeing. Baby boomers who

are renting are more vulnerable to disadvantage.

We must also take intergenerational differences into account and consider the

relationship between generations in our policy approaches and actions.

We know that despite rising levels of education among the boomer cohort, it is the

younger generations that are the most highly educated. However, young people also

face their own challenges. Baby boomers who went to university from 1974 to the

late 80s would have benefited from the Whitlam government’s policy of free tertiary

education. With the introduction of HECs in 1989, students at university now

experience one of the highest tertiary education tuition fees among OECD countries,

(fifth highest fees after Canada, Japan, Korea and the US). In Australia, 4 out of 5

bachelors, masters and doctoral students take out a student loan, often also

benefiting from a public subsidy. The number of student loans has increased by 57%

in the last decade.24

An increasing proportion of young Australians were living with their parents until their

mid-20s. In 2011, around 29% of single young adults (aged 18–34 years) lived with

one or both of their parents, up from 21% in 1976. 25

14

Many of these late leavers, are also ‘boomerang kids’, returning to the family home

when circumstances change, such as to save money for their first home. After

leaving the home, an estimated 46% will return at least once before the age of 35.26

As well as these pressures on baby boom parents, there is an increased pressure to

transfer wealth to the next generation, and sadly we are seeing this lead to increased

elder abuse, in particular financial abuse.

Similar challenges, then and now

We need to recognise the ongoing nature of some ageing issues but also the

different circumstances and experiences of the baby boom generation, and the

unique policy implications they highlight. However the same challenges still apply:

How can we be more effective in advancing public policy for the ageing baby boom

generation?

Are we proactive in making connections?

Are we making known this knowledge we have about older Australians, then and

now, and its implications for policy?

How do we influence politicians, statutory office holders, community leaders,

stakeholders and other movers and shakers?

How do we drive translation and implementation of social science research?

As I mentioned earlier Anna Howe argued, ‘that the many policy failures and abortive

inquiries were partly due to the inability of bureaucratic solutions to solve complex

problems’, and Sydney Sax claimed earlier enquries were conducted by officials who

15

were ‘lacking in political clout’.27 I know there are some current and former

bureaucrats here tonight and I would like to acknowledge Mary Murnane. I am sure if

she had the chance she would like to make a comment on this observation. She

played a significant role in the implementation of a number of age care reforms. I

think it is more likely that it was more often the case that the bureacrats were

hindered by tardy and difficult Ministers – let’s not lay all the blame at the feet of the

bureaucrats.

In his 2013 Cunningham Lecture Simon Chapman expressed his concern about the

difficulty of translating research findings into policy. He presented a case study

outlining the policy adoption and role of advocacy in the introduction, in Australia, of

plain packaging of tobacco products. He made the observation:

It’s long been banal to note that policy adoption is not simply a matter of presenting

the best facts and evidence to policy makers and then sitting back to watch quality

evidence triumph over all other considerations. With rare, exceptions, policy

entrepreneurs and advocates need to engage in extended and strategic efforts to

ensure that evidence is communicated in ways that make it publicly and politically

compelling so that inaction is not an option.

In 2009 he worked on a project looking at characteristics of influential Australian

health researchers and senior policy makers, (politicians, their staff and senior

bureaucrats). He went on to say:

Three quarters of Australian politicians we interviewed placed greater importance on

media profile, with media presence sometimes disturbingly seen as commensurate

with expertise. For one political advisor, it was the only means of identifying experts.

16

He said: “I have absolutely no idea how I would go about identifying someone if there

wasn’t an obvious expert prominent in the media”.

Chapman said:

In summary, the opportunity that media engagement provided for researchers to

contribute to research-informed public awareness and debate was regarded not only

as appropriate by most of our influential interviewees, but as a critical aspect of their

professional duty to advance public health.

I think I can hear you saying under your breath that the public and therefore the

media are more interested in the results of medical and health research than they are

in the findings of the social science community. This may be so, but it should not

stop social scientists from ‘broadcasting’ research which has the potential to lead to

better social, economic and personal outcomes, nor should it stop them from

developing contacts in the media and getting the ‘good news’ out. Chapman said he

tells students, when talking about using the media, that if you manage to get your

story on to the nightly news, breakfast show etc it will cover a large number of people

and among that audience will be ‘a small number of highly influential people with

power to legistlate and to allocate resources to your issue’.28

It was only in March this year, that MASH actor and science advocate Alan Alda

delivered an address to the National Press Club, where he spoke about the Alan

Alda Centre for Communicating Science in New York. Alda explained that the Centre

provides training and credited courses on communication for science graduates, ‘so

that when they go out into the world as capable scientists they will also be capable

communicators’.29 ANU, (The Australian National University), I believe partnered with

the Centre earlier this year. This could be something for us to consider in Australia,

17

not only for medical and bio-medical sciences but also social science, as a way of

enabling more effective communication with the public, media, policy makers and

others outside the discipline. What we need is an AAA, an Australian Alan Alda

Social Sciences Communicaton Centre!!

