Skip to main content

Search

HREOC Social Justice Report 2002: Introduction

Social Justice Report 2002

  • back to contents
  • Chapter
    1:
    Introduction

    This year's Report
    discusses a large number of initiatives currently underway or in development
    at the federal, state and territory levels in relation to policy making
    in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs. It notes for example
    the following positive developments in Indigenous policy:

    • The commitment
      of governments at all levels to partnerships with Indigenous people,
      including through statements of commitment to negotiate service delivery
      arrangements with Indigenous organisations and commitments to negotiating
      justice agreements;

    • The commitment
      of the federal Government to principles for the equitable provision
      of services to Indigenous people as part of a broad-ranging response
      to the Commonwealth Grants Commission's Report on Indigenous funding;

    • Recognition by
      governments of the central importance of capacity building of Indigenous
      communities and of supporting and developing Indigenous governance structures;

    • The commitment
      of the Council of Australian Governments to processes for addressing
      Indigenous disadvantage, including the establishment of a framework
      for reporting on Indigenous disadvantage, the formulation of action
      plans at the inter-governmental level in specific areas and a trial
      in ten communities of a whole-of-government approach to service delivery;
      and

    • Support of the
      federal Government at the international level to the effective operation
      of the newly created United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.

    Overall, however,
    the Report evidences that the past year has been another difficult one
    for Indigenous people in this country. In trying to provide a snapshot
    of the status of Indigenous policy making and achievements by governments
    over the past year, it is difficult to see any consistent forward trend.
    There have been marginal improvements in some statistical indicators,
    but deterioration in others. The policy approaches of governments are
    ultimately full of inconsistencies, ad hoc developments, and commitments
    that not only remain unmet but which are not adequately supported by institutional
    developments.

    The framework for
    Indigenous policy making at the federal level has also become an ever-reductive
    one, constantly becoming more limiting and constraining of Indigenous
    peoples' aspirations. This has occurred through three significant High
    Court decisions which have destroyed the capacity for native title to
    be anything more than a marginal influence and through the continued rejection
    by the federal Government of anything that does not meet its expectations
    for 'practical' reconciliation.

    There have been two
    particularly worrying trends that have been confirmed over the past year
    at the federal level. The first is a continuation of the antagonistic
    and adversarial approach to Indigenous policy by the Government. Substantial
    bi-partisan support for reconciliation and directions in Indigenous policy
    has been undermined by the limited focus of the Government. Those areas
    on which there is common ground are relatively few - and basically relate
    to agreement on the need to overcome Indigenous disadvantage - and there
    is even less agreement on what are the best ways to address such issues.

    The second worrying
    trend is what has effectively been the relegation of Indigenous issues
    to a second tier issue for the Government. While reconciliation was a
    priority for the second term of the Government, it does not even rate
    a mention in recent announcements of the Government's strategic long term
    vision for Australian society. Indigenous issues are not treated as a
    national priority, and there are no public commitments to timeframes for
    achieving results in areas on which there is substantial agreement - such
    as Indigenous disadvantage.

    At the state and
    territory levels, there is much goodwill being expressed with extensive
    commitments to partnerships with Indigenous people. These partnerships
    remain works in progress and it is unfortunate that they have not yet
    been accompanied by the necessary institutional support or action.

    In Queensland, for
    example, the Queensland Government continues to implement its ambitious
    program under the Ten Year Partnership, including through the development
    of the regional Cape York Partnership and significant changes to liquor
    canteen management. At the same time, little progress is being made in
    relation to proposals for regional autonomy in the Torres Strait and progress
    in addressing one of the headline commitments under the Ten Year Partnerships
    - halving Indigenous over-representation in corrections within the decade
    - is getting worse rather than better. Similarly, against the backdrop
    of the partnerships approach the Government has failed to enter into good
    faith negotiations with Indigenous people to settle a longstanding injustice
    in relation to the control of wages and savings under the protection acts
    over the past century.

    In New South Wales,
    the Government has entered into a Justice Agreement committing it to reduce
    Indigenous over-representation in custody and to work in partnership with
    Indigenous communities to develop a Justice Plan to underpin criminal
    justice issues. It has also overseen the introduction and rapid development
    of circle sentencing. At the same time, Indigenous people continue to
    be the silent victims of election sloganeering aimed to prove who is toughest
    on crime. Amendments to bail provisions introduced during the past year,
    for example, are expected to have a significant negative impact on Indigenous
    people in the criminal justice system.

    In Western Australia,
    rates of Indigenous over-representation in custody are steadily declining.
    This is likely to continue with proposed changes to laws removing sentences
    under 12 months duration. At the same time, mandatory sentencing remains
    and there has been little action to address serious concerns about the
    operation of juvenile diversionary schemes raised in the Social Justice
    Report 2001
    and other reviews. Similar examples can be provided for
    each state and territory.

    The one true highlight
    of the past year, however, has been the demonstration through a range
    of processes that Indigenous people are not going to sit back and wait
    for governments to solve the various problems faced in communities. Indigenous
    communities across the country are demonstrating that they are not passive
    victims but distinct peoples fighting hard for the survival and recognition
    of their cultural distinctiveness.

