Disadvantage and ‘Otherness' in Western Sydney

32

Disadvantage and ‘Otherness’ in Western Sydney

STEPHEN HODGE

The construction of western Sydney as Sydney’s ‘other’ has played a role in its historic underprovision of human services compared to the Sydney region as a whole. Issues of difference, disadvantage, identity and the representations of western Sydney are analysed for their contri- bution to its provision of services, with planning for higher education given as an example. Some service provision decisions seem to based on a notion of innate disadvantage rather than disadvantage brought about by structural inequities. These structural inequities include the historical underprovision of human services. An understanding of the ‘othering’ of western Sydney is necessary in order toprevent a vicious cycle of underprovision and disadvantage arising in the future.

The provision of human services such as health and education in western Sydney has long been a political issue (see Gardiner, 1987). Provision has lagged behind population growth in this vast, fast-growing middle and outer suburban sector, causing patterns of inequity in service provision during the course of its development since the second world war. That inner local government areas (LGAs) have generally enjoyed better access to services compared to middle and outer LGAs, has been recognised by planning authorities:

‘There are backlogs of human services in a number of new urban areas. The issue is now the fair and equitable distribution of

Stephen Hodge is an Associate Lecturer i n Human Geography, School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW 2109.

services across the whole Sydney region .... The fair and equitable distribution of services such as child care, health and education across the metropolitan area is recognised as a major issue’ (NSW Department of Planning, 1992).

More established areas of western Sydney have also experienced a relative shortage of service provision, even during times when the financial restraints on the public sector were not extreme (Fagan, 1986a). The provision of health care facilities throughout the Sydney region, for example, has not matched changes in the distribution of population (Donald, 1981). In the 1970s and 1980s this inequitable pattern was the focus of community activity and resulted in the transfer of many public hospital beds from the inner city to western Sydney (Spearritt and DeMarco, 1988:76-78). The establishment and growth of the University of

Australian Geographical Studies April 1996 34(1):32-44

Disadvantage and ‘Otherness ’ in Western Sydney 33

Census Sydney Region Western Syney Year Poulation Intercensal Population Intercensal %Sydney Region

Change % Change % Popn in WSydney

1947 1954 1961 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991

1 743 434 2 004 338 2 390 237 2 641 985 2 917 704 3 033 486 3 204 618 3 365 763 3 538 622

292 845 14.96 470 612 19.25 697 093 10.53 835 657 10.44 968 242 3.97 1 099 058 5.64 1 236 617 5.03 1 357 654 5.14 1 474 417

60.70 48.12 19.88 15.87 13.51 12.52 9.79 8.60

16.80 23.48 29.16 31.63 33.19 36.23 38.59 40.34 41.67

I Sortrce: Spearritt and DeMarco, 1988 and ABS, 1991.

Table I: P o p u I a t i o n Growth and Distribution in the Sydney Region 1947-1991

Western Sydney has resulted in a more equitable distribution of higher education opportunities in the Sydney region and recent data show a more even distribution of hospital beds than previously (NSW Department of Health, 1993).

It is debatable, because of a lack of compre- hensive information, whether western Sydney continues to be underprovided with human services. Nevertheless there is still a need to better understand the factors behind the historic underprovision of human services so that inequities in service provision across the Sydney region do not re-emerge. Western Sydney’s identity as Sydney’s ‘other’ is one of the factors that contributed to its underprovision of human services. Western Sydney has been seen as different from, and disadvantaged compared to, the rest of the Sydney region. Without consulting local residents, some decision-makers in human services have provided services that are now underutilised. Further, some service provision decisions seem to be based on a notion of innate disadvantage in western Sydney rather than disadvantage brought about by structural inequities. Ironically, one of these inequities is the historic underprovision of human services to western Sydney. A vicious circle of underprovision may then arise.

Viewing western Sydney as innately (rather than structurally) disadvantaged is a key plank

of its identity as ‘other’. There is a need to understand how this ‘otherness’ came about and operated so that its influence in future decision making can be curtailed. The paper analyses the provision of higher education in western Sydney to demonstrate the role of western Sydney’s identity as ‘other’ in the delivery of this service (Hodge, 1992).

Defining and constructing Sydney’s ‘other’ The term ‘other’ has common currency in acad- emic social science literatures concerned with issues of identity and representation. Rose argues that identity is relational: ‘[wlho I think I am depends on me establishing in what ways I am different from, or similar to, someone else’ (Rose, 1993:5). As well as being relational, the construction of identities is about power and ‘not simply a matter of free choice and the unbi- ased perception of others’ (Rose, 1993:6). Therefore, in constructing our ‘others’ we draw on existing power structures and our conceptions and misconceptions of others. Many geographers argue that places are also constructed or invented and that their identities are also prod- ucts of power relations, (mis)conceptions and (mis)representations (Anderson and Gale, 1992; Jackson, 1989; Shurmer-Smith and Hannam, 1994).