Returning to Simon Chapman’s Cunningham address, he also said that he had never

met Nicola Roxon before she became Health Minister. And herein lies a story.

I have on many occasions at gathering of medical scientists bemoaned the fact that I

had never, or maybe once or twice, when I was a backbencher, been invited to visit a

medical research institute, or have requests for meetings with medical researchers.

When I asked one Director of an Institute why this may have been the case he

replied, ‘We didn’t know you were going to be the Health Minister’. My retort was nor

did I, but had I been appointed to another Cabinet ministry it would have been useful

for the Health Minister to have an informed colleague sitting around the Cabinet

table. I vividly remember one of my colleagues asking me why the Commonwealth

should put $50 million dollars towards a microscrope in a room, he had no idea of the

size and importance of the Synchrotron, and I credit myself with playing an significant

part in the Commonwealth’s contribution to the funding of that important facility.

My message to you is that one of the most important things you can do is to engage

with the backbenchers. They have time and you can develop some very useful, and

with your assistance, ‘informed and enlightened’, contacts. You may be undertaking

research which has local implications, for example my local council has conducted a

four year project on women at risk of homelessness. Your research may relate to a

specific area e.g. rural, inner city etc. You need to identify the local members, (state

18

and federal who are responsible for areas, or whose interests are covered by your

research). Make an appointment to see them, and explain how implementation of

your research would assist their consitutents. And don’t forget your Senators! You

can identify those members of parliament who have a particular interest in social

policy and social science research. You can see who speaks on social policy bills,

who is on various backbench social policy committees, those who serve on

parliamentary social policy standing and select committees. You never know, a

backbencher you met 12 months ago, may be a Minister today, someone with whom

you have made a connection and met when you weren’t asking for anything, but who

knows you and is more likely to seek your advice. The backbencher you met may

not be the Minister responsible for a social policy portfolio but may be the Treasurer,

Finance Minister or another Cabinet Minister sitting around the Cabinet Table, who is

more aware of the issues than would otherwise be the case.

I would just like to give you an example of a researcher, who has been very creative

in getting her message across. She comes from a country town in NSW and I hope I

am doing her justice because I am telling you about her project having heard her

speak about it recently. She wanted to undertake a Restorative Justice Program –

she engaged the Local Mayor and the community. She undertook a survey of the

types of crimes that the community did not see as warranting prison and could be

dealt with by enforcing community service orders. There was a very high degree of

agreement in the community as to which crimes should result in a prison sentence

and which could be managed in the community. She then approached the local state

and federal member and got them involved. They saw an evidence-based solution to

some of the minor crimes which were occurring in their electorate and she is now

moving towards implementing the program – how much more success is she likely to

19

have in translating her findings into action, with the Major and two local members

supporting her and advocating for financial support? Not all research would lend itself

to this approach but if we think outside the square there may be other possible ways

to have ‘influential’ people involved in achieving outcomes.

One way to do this is to get into Parliament, but I am not suggesting you should go all

the way and stand for Parliament, although it would be a good idea, we need to dilute

the army of lawyers with a good sprinkling of social scientists!!

Adam Graycar’s speech I referred to earlier, which was produced on a typewriter,

was written in 1988 when I was serving my first year in the Senate here in this

Chamber. We had an IBM Selectric typewriter with a limited memory and word

processing capacity and the printer was so large and noisy it had a huge Perspex

cover to reduce the noise. Offices were allocated on the order of election and being

the last person elected in the 1987 election I got the smallest office. The printer didn’t

fit, and was located under the stairs adjacent to our office.

How much easier it is now. We have the ability to write draft after draft, and edit and

edit, and produce reports/reviews/papers in vast quantities. Maybe in the pre-word

processing world when public servants, politicians and researchers were more

circumspect and economical, influenced by the fact that the fruits of their labours

were produced on a typewriter with a couple of carbon copies and then typeset and

printed, we were not inundated with the mountain of reports we have now.

20

From experience I can attest that politicians drown in an almost daily flood of reports,

reviews and other documents. This may be one of the reasons why implementation

of policy is so slow, or doesn’t happen at all.

I have an aversion to good solid sensible reviews ending up in the graveyard of good

intentions.

Where I stand

My role as Age Discrimination Commissioner is a culmination of my education,

teaching, political and ministerial experiences.

Having straddled the fields of social science and politics, what I hope to achieve now

is:

To expand on the work of my predecessor, Susan Ryan, in progressing

implementation of the Willing to Work Report on employment discrimination against

older Australians and Australians with a disability. This report was launched in May

of this year and should be tabled in this parliamentary session. The implementation

of the recommendations are a top priority for the Disability Commissioner and me.

I also intend to contribute to and influence the adoption of the recommendatons of

the Elder Abuse report commissioned by the Attorney-General and being undertaken

by the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC). The Elder Abuse Inquiry is still

underway and by mid December there will be a draft discussion paper, and I urge

21

those of you who are interested to contact the ALRC to get a copy of the report and

make a submission.