    At two major conferences
    during the year on Indigenous governance and the treaty process, it became
    clear that Indigenous communities across the country know what they want
    and are working towards building their capacity and striking agreements
    with governments to implement it.

    The highest profile
    of these is the partnerships approach in Cape York. Of equal importance
    and substance are the efforts of the ATSIC Murdi Paaki regional council,
    the Torres Strait Regional Authority, the Ali Curung community or the
    Mutitjulu community to name but four. There have been variable levels
    of success through these and other processes to date. Each process faces
    common barriers of building up local community expertise to be self-determining
    and getting agreement from governments at all levels to enter into partnerships
    with them and remove the controlling hand over their destinies.

    When these developments
    are viewed alongside the growth of initiatives such as the Australian
    Indigenous Leadership Centre, I end the year full of optimism that Indigenous
    people are slowly but surely moving towards achieving greater control
    over their life circumstances.

    There are two main
    issues that run through this Report. The first is that it continually
    seeks to give meaning and content to the words and symbols used by the
    Government.

    What, for example,
    should we make of the Government's rejection of the concept of a treaty
    when it is accompanied by a commitment to work in partnership and to make
    agreements with Indigenous peoples? What do we make of the Government's
    suggestion that the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation's proposals
    provide 'support' to the Government practical approach at the same time
    that they reject the majority of their recommendations? And what does
    a commitment to self-empowerment and self-management as the underlying
    basis of Indigenous policy formulation mean when it is offered as an alternative
    to the unacceptable principle of self-determination?

    The Report continually
    seeks to establish whether the Government's preference for certain words
    and symbols is merely rhetorical and is consistent with the principles
    that they symbolically reject, or whether it in fact amounts to a substantive
    change of direction in Indigenous policy.

    The second feature
    of the Report is that given the minimal framework for Indigenous policy
    being set by the federal Government, it deliberately seeks to place Indigenous
    issues within a broader context. It reports not only on what is happening
    at various levels of government, but on what is missing from the policy
    framework. In particular, the Report highlights the differences between
    self-determination and self-empowerment; practical reconciliation and
    progressive realisation and a rights framework for addressing Indigenous
    disadvantage; and by considering international developments in the recognition
    of Indigenous rights. Each demonstrates the severely constrained approach
    that has been adopted by the federal Government and hints at the potential
    in a broader, rights-based approach.

    Chapter 2 of the
    Report - titled 'Self-determination: the freedom to live well' - examines
    the core principles which underpin the federal Government's approach to
    Indigenous affairs. Since 1998, the Government has openly rejected self-determination
    as the basis of policy formulation and preferred concepts of self-empowerment
    and self-management. This chapter provides an overview of international
    developments on Indigenous self-determination. It then compares this to
    the way the Government explains its policy approach in order to identify
    its limitations and considers options for addressing these.

    Chapter 3 - 'National
    progress towards reconciliation in 2002 - an equitable partnership?' -
    then provides a progress report on reconciliation over the past twelve
    months. It notes developments at the inter-governmental level, the federal
    Government's responses to the documents of the Council for Aboriginal
    Reconciliation and the Report of the Commonwealth Grants Commission, and
    the Government's agenda for reconciliation as set out in a number of speeches
    and processes. Ultimately it questions the basis on which the Government
    seeks to engage with Indigenous people, and the lack of equality in the
    partnerships that it seeks to enter.

    Chapter 4 - 'Measuring
    Indigenous disadvantage' - then provides a detailed analysis of current
    approaches and research on addressing Indigenous disadvantage. It draws
    on significant international developments in countering poverty and economic
    marginalisation, as well as international human rights standards. The
    chapter also considers in depth the framework for measuring Indigenous
    disadvantage that is currently being instituted at the inter-governmental
    level. There are some clear contrasts between the limiting framework of
    practical reconciliation and the more focused and accountable approach
    based on international guidance and standards.

    Chapter 5 - 'Indigenous
    women and the criminal justice system - A landscape of risk' - then follows
    up on an issue of great concern raised in the introduction of the Social
    Justice Report 2001
    . It focuses on Indigenous women and their experiences
    of contact with criminal justice processes. This chapter paints a disturbing
    picture of the lack of support provided to Indigenous women in many areas
    of society and its consequent impact through criminalisation. The lack
    of attention to these issues by policy makers to date is a matter of great
    shame. This review is preliminary by nature and will require further attention
    in coming years.

    Chapter 6 - 'International
    developments in the recognition of the rights of Indigenous peoples' -
    then places discussions of Indigenous policy within an international context.
    It notes the extensive developments in the recognition of Indigenous rights
    at the international level over the past thirty years. These are considered
    within two main contexts - the current review taking place within the
    United Nations of all the existing mechanisms at the UN dealing with Indigenous
    issues; and the International Decade for the World's Indigenous Peoples
    which is now in its final two years. This review illustrates how Australia
    has moved towards the most conservative end of the spectrum in addressing
    Indigenous rights, a factor which is reinforced in the domestic policy
    approach.

    The Report then concludes
    with an appendix which summarises partnerships and agreements that have
    been entered into between Indigenous people and state or territory governments
    in recent years.

    19
    March 2003.