Search results

In recent years a mutual obligation approach has been adopted to reform public policy on welfare and employment issues. There has been much discussion about the applicability of this approach within an Indigenous policy context. It is seen by many as consistent with Indigenous cultural values such as reciprocity and an emphasis on community, as well as suggesting an antidote to the damage caused by intergenerational poverty, of which long-term welfare dependency and a crippling short-term local cash economy are often features.

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.

The Commission is Australia’s national human rights institution. It is an independent statutory body established under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth). The Commission’s main responsibilities are:

2.1 Scope of international obligations During Australia’s review, the Government made a commitment to improving Australia’s monitoring of its international human rights obligations. Australia is a party to seven of the core human rights treaties and maintains a number of reservations under these. The Australian Government made a commitment to conduct a comprehensive review of such reservations by ...

[1] Information in this Appendix is a collation of extracts from responses provided by various Federal, State and Territory Government Departments in Correspondence to T Calma, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, for the Native Title Report 2008.

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.

The landscape of the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) is under severe ecological stress. Issues such as salinity, poor water quality, stressed forests, dried wetlands, threatened native species, feral animals and noxious weeds are commonplace within the MDB. The reasons for this dramatic decline in river health are caused by water mismanagement including reversal of natural flow cycles and over allocation of water licences. Generations of bad farm practices such as deforestation have also played a major role in the ecological disaster that is the MDB.[1]