34 Australian Geographical Studies

Wollondilly

Hawkesbuty

Blue Mountains

1 Parramatta 7 Concord 13 HuntersHill 19 NorthSydney 25 SouthSydney 2 Hohyd 8 StratMiekl 14 Drurnmoyne 20 Leichhardt 26 Botany 3 Auburn 9 Canterbury 15 Burwood 21 Marrickville 27 Woollahra 4 Bankstown 10 Hurstville 16 Ashfield 22 Rockdale 28 Waverley 5 Ku-ring-gai 11 Will0 hby 17 Manly 23 K arah 29 Randwick 6 Ry& 12 Laneqove 10 Mosman 24 Sgney

Fig.1 Boundary of western Sydney within the Sydney region

Disadvantage and ‘Otherness’ in Western Sydney 35

Difference and disadvantage in western Sydney The western Sydney referred to in this paper is a greater western Sydney as outlined in Figure 1. It includes what are commonly known as the ‘western suburbs’, ‘the south-western suburbs’ and ‘the north-western suburbs’. At the 1991 census the population of western Sydney was 1474 417 or 41.67 per cent of the Sydney region total of 3 538 348 (ABS, 1991). Possibly the most outstanding feature of western Sydney in the postwar period has been its massive population growth and increasing share of the Sydney region’s total population (Table I). Other notable features of the sub-region are its demographic structure and key socio-economic indicators such as educational qualifications, occupational structure and income levels. Western Sydney has a higher proportion of its population aged under 20 and a lower proportion aged over 45 compared to the Sydney region as a whole. A lower proportion of its residents hold higher education qualifications (9.5 per cent compared with 14.9 per cent) while a higher percentage of western Sydney residents hold no qualifications at all (62.1 per cent compared with 56.8 per cent) (ABS, 1991).

The occupational profile of western Sydney also differs from that of the Sydney region as a whole. This ‘class’ difference plays a key role in defining western Sydney as ‘other’. The Australian Bureau of Statist ics uses the Australian Standard Classification of Occupations to classify and rank occupations into eight major groups in a hierarchy based on the skill level and skill specialisation needed to undertake the tasks of the occupation (Horvath et al, 1989: 44-46). Western Sydney has a lower proportion of its workers in the two highest skilled categories: ‘Managers & Administrators’ and ‘Professionals’. Notably, there is also a higher proportion of workers in the two lowest categories: ‘Plant & Machine Operators’ and ‘Labourers and Related Workers’. In the intervening four categories western Sydney is roughly equally represented

in ‘Para-Professionals’, ‘Clerks’ and ‘Sales & Personal Service Workers’, and over-represented in ‘Tradespersons’ (ABS, 1991). In terms of income levels, western Sydney has more of its population in lower income brackets and fewer in higher income brackets than the Sydney region as a whole.

Recent developments in human geography may contribute to a clearer understanding and explanation of western Sydney’s difference from the remainder of the Sydney region. ‘[Elveryone. ... .is now a deconstructionist, ’ claims McDowell, ‘ [dlifference, diversity, the other, situatedness, positionality, polyvocality - these are the new words that rise in the hum of intellectual exchange in the rooms and corridors of geography meetings’ (McDowell, 199258). Dear argues that human geography’s contempo- rary concern with difference is due to the so- called postmodern challenge to modernist social science (Dear, 1988). Some human geographers such as Gregory (1989) argue that geography’s emphasis on uniqueness and specificity of place predates postmodern theory and has itself instead influenced such theory in regard to issues of locality and contextuality.

Regardless of the origin of geography’s con- temporary and historical concern with spatial differentiation, there has been concern with western Sydney’s socio-economic difference and the inherent inequity in access to economic opportunities this generates (Fagan 1986a; Fagan 1986b; Blakely and Fagan, 1988). These commentators have noted the structural disadvantage experienced in western Sydney, including the relationship between lower levels of labour market skills and specialisation and higher levels of unemployment, especially during a recessed economic climate.

Viewing western Sydney as disadvantaged rather than simply different introduces notions of empowerment and disempowerment. These notions have also been employed in critiques of the celebration of difference in postmodern social science. McDowell criticises the ‘new ethnography’ school in anthropology and its


preoccupation with writing anthropologies that celebrate difference (see Marcus and Fischer, 1986), arguing that ‘it is hard to swallow for those whose “otherness” and “exoticness” reflect structures of oppression and domination. There is little reason to celebrate a marginality that entails a lack of power’ (McDowell, 1992:65). Local organisations in western Sydney have argued’ that its historic underprovision of human services such as education and health has contributed to the sub-region’s marginality and structural disadvantage. Improved service provision, they claim, would contribute to western Sydney’s economic development and increase the ability of its residents to participate in the economic opportunities available in the Sydney region (MSJ Keys Young, 1985; WSROC, 1985b). Western Sydney’s ‘otherness’ has contributed to its lower provision of human services and in turn its structural disadvantage.

