Search results

Part II - THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND MULITCULTURAND AND INDIGENOUS AFFIARS (DIMIA) AND THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN DEPARMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES (DHS) RELATING TO CHILD PROTECTION NOTIFICATIONS AND CHILD WELFARE ISSUES PERTAINING TO CHILDREN IN IMMIGRATION DETENTION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA

The Australian Government has signalled that economic development is a central focus for the Indigenous Affairs portfolio this term. The Ministerial Taskforce on Indigenous Affairs, created in May 2004 to drive and coordinate the federal Government’s Indigenous policies,1 identified as one of three key areas2 for priority action:

During the 2004 reporting period I have embarked on a series of consultations focusing on the ideas and principles that were contained in a Discussion Paper, released by my predecessor as Social Justice Commissioner in June 2003. The Discussion Paper was entitled Promoting Economic and Social Development through Native Title (at Annexure 1). This chapter seeks to record and develop the ideas and discussions that were generated in the consultation process. 1

DR OZDOWSKI: I would like to formally open the second day of hearings in Adelaide. This is one of the hearings conducted around Australia for the National Inquiry into Children in Detention. My name is Sev Ozdowski, I'm the Human Rights Commissioner. With me is Mrs Robin Sullivan to my left, who is Queensland Children's Commissioner, and Dr Trang Thomas, on my right, is Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. They are Assistant Commissioners helping me with the Inquiry.

All Australians are equally entitled to enjoy the rights, benefits and responsibilities of citizenship. In our society, every person should feel free from discrimination of any kind and have the right to share in the nation's land, resources and wealth. The entitlements and freedoms of all people are recognised in human rights instruments, many of which have been freely signed and ratified by Australia, and in some instances are now a part of Australian law.

During these ten years, thousands of individuals and organisations have used the DDA to create change, either by making complaints of discrimination, using the law as a basis for negotiating broad social change or educating organisations on their responsibilities.

This is the third successive Social Justice Report to report on the implementation of the new arrangements for Indigenous affairs at the federal government level. The past two Social Justice Reports have emphasised the importance of governments ensuring the effective participation of Indigenous peoples in decision making that affects our lives. This includes the development of policy, program delivery and monitoring by governments at the national, as well as state, regional and local levels.

On 3 April 2009, the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (Minister for Indigenous Affairs) delivered a formal statement in support of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Declaration).[1] In this statement, the Minister acknowledged that ‘[w]e need to find more ways of hearing Indigenous voices’.[2]

The first twelve months of the federal government's new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs has ended. The primary focus of this period has been on abolishing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) and creating new processes to engage with local Indigenous communities and coordinate mainstream delivery of services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Twelve months on, the new arrangements remain in a transitional phase. It will be a number of years before they are fully locked into place.

In 2006 the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet made a revealing statement about Indigenous affairs. He argued that his own government’s policy performance in the Indigenous portfolio had been a failure. He went further to say that while well intentioned, the policies and approaches of the past 30 years had contributed to poor outcomes for Indigenous people.

This appendix provides an overview of the main events with regard to the administration of Indigenous affairs to 30 June 2006. It commences with a summary table and is followed by a detailed description of each event.

DR OZDOWSKI: It is 9.30 so we will start another day off, formal hearings. My name is Dr Sev Ozdowski and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner. To my right is Dr Trang Thomas, Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology and to my left Mrs Robin Sullivan, Queensland's Children's Commissioner. Both of them do assist me with the Inquiry as Assistant Commissioners. Also, on my left Ms Vanessa Lesnie who is Secretary to the Inquiry.

On 27 July 2000, the Commonwealth government and the Northern Territory Government signed an agreement for the establishment of a juvenile pre-court diversion scheme in the Northern Territory (NT). This agreement arose specifically as a response to the continued criticism of the NT’s mandatory minimum imprisonment laws and their impact on juveniles and Indigenous people. By establishing the pre-court juvenile diversionary scheme, the NT has belatedly joined most other states and territories in Australia in providing such options for dealing with juvenile offenders.

a) Ngaanyatjarra Regional Partnership Agreement. b) Murdi Paaki Regional Assembly c) Post-ATSIC regional representation for Torres Strait Islanders on the mainland