In a recent (September) Radio National program on financial elder abuse, Brian

Herd, a Brisbane lawyer specialising in elder law expressed his reservations about

the current inquiry into Elder Abuse. He said, ‘I am sceptical, I'm cynical, and I'm

depressed because so many previous iterations of this issue have simply sat on

bureaucrats' shelves’.30 Let me disabuse Brian Herd or any minister or bureaucrat

who thinks the Elder Abuse will simply sit on a shelf. I am determined that is not

going to happen.

As well as these objectives my role will, for example, also include promoting positive

attitudes towards older Australians, calling out age discrimination when it rears its

ugly head, and pursuing issues of homelessness especially as they affect the fastest

emerging group of homeless people – older Australian women.

I hope this has been a call to action for all of us. That just as there have been missed

opportunities to respond to the findings of research from the 50s to the 80s, that we

do not commit the same error. If we fail to drive the implementation of social science

research the invited speaker at the 2076 Cunningham Lecture will have every right to

condemn our hypocrisy and inertia.

22

1 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Feature Article: Population by Age and Sex, Australia, States and Territories (Cat. No. 3101.0 – Australian Demographic Statistics, June 2015). At http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/featurearticlesbyCatalogue/7A40A407211F35F4CA257A2200120EAA?OpenDocument (viewed 12 September 2016).2 Commonwealth of Australia, 2015 Intergenerational Report: Australia in 2055 (5 March 2015), Report, Ch1. At http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2015/2015-Intergenerational-Report (viewed 12 September 2016).3 P Jalland, Old Age in Australia: A History (2015), p 151.4 P Jalland, note 3, p 157.5 P Jalland, note 3, p 159.6 P Jalland, note 3, pp 150-159.7 P Jalland, note 3, p 168.8 P Jalland, note 3, pp 167-168.9 P Jalland, note 3, pp 230-231.10 P Jalland, note 3, p 232.11 P Jalland, note 3, p 227.12 P Jalland, note 3, pp 235-253.13 P Jalland, note 3, p 160.14 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Australian Historical Population Statistics, 2014 (Cat. No. 3105.0.65.001). At http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3105.0.65.001Main+Features12014?OpenDocument (viewed 1 July 2016).15 ABS Retirement and Retirement Intentions, Australia, July 2014 to June 2015 (Cat. No. 6238.0). At http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6238.0Media%20Release2July%202014%20to%20June%202015?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6238.0&issue=July%202014%20to%20June%202015&num=&view=16 FECCA, Review of Australian Research on Older People from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Backgrounds (2015) p 6.17 G Hugo, ‘The Demographic Facts of Ageing in Australia’, Appendix Q for Aged Care Financing Authority Second Annual Report (2014), p 18.18 OECD, ‘Australia’ in Education at a Glance 2012: OECD Indicators, p 5. At http://dx.doi.org/10,1787/eag-2012-41-en (viewed 27 September 2016).19 Australian Bureau of Statistics, A Picture of a Nation (Cat No. 2070.0, 2006), p 12. At http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/2070.02006?OpenDocument (viewed 10 October 2016).20 Chandler Macleod, Coming of Age: The impacts of an ageing workforce on Australian business (White Paper, 2013) p 3. At https://www.chandlermacleod.com/other/coming-of-age (viewed 4 November 2016).21 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), Australia’s welfare 2015: Growing older, http://www.aihw.gov.au/australias-welfare/2015/growing-older/ (viewed 7 November 2016).22 A Sharam, L Ralston & S Parkinson, Security in Retirement: The impact of housing and key critical life events, Swinburne Institute for Social Research (2016), p 3. At http://apo.org.au/resource/security-retirement-impact-housing-and-key-critical-life-events (viewed 7 November 2016).23 Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey: Selected Findings from Waves 1 to 14 (2016) p 61. At http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/hilda/Reports/statreport.html (viewed 7 November 2016).24 OECD, Education at a Glance 2016: OECD Indicators (2016) p 3. At https://www.oecd.org/australia/education-at-a-glance-2016-country-notes.htm (viewed 27 September 2016). 25 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Young adults: Then and now (Cat. No. 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, April 2013). At http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features40April+201326 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Home and Away: The Living Arrangements of Young People (Cat. No. 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, June 2009). At http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features50June+2009 (viewed 7 November 2016). 27 P Jalland, note 3, p 227.28 S Chapman, Plain Packaging of Tobacco Products: A case study in radical health policy adoption and the role of advocacy (Speech delivered at Cunningham Lecture 2013, Canberra, 12 November 2013). At http://www.assa.edu.au/events/lectures/cunningham/2013/31 (viewed 7 November 2016).29 ABC News Online, Actor Alan Alda addresses the National Press Club (Video, 10 March 2016). At http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-10/actor-alan-alda-addresses-the-national-press-club/7238316 (viewed 7 November 2016).30 ABC Radio National, ‘Background Briefing: Early inheritance syndrome’ (Radio Transcript, 25 September 2016). At http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2016-09-25/7866264#transcript (viewed 7 November 2016).