Representation and identity The ways in which the media represent places have been highlighted by Burgess and Gold (1985). In media representations of western Sydney one of the key themes is socio-economic disadvantage. Powell, in a recent study of the coverage of western Sydney in The Sydney Morning Herald, noted the skew towards negative reporting and a lack of positive or ‘good news’ stories: ‘[Tlhe constant repetition of stories of problems and neglect, about the excess of disadvantage, crime, violence, unemployment and lack of facilities, services, wealth, education and so on, creates an image of the western suburbs as Sydney’s “other”’ (Powell, 1993: xvii).

Powell argues that such negative representations contribute to the construction of western Sydney as Sydney’s ‘other’. She further argues that the Sydney media has ‘othered’ western Sydney in an attempt to define what the ‘real’ Sydney is not, while Mee (1994) argues that the use of frontier metaphors in describing western Sydney represents it as a violent and threatening

place, thus contributing to its ‘othering’. Although western Sydney is represented as homogenous, it is indeed a diverse and con- tested space more adequately portrayed as a variety of western Sydneys (see Mee, 1988) where diverse approaches are needed to deal with a variety of human service needs.

Said (1978; 1993) argues that the representation of other places (such as colonies) in European cultural artefacts (such as fiction), is an essential tool in the maintenance of imperial power and domination over these places. The diversity of the Middle East is constructed as an easily packaged and digested ‘Orient’. Batchen discusses these themes with specific reference to western Sydney: ‘West carries [a] range of meanings .....[ a]s far as the metropolis of Sydney is concerned, the western suburbs are positioned as its ‘east’ with all the negative connotations this construction carries in its wake’ (Batchen, 1991:5). The ‘east’ Batchen refers to is the global ‘east’ that the ‘western world’ has constructed as part of its colonial history. The ‘0th- ering’ of places has been introduced into geographical literatures by Anderson who docu- mented the ‘othering’ of Aboriginal Redfern in Sydney (1993) and Chinatown in both Sydney and Melbourne (1990).

The media do not present a singular representation of western Sydney and individual con- sumers of the media will have different inter- pretations of these representations. Powell analyses the ways these multiple representations can affect funding decisions about services for western Sydney (1993). Decision makers in human service organisations may minimise service delivery to places based on their perceptions formed from media images. Reporting of the ‘failure’ of specific funding programs may influence decision makers to cancel or curtail existing funding. On the other hand the media representations of the issues raised by Powell may motivate people inside and outside of western Sydney to lobby for improvements in human services. Powell recognises that these representations of western Sydney have, in


many instances, caused governments to address the issues through increased funding.

Through their representations of western Sydney the media play both a positive and negative role in defining it. Further investigation of the positive outcome demonstrates that securing more funding for services does not guarantee that these services will be relevant to local needs. The local population must be consulted before major funding decisions are made in the provision in human services. This point has been addressed in relation to arts funding in western Sydney (Hawkins and Gibson, 1991; Revallion, 1991). The recognition of western Sydney’s underprovision in arts funding by bodies such as the Australia Council has led to further investment in arts infrastructure (Australia Council, 1990), an investment how- ever, that is not entirely relevant to the region it was intended to serve.

A good example is the Parramatta Cultural Centre (now known as the Parramatta Riverside Theatres) which was constructed in 1988 as a bicentennial project. The facility is underutilised, and instead of being self funding, it seems that it will have to be heavily subsidised for some time (Revallion, 1991). Revallion argues that no research or local consultation was undertaken in the planning stages to deter- mine local needs. Instead a ‘high culture’ edi- fice was created which has become a white ele- phant. At best the subsidy required for the facility to continue to operate will be seen as part of the overall subsidy for arts infrastructure in NSW. A worst case scenario could see any further development may be seen as ‘throwing good money after bad’, with the Parramatta Cultural Centre inhibiting the further development of arts infrastructure in western Sydney.

The Cultural Centre is one example of the role of western Sydney’s ‘othering’ in deter- mining its provision of human services. The voices of local people were not heard and the decision, made outside western Sydney, has resulted in a facility that very few people use. Consultation may have revealed a variety of

voices and positions favouring other funding options in western Sydney. The provision of higher education is a good example of the underprovision of a human service in western Sydney. It also demonstrates the role played by western Sydney’s ‘othering’ in contributing to structural disadvantage through lack of educational opportunity.

