Urban Land Development Authority - Department of Innovation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Women The Taskforce noted that women only represented just over three per cent of all employees at mine sites and minerals processing operations. The Taskforce also recognised that FIFO can pose particular challenges for employees with young families and workers who are single parents. It is generally incompatible with starting a family and caring for young children. On the other hand it can create opportunities for young women to start their careers as well as for mature-age women who wish to re-enter the workforce after raising children (Costa, Silva, Hui, 2006). In a study of twenty WA women working in the resource industry FIFO was not seen as a long term option for most women, especially for those who wanted children and or develop a sense of home or community (Pirotta 2009). Similarly Lord and Preston (2003) report 'Women and FIFO: Take it or leave it?' found tertiary students in resource industry professions, based on their work experience, saw FIFO as being: »» short term »» having a high costs with impacts on family, friends and relationships »» having some benefits (free food and lodging, ability to earn high salary) »» impossible to combine with motherhood. The conclusion that can be reached is that FIFO can be particularly unsuitable for women and parents with young children. This means that improving resource communities requires particular focus on addressing the needs for women and young families. - 8 -
Conclusion The ULDA submits that residential location is one of the key issues that impact on attraction and retention in the resource sector. This is in part because the relative lack of attraction of resource communities, as compared to major urban areas, reduces the appeal of resource industry employment for many people. Further it encourages a 'short term' mentality in terms of worker commitment to the industry (and use of FIFO) therefore encouraging turnover. The ULDA submission is essentially that a key part of the solution is to maximise the accommodation choices for resource workers. What is clear from the research is that many workers prefer FIFO while other workers and their families prefer being locally based. It is not a matter of a one size fits all approach. It is also clear from the research (and from anecdotal information provided to the ULDA from a number of resource companies) that worker preference is partly determined by where they are in their life cycle: this is particularly so for workers with young families where family preference tends to be for being locally based. The Taskforce has recognised the linkage between having strong resource communities and attraction and retention: "it is important to recognise that while resources projects present opportunities for local people, they also present significant problems for some communities, including high costs of housing, food and other costs, and wage and labour pressures on other local businesses and industries. Thriving local communities with abundant social infrastructure, including good schools, access to high quality tertiary education and training, child care, health facilities, sports and recreational facilities may form an important part of the response to the workforce challenges that will confront the resources sector over the next five to ten years." While the Taskforce rightly recognised the role 'for regional and state governments to coordinate with mining operations and local communities to deliver better outcomes' is also a role for the Federal Government. The ULDA submits that the Federal Government can support the range of initiatives undertaken by the Queensland Government (and similar initiatives of the WA Government with Karratha 2020) to increase liveability and affordable housing supply in major resource towns. The high rates of turnover and barriers to entry into the resource sector are due to a complex range of factors. This would suggest targeted solutions and strategies will be required rather than a broad brush approach. As per the Regional Development Australia Core Principle of having a 'more integrated and aligned arrangements for regional engagement and economic development', there is an opportunity for all tiers of government to have strategies to deliver increased levels of economic and social sustainability for resource communities. The Queensland Government's moves to strengthen regional planning and growth management capacity, as well as introduce sustainability policies for resource communities, provide the policies and structures to support local governments. Through the ULDA, local planning and land development in major Queensland resource communities will be given support and priority. The opportunity for the Commonwealth is for funding support through targeting regional development programs or policies toward delivering sustainable resource communities. ULDA recommendations 1. Commonwealth should establish regional development funding priorities for key resource communities with the aim of increasing attraction and retention of resource workers and their families. 2. Commonwealth regional development funding for resource communities should be developed and implemented to compliment State and Local government resource community strategies 3. The focus of Commonwealth regional development funding for resource communities should be on: a. improving economic diversity in resource communities b. improving the liveability of resource communities c. supporting affordable housing initiatives of state and local government d. improving town infrastructure upgrades. - 9 -
Page 1 and 2: Submission to National Resource Sec
Page 3 and 4: Executive summary The Urban Land De
Page 5 and 6: Surat Basin Future Directions State
Page 7 and 8: The conclusion that can be reached
Page 9: would result in forced relocation f

Urban Land Development Authority - Department of Innovation ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?