Mayor Karen Williams Lies About SEIFA Rankings On SMBI
One thing that I found interesting in the Chamber of Commerce "Meet
the Candidates" events on the weekend is when the Mayor said that the
SMBI had a SEIFA ranking of 3. This is extremely... well, I was going
to say misleading, but I think more "outright lie" is appropriate here.
Let me delve into this a little so we can all understand the issue here.
The SEIFA Ranking is the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas as obtained from the latest 2016 Census data. It ranks areas across Australia on their Socio-Economic status in a number of ways. There are a number of ways these areas can be defined, one of which is the Local Government Area (LGA) and another is SA1 (or down to the finest level of detail available). And here's a comment from the SEIFA 2016 Technical Paper:
"The primary unit of analysis and the smallest area for which the indexes are available is the Statistical Area Level 1 (SA1). This is the recommended unit of analysis for SEIFA 2016.
For a selection of geographic areas larger than SA1, scores have been calculated by taking population-weighted averages of constituent SA1 scores. The output spreadsheets also contain some information about the distribution of SA1 index scores within larger areas. This enables users to consider the socio-economic diversity that can exist within a larger area."
So, with that in mind, if we're using the recommended SA1 Level, the SMBI are ranked as Quintile 1 - most disadvantaged (Lamb, Macleay and Russell) and Quintile 2 (Karragarra), whereas the Redland LGA is ranked as Quintile 1 - least disadvantaged (using the Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage). The same disparity is repeated for the Index of Relative Socio-Economic Advantage and Disadvantage scores. Aside from the far end of Caniapa Rd out near the RSL on Russell, and the top end of Macleay Island, the same goes for the Index of Economic Resources index, too, and those specified areas are Quintile 2 (next to most disadvantaged).
As far as the final Index goes, the Index of Education and Occupation, the Redland LGA is ranked at Quintile 4 (1 quintile down from most advantaged), Karragarra is ranked as Quintile 3, Lamb is Quintile 1 (most disadvantaged), the far end of Caniapa Rd out near the RSL on Russell and the lower third of Russell Island as well as the top end of Macleay Island is ranked as Quintile 2 (next to most disadvantaged) whereas the rest of Russell Island and Macleay Island are ranked as Quintile 1 - most disadvantaged.
So, in summary, the information that the Mayor presented around SEIFA Rankings in the public Meet the Candidates events was in no way correct at all.
I wonder if the Mayor would like to explain the disparity between the facts and her claims. Everyone can check these results as I have given above themselves using the official information at: https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2033.0.55.001~2016~Main%20Features~Interactive%20Maps~7
Let me delve into this a little so we can all understand the issue here.
The SEIFA Ranking is the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas as obtained from the latest 2016 Census data. It ranks areas across Australia on their Socio-Economic status in a number of ways. There are a number of ways these areas can be defined, one of which is the Local Government Area (LGA) and another is SA1 (or down to the finest level of detail available). And here's a comment from the SEIFA 2016 Technical Paper:
"The primary unit of analysis and the smallest area for which the indexes are available is the Statistical Area Level 1 (SA1). This is the recommended unit of analysis for SEIFA 2016.
For a selection of geographic areas larger than SA1, scores have been calculated by taking population-weighted averages of constituent SA1 scores. The output spreadsheets also contain some information about the distribution of SA1 index scores within larger areas. This enables users to consider the socio-economic diversity that can exist within a larger area."
So, with that in mind, if we're using the recommended SA1 Level, the SMBI are ranked as Quintile 1 - most disadvantaged (Lamb, Macleay and Russell) and Quintile 2 (Karragarra), whereas the Redland LGA is ranked as Quintile 1 - least disadvantaged (using the Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage). The same disparity is repeated for the Index of Relative Socio-Economic Advantage and Disadvantage scores. Aside from the far end of Caniapa Rd out near the RSL on Russell, and the top end of Macleay Island, the same goes for the Index of Economic Resources index, too, and those specified areas are Quintile 2 (next to most disadvantaged).
As far as the final Index goes, the Index of Education and Occupation, the Redland LGA is ranked at Quintile 4 (1 quintile down from most advantaged), Karragarra is ranked as Quintile 3, Lamb is Quintile 1 (most disadvantaged), the far end of Caniapa Rd out near the RSL on Russell and the lower third of Russell Island as well as the top end of Macleay Island is ranked as Quintile 2 (next to most disadvantaged) whereas the rest of Russell Island and Macleay Island are ranked as Quintile 1 - most disadvantaged.
So, in summary, the information that the Mayor presented around SEIFA Rankings in the public Meet the Candidates events was in no way correct at all.
I wonder if the Mayor would like to explain the disparity between the facts and her claims. Everyone can check these results as I have given above themselves using the official information at: https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2033.0.55.001~2016~Main%20Features~Interactive%20Maps~7
Comments
Post a Comment
This page is moderated according to standards of best practice recommended by the Office of the Independent Assessor and the LGAQ – www.lgaq.asn.au/socialcommunityguidelines or oia.qld.gov.au/socialcommunityguidelines - comments must adhere with these Standards or will have to be removed.