Higher Education in Western Sydney On 1 January 1989 the University of Western Sydney Act, 1988 (NSW) created a federated university comprising the network members of UWS, Hawkesbury and UWS, Nepean. On 1 November 1989, the University of Western Sydney (Amendment) Act, 1989 (NSW), per- mitted UWS Macarthur to join the network as its third member (UWS, 1992:6). The mission of UWS is ‘to provide excellence in higher education, research and associated community service in Greater Western Sydney’ (UWS, 1992:6). This mission could include increasing the participation of western Sydney residents in higher education, a rate that is historically well below that of the Sydney region as a whole (WESTIR, 1992). Higher education provides a good example both of the historical underprovision of human services to western Sydney as well as the way in which perceptions of the study region influence decisions about service provision. The history of higher education provision in western Sydney from the immediate postwar period to the establishment of UWS illuminates the role that the ‘othering’ of west- em Sydney has played in the inequitable distribution of higher education opportunities in the Sydney region.

Enter the Backwater: Higher Education in the Sydney region 1945 -1 983 The immediate postwar period saw not only rapid growth of student numbers in Australian higher education, but also the beginning of the decentralisation of the university system away from inner city sites in state capital cities. Decentralisation began with the granting of


autonomous university status to the New England University College at Armidale in 1954, at the time Australia’s only non-metropolitan university, and the development of the New South Wales University of Technology’s (now the University of New South Wales) per- manent campus at suburban Kensington in the early 1960s.

In 1957, the Commonwealth Government appointed the Murray Committee to report on avenues for the possible further expansion of university level education in Australia (Murray, 1957). While the Murray Report did not recom- mend specific sites for new universities, it argued the proposed second university for Victoria should not be located outside the Melbourne metropolitan area, but that the university ‘must be a part of the city [Melbourne] which embraces over 60 per cent of the population .... of the State’ (Murray, 1957:87). Similar concern that the expansion of higher education should match the pattern of population growth was also expressed in Sydney where ‘a campaign emerged for growth in higher education in the Sydney region to reflect demographic trends’ (Chifley University Interim Council, 1988:2). Western Sydney’s share of the Sydney region’s population increased from 16.80 per cent in 1947 to 23.48 per cent in 1954 and further to 29.16 per cent in 1961 (Table I).

In 1961 the New South Wales government, concerned with pressures upon the University of Sydney, appointed the Price Committee to investigate higher education in the state. One of the major tasks of the committee became the recommendation of a site for a third university in the Sydney region (Fig. 2).The committee received advice on sites at Auburn, Liverpool and Parramatta in western Sydney and St. Leonards and North Ryde in northern Sydney (Price, 1961:114). Given the westward move- ment of population and the concerns expressed in the Murray Report, the recommendation of a site in western Sydney could have seemed highly likely. During the committee’s delibera- tions local voices in western Sydney began to

campaign explicitly for a university, and the Parramatta district council of the Parents and Citizens’ Association argued that ‘a “Parramatta University” would be a “gracious addition” to the historic city’ (Mansfield and Hutchinson, 1992:18).

Ultimately the Price Committee recommended ‘that steps be taken immediately towards the establishment of a new university in the northern suburbs of Sydney’ (Price, 1961:17), resulting in the establishment of Macquarie University at North Ryde in 1964. Sydney now had three universities, one in the centre, one in the east and the newest in the north, while the population was moving west. The Price Committee argued that the site for Sydney’s third university ‘must be governed by the geographical distribution of the students for whom it is planned’ (Price, 1961:lll). With the relief of the University of Sydney in mind, the committee analysed the distribution of home addresses of new students between 1953 and 1960 and found that between 37 and 42 per cent of new students from the Sydney region came from the northern local government areas outlined in Figure 2 (Price, 1961:113). While not- ing that ‘[tlhe distribution of the places of resi- dence of these students is not the same as that of the general population’, the committee stated that there would probably be ‘a special demand for a university west of Sydney in the future’ but the lack of ‘substantially large groups of undergraduate age’ in the outer suburbs meant that the provision of a university in western Sydney did ‘not demonstrate a priority of need’ (Price, 1961:112).

Although the recommendation of northern Sydney as the site for the third university seems logical given the evidence presented in the committee’s report, other factors may have influenced the committee against selecting a western Sydney site - even Parramatta which is not too distant from the northern suburbs. The committee also noted that ‘other factors, such as family incomes and traditions in education influence the areas from which students enrol. University-


Hawkesbuty

Blue Mountains

Group A: Central Sydney Group B: Eastern suburbs Group C Southern suburbs Group D: Western suburbs Group E: Northern suburbs

1 Parramatta 7 Concord 13 HuntersHill 19 NorthSydney 25 SouthSydney 2 Holroyd 8 StratMieM 14 Drummo ne 20 Leichhardt 26 Botany 3 Auburn 9 Cante9ty 15 Burwoody 21 Mamickville 27 WOOllahra 4 Bankstown 10 Hurstville 16 Ashfiild 22 Rockdale 28 Waverley 5 Ku-rlnggai 11 Willou hby 17 Manly 23 K arah 29 Randwick 6 Ryde 12 Lane 8ove 18 Mosman 24 Syney

Fig.2 Subdivisions of the Sydney region used in the Price report 1961 Source: Price, 1961: 113.


going habits and the desire for enrolment must also be taken into consideration’ (ibid). Earlier it argued that ‘[a] university badly situated would not gain a natural enrolment of students and a situation would be created in which the university which it was designed to relieve would need to establish quotas of enrolments and the new university would be enrolling students rejected from the old. An undesirable dis- tinction of quality would thus be created’ (Price, 1961:lll-112).

A university in western Sydney would, according to this argument, be badly situated because of the lack of a ‘natural’ enrolment. The notion of a ‘natural’ enrolment suggests that the committee considered there to be an inherently low ability for higher education amongst western Sydney residents unlike the adequate ability considered to exist in the northern suburbs. Also implicit is the notion that students from the northern suburbs would not want to travel to western Sydney and would only do so if forced to by the imposition of quotas at the University of Sydney. The other factors of university-going habits and family incomes, and the way they affect the areas from which students enrol, were not further discussed in the report. The committee’s silence on this point could easily cement previous hints at a lack of educational ability in western Sydney, whereas an examination of issues such as socio-economic status and the difficulties of physical access to higher education in western Sydney may have explained some of the more funda- mental reasons for the lower participation rates.

In 1972 the Commonwealth Minister for Education and Science commissioned the Bull- Swanson Report to investigate the location, nature and development of tertiary institutions in Sydney, Melbourne and Albury-Wodonga. The report recommended that a university open in western Sydney by 1981 (Swanson and Bull, 1973). Like the Price Report before it, the Swanson-Bull Report recognised that the spatial distribution of potential university students from different parts of Sydney did not match

that of the population generally. Swanson and Bull argued ‘[ilt cannot be denied that for socio-economic reasons some areas are consid- erably less productive than others of students completing a full secondary education. For example, the ratio of matriculants to population may vary by a factor of over four or five for different districts within the same metropolitan area’ (Swanson and Bull, 1973%).

The Swanson-Bull report supported the reduction of spatial inequity of higher education participation rates hoping that ‘action by the Schools Commission will lead to a reduction in the differences of educational opportunity ...’ (Swanson and Bull, 197323). The report thus explicitly explains differences in higher education participation, in part at least, to differences in educational opportunity rather than notions of ‘natural’ enrolments. Further, the report highlights the role higher education may take in increasing the educational opportunity of new areas by arguing that a new university ‘is an important .... element in contributing to the developing educational and cultural life of the community and opening up opportunities for tertiary education for the children of those moving into new areas’ (Swanson and Bull, 1973:28).

The 1980s: ‘Factory Fodder’ versus Regional Development In 1983, the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission (CTEC) established a working party on higher education in outer metropolitan areas. It reported that western Sydney suffered inequity in the provision of higher education and recommended that CTEC investigate meth- ods of overcoming this inequity (CTEC, 1983:iii). Before the Commission could for- mally respond, the local campaign for increased higher education opportunities accelerated in western Sydney, spearheaded by the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC), which had long lobbied for improved human services for the region. In 1985 WSROC commissioned a report titled


West Sydney 2000 which found that while western Sydney’s participation in the Technical and Further Education (TAFE) system was on a par with state and national averages, there were only 3.8 higher education places in western Sydney per 1000 population. This compared with 29.1 places per 1000 population in the Sydney region as a whole and 18.8 places per 1000 nationally (MSJ Keys Young, 1985:lO). West Sydney 2000 argued that a larger and broader post secondary education system was required for continuing regional community (including social and economic) development in western Sydney. This case for spatial equity of human service delivery was the basis on which WSROC and other local organisations continued to lobby for a university in western Sydney.

In response to WSROC’s lobbying, the New South Wales government established a committee in August 1985 to review the structure of higher education in western Sydney. Chaired by the Chairman of the NSW Higher Education Board, R.E. Parry, it was to report to the minister before the end of 1985. Meanwhile, WSROC convened a seminar titled Future Directions for Higher Education in Western Sydney (WSROC, 1985a) which provided a forum for local government and the state and federal education bureaucracies to present their development plans. The opening address recognised ‘that there is a growing community desire for a university located in western Sydney’ and that ‘existing university facilities in Sydney are very distant from people living in this region’ (March, 1985:2). The seminar is evidence of the continuing lobbying by local organisations for a university in western Sydney, the arguments pressing for increased educational opportunity and choice and for reduced inequities in service provision.

The Chairman of CTEC, Hugh Hudson, outlined at the seminar, his proposals for the future of higher education in western Sydney. Hudson called for ‘the development of multi-purpose institutes of technology for the west and south- west of Sydney, i.e. institutes that can provide

appropriate opportunities in applied science and engineering as well as business studies, teacher education, humanities, the arts and health sciences’ (Hudson, 1985:40). While supporting the expansion of higher education in western Sydney, Hudson did not favour the establishment of a university but rather ‘appropriate opportunities’ in vocationally oriented courses. This proposal was based on a number of processes which are themselves based on and contribute to the othering of western Sydney.

Hudson ‘homogenises’ western Sydney arguing that ‘the population of western Sydney must be assessed as constituting a disadvantaged group’ (Hudson, 1985:27). While recog- nising that western Sydney ‘is grossly underprovided for in educational terms’ (Hudson, 1985:26), he then attributes this to the socio- economic makeup of western Sydney: ‘[wlhile I would not wish to overstate the problem of the region, 1 think we have to recognise the high concentrations of low income families, migrant and ethnic families and high youth unemployment. Educationally, the area is characterised by comparatively low rates of participation in the later years of schooling’ (ibid).

One may be left thinking, therefore, that western Sydney’s lower higher education participation rate is more a product of innate lack of educational ability than the reluctance of educational bureaucracies to provide a diverse range of places locally. Hudson is not critical of this lower provision, or how this difference from the remainder of the Sydney region has come about. Furthermore, there is no recommended investigation of ways to overcome this disadvantageous difference.

Hudson then seeks to represent the educational aspirations of western Sydney: ‘In pro- viding for disadvantaged groups and areas, acknowledgment must be made of their post- education destinations and area needs’ (Hudson, 1985:28). Hudson’s solution is the expansion of the College of Advanced Education sector which is ‘more vocationally oriented and more in harmony with the concerns of lower socio-


economic groups. (Hudson, 1985:30). While Hudson does not specify these concerns are he states that ‘students with such backgrounds are often more willing to enrol on a CAE, and thus avoid the frostier and more remote atmosphere of a university’ (ibid). The presumed cultural atmosphere of a university is seen as more of a barrier to western Sydney students than the fact that there was no university there to attend.

Hudson’s proposal did not go unchallenged. Pam Allen (Vice Chairman of WSROC) in her closing address to the seminar, labelled Hudson’s proposal as ‘some sort of refined factory fodder producing institution’ (Allen, 198553). Hudson had ignored ‘a whole area of creativity within the Western suburbs’ (ibid) by emphasising only vocational higher education. Western Sydney, she concluded, was entitled to a broad range of higher education opportunities, not only because of the size of its population, but also because of the positive role of higher education in regional development. Allen’s representations of western Sydney and her criti- cisms of Hudson highlight his subjective posi- tion in this debate by pointing out that his voice does not represent western Sydney. The dis- agreement of two of the keynote speakers at the seminar illustrates the variety of positions held about higher education.

Although Hudson’s voice may seem to be just one in this discourse, at the time it was very powerful by virtue of his chairmanship of CTEC. Hudson’s argument was adopted by the Commission in a subsequent submission (CTEC, 1986). It is here that McDowell’s criti- cisms of the ‘new ethnography’ school discussed earlier become so pertinent. It is not enough to recognise the different voices of the people of western Sydney. There must also be a process to ensure that these views are considered in the planning and delivery of human services. The lobbying by WSROC provides at least part of such a process and eventually contributed to the establishment of the University of Western Sydney in 1989.

In December 1985, the Parry report recom-

mended to the NSW Minister for Education ‘that there be established a multi-campus university in the Western Sydney region, to be named “Western Sydney State University”’ (Parry, 1985:97). The report was released for public comment in February 1986 and in June 1986 the committee released a subsequent report incorporating its consideration of submis- sions received (Parry, 1986). After the release of the initial report CTEC continued to argue against a university in western Sydney along similar lines to Hudson’s speech at the seminar (CTEC, 1986). WSROC also continued to lobby for a university (WSROC, 1985b). In response to the Parry report’s recommendation the NSW Parliament passed the University of Western Sydney Advisory Council Act 1986 (NSW). An agreement between the Commonwealth and NSW Governments in early 1987 paved the way for the establishment of the Chifley University College. Changes in Commonwealth higher education policy abol- ished the binary system of universities and Colleges of Advanced Education in 1987. As a new and small institution, Chifley was not well placed to integrate into the new Unified National System (Dawkins, 1987). Chifley was disbanded in July 1988 but western Sydney was to receive its university in the form of Australia’s first federated university under the new system. Negotiations between the Commonwealth and NSW Governments in the latter part of 1988 led to the establishment of the University of Western Sydney on 1 January 1989.

Conclusion The construction of western Sydney as Sydney’s ‘other’ has played a role in its historic underprovision of human services, especially in higher education. While the provision of human services to western Sydney has improved, the quantity, quality and diversity of service provision is always subject to change and the role of western Sydney’s identity as Sydney’s ‘other’ may play a role in any future change. Again,


higher education is no exception. While western Sydney may now have a university, debates in the higher education sector may yet see universities divided into ‘research’ and ‘teaching’ universities (Nicholls, 1992; Leech and Hawes, 1992) with distinctions of status: the emergence of ‘real’ and ‘mickey mouse’ universities. It is critical that the University of Western Sydney be able to contribute to increased participation in higher education and regional development in western Sydney through teaching and research. Hopefully it can remain a university for western Sydney rather than becoming a university that just happens to be in western Sydney.

Clearly, in many ways, western Sydney is different from the rest of the Sydney region. Some of these differences should be celebrated as examples of diversity, but differences caused by structural disadvantage need to be under- stood and overcome. The provision of human services in consultation with western Sydney residents can contribute to overcoming structural disadvantage. Decisions to restrict the delivery of a diverse range of services based on notions of innate disadvantage will only exacer- bate structural disadvantage and thus contribute to a vicious circle of underprovision. This paper has argued that western Sydney’s identity as Sydney’s ‘other’ has contributed to these notions and therefore its historic underprovision in human services. Hopefully an understanding of the role of this othering will contribute to the prevention of inequities in the future. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Professor Bob Fagan, Assoc. Prof. Larry Knopp, Ms. Liza Tonkin and the two anonymous referees for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

REFERENCES ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics), 1991: Census of

Population and Housing, (Catalogue Number 2722.0), Canberra, Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Allen P., 1985: Summary of Proceedings, in Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) Future Directions for Higher Education in Western Sydney (proceedings of a seminar held on Monday 9

September 1985 at the Westmead Campus, Nepean College of Advanced Education), Blacktown, WSROC,

Anderson K., 1990: ‘Chinatown Re-oriented’: A critical analysis of recent redevelopment schemes in a Melbourne and Sydney enclave, Australian Geographical Studies, 28(2), 137-154.

Anderson K., 1993: Place narratives and the origins of inner Sydney’s Aboriginal settlement, 1972-73, Journal of Historical Geography, 19(3), 314-335.

Anderson K. and Gale F., 1992: Introduction, in K. Anderson and F. Gale (editors) Inventing Places: Studies in cultural geography, Melbourne, Longman Cheshire, 1- 12.

Australia Council, 1990: Arts Development in Western Sydney, Sydney, Australia Council.

Batchen G., 1991: Going West, West: an interdisciplinary magazine, 3(1), 5.

Blakely E. and Fagan R., 1988: Metropolitan Strategy in Sydney: Employment distribution and pol icy issues, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, Monograph no. 36, Berkeley, University of California, Berkeley.

Burgess J. and Gold J. (editors), 1985: Geography, the media andpopular culture, London, Croom Helm.

Chifley University Interim Council, 1988: Annual Report 1987-88: Towards a University in Western Sydney, Sydney, CUIC.

CTEC (Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission), 1983: Repor t of the Working Par ty on Outer Metropolitan Areas, Canberra, CTEC.

CTEC (Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission), 1986: Higher education development in western and south-western Sydney: The response of the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission to the report of the ministerial committee to review the structure of higher education in Western Sydney, Canberra, CTEC.

Dawkins J., 1987: Higher Education: A policy discussion paper (circulated by the Hon. J.S. Dawkins, Minister for Employment, Education and Training), Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.

Dear M., 1988: The postmodern challenge: reconstructing human geography, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 13,262-274.

Donald 0.. 1981: Medical Services in P. Troy (editor) Equity in the City, Sydney, George Allen and Unwin, 63- 84.

Fagan R., 1986a: Industrial restructuring and the metropolitan fringe: growth and disadvantage in Western Sydney, Australian Planner, 24(1), 11-17.

Fagan R., 1986b: Sydney’s West: the paradox of growth and disadvantage, in D. Dragovich (editor) The Changing Face of Sydney, Sydney, NSW Geographical Society.

Gardiner W., 1987: How the west was lost: urban development in the Western Sydney region, Austral ian Quarterly, 59(2), 234-244.

61-64.


Gregory D., 1989: Areal Differentiation and Post-Modern Human Geography, in D. Gregory and R. Walford (editors) Horizons in Human Geography, London, Macmillan, 67-96.

Hawkins G. and Gibson K., 1991: The Big Leagues, Australian Left Review, 130 (July 1991), 27-31.

Hodge S., 1992 The University of Western Sydney: A university in Western Sydney or a university for Western Sydney?, Unpublished BA (Hons) thesis, School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney.

Horvath R., Mills C. and Mee K., 1989: A Skills Atlas of Western Sydney, Sydney, Department of Geography, University of Sydney and WESTIR.

Hudson H., 1985: Directions for Higher Education in Western Sydney - the view from the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission, in Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) Future Directions for Higher Education in Western Sydney (proceedings of a seminar held on Monday 9 September 1985 at the Westmead Campus, Nepean College of Advanced Education), Blacktown, WSROC, 23-40.

Jackson P., 1989: Maps of Meaning: An introduction to cultural geography, London, Unwin Hyman.

Leech G. and Hawes R., 1992: Research unis join forces, The Australian (Higher Education Supplement), 16.9.92.

McDowell L., 1992: Multiple Voices: Speaking from inside and outside the project, Antipode, 24(1), 56-72.

Mansfield B. and Hutchinson M., 1992: Liberality of Opportunity: A history of Macquarie University 1964- 1989, Sydney, Macquarie University in association with Hale and Ironmonger.

March D., 1985: Welcome Address, in Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) Future Directions for Higher Education in Western Sydney (proceedings of a seminar held on Monday 9 September 1985 at the Westmead Campus, Nepean College of Advanced Education), Blacktown, WSROC, 1-3.

Marcus G. and Fischer M., 1986: Anthropology as Cultural Critique: the experimental role of the human sciences, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

Mee K., 1988: Western Sydney: Image and Reality in the 1980s, Unpublished BEc (Hons) thesis, Department of Geography, University of Sydney, Sydney.

Mee K., 1994: Living in the wild, wild west: Frontier mythology and the depiction of place in western Sydney, paper given at the Institute of Australian Geographers Annual Conference, September 25-29, Townsville.

MSJ Keys Young. 1985: Regional Community Development Program: West Sydney 2000, Sydney, MSJ Keys Young.

Murray K., 1957: Report of the Committee on Australian Universities, (Murray Report), Canberra, Australian Government Printer.

Nicholls J., 1992 Unified system threatens ivy league, The Australian (Higher Education Supplement), 16.9.92.

New South Wales. Department of Health. 1993: Annual Report 1992-1993, Sydney, NSW Department of Health.

New South Wales. Department of Planning. 1992: Updating the Metropolitan Strategy: an invitation to comment (unpaged pamphlet), Sydney, NSW Department of Planning.

Parry R., 1985: Report of the ministerial committee to review the structure of higher education in western Sydney, Sydney, Ministerial committee to review the structure of higher education in western Sydney.

Parry R., 1986: Supplementary report of the ministerial committee to review the structure of higher education in western Sydney, Sydney, Ministerial committee to review the structure of higher education in western Sydney.

Powell D., 1993: Out West: Perceptions of Sydney’s Western Suburbs, Sydney, Allen & Unwin.

Price P., 1961: First Report of the Committee appointed by the Minister for Education to inquire into various aspects of Higher Education in New South Wales, (Price Report), Sydney, NSW Government Printer.

Revallion I., 1991: Phantom of the Theatre, Australian Left Review, 130 (July 1991), 36-38.

Rose G., 1993: Feminism and Geography: The limits of geographical knowledge, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.

Said E., 1978: Orientalism, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Said E., 1993: Culture and Imperialism, London, Chatto & Windus.

Shurmer-Smith P., and Hannam K., 1994: Worlds of Desire, Realms of Power: A cultural geography, London, Edward Arnold.

Spearritt P. and DeMarco C., 1988: Planning Sydney’s Future, Sydney, Allen and Unwin (in conjunction with the NSW Department of Planning).

Swanson T. and Bull F., 1973: The Location, Nature and Development of Institutions of Tertiary Education in Sydney, Melbourne and the Albury-Wodonga Region, (Bull-Swanson Report), Canberra, Australian Government Printer.

UWS (University of Western Sydney). 1992: Annual Report for 1991, Sydney, U W S .

WESTIR (Western Sydney Information and Research Service). 1992: Social Indicators for Western Sydney, Western Sydney Quarterly Bulletin, 3(4).

WSROC (Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils). 1985a: Future Directions for Higher Education in Western Sydney, (Proceedings of a seminar held at the Westmead Campus of the Nepean College of Advanced Education 9.9.85), Blacktown, WSROC.

WSROC (Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils). 1985b: Submission to the ministerial committee to review the structure of higher education in western Sydney, Blacktown, WSROC.

Documents

Disadvantage and ‘Otherness' in Western Sydney