Transient Languages & Cultures

(1) Details of changes to 7,000 people's wages
On 1 July seven thousand Australian Indigenous participants in Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) are set to lose their wages. A few will have the CDEP positions converted into real jobs. But most will not.

There's a worrying lack of detail as to how the Federal Government proposes to manage the transition and the immediate problems caused by lack of money in communities in which CDEP may be the main income. This is highlighted in the Social Justice 2006 report by Tom Calma, the Social Justice Commissioner. The report which was sent to the Attorney-General on 5 April 2007 contains an alarming indictment of the Federal Government and the Federal bureaucracy's general ability to manage Indigenous affairs. It seems to have got buried in the publicity surrounding Ampe Akelyernemane Meke Mekarle “Little Children are Sacred”.

Backtracking, in Western Australia, police in Broome have already blamed changes in CDEP payments for drawing people into towns from the communities.

"Broome police officer in charge Darren Sievwright says the Commonwealth's changes to the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) program are believed to be responsible for more people from outlying Indigenous communities sleeping rough in the town. Historically the start of the tourist season has seen these transient people head back to their communities in the east," he said. "Unfortunately there has been a bit of fallout from the changes to the CDEP program which means that a lot of people have to remain in the business centres like Broome and Kununurra in order to gain their welfare payments."

(2) Details of the takeover of Northern Territory Aboriginal communities

The Federal Government's response in the Northern Territory is likely to cause similar movement. In South Australia, the mayor of Port Augusta says that the Federal Government's response in the Northern Territory will cause an influx of Indigenous people across the border and a consequent strain on their services.

Aboriginal organisations have written an open letter expressing their concerns about the longterm effects of this all. They write:

The proposals go well beyond an 'emergency response', and will have profound effects on people's incomes, land ownership, and their ability to decide the kind of medical treatment they receive. Some of the measures will weaken communities and families by taking from them the ability to make basic decisions about their lives, thus removing responsibility instead of empowering them.

In their present form the proposals miss the mark and are unlikely to be effective in their present form. There is an over-reliance on top-down and punitive measures, and insufficient indication that additional resources will be mobilised where they are urgently needed; to improve housing, child protection and domestic violence supports, schools, health services, alcohol and drug rehab programs. These issues have been raised by many Indigenous leaders over many years.

A shock and awe campaign relying on volunteers, and not backed up by adequate and sustained long-term planning and long-term implementation? So - what evidence do we have that the Federal Government can deliver adequate long-term implementation? Or the 3-4 BILLION dollars over 5 years that Jon Altman of the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research reckons is needed for a long-term outcome.

Unfortunately - very little. Here's a small example. Paul Cockram points out that the grog ban on Thursdays in Tennant Creek was overturned by Centrelink's change to a pay-on-any-day system. Amanda Vanstone, the then Minister responsible for Indigenous Affairs, refused to make a special case for Tennant Creek’s welfare recipients to keep being paid on Thursdays. Bang went the Tennant Creek Aboriginal community's attempt to reduce grog consumption.

And here's a much bigger example. The Social Justice Commissioner's report highlights the failure of the Federal Government's changes to administration of Indigenous affairs to deliver what it promised . He says of the three year trial of the Shared Responsibility Agreement trial at Wadeye, Northern Territory (one of the troubled communities targeted by the Federal Government) reported in the Gray Report that:

in key aspects the trial has been a significant failure. There was no identified leadership of the trial. Contrary to the trial’s objective of a reduction in red tape, the burden of administering funds increased markedly. Flexible funding and streamlining did not eventuate. Experience of communications within and between governments was mixed with a reduction in effective communication as the trial progressed.

The government’s objective of improving engagement with Indigenous families and communities was not achieved. There was a significant breakdown in relations with Thamarrur. Other key structures or processes agreed under the SRA, such as Priority Working Groups, either never became operational or faltered.

Even the Secretary of the Department of Family and Community Services, Jeff Harmer, admitted they'd got it wrong.

"I don't believe that the Department of Family and Community Services did a fantastic job," Dr Harmer said.

The Federal Minister for Indigenous Affairs admitted that he received the Northern Territory government's 20 year plan for Indigenous communities last year. How much of that has been implemented?

In the last few days, the Social Justice Commissioner, Tom Calma, has expressed concern about the long-term effects of the Federal Government's response to the sexual abuse of children.

".. it doesn't put in place the preventative measures that indigenous people need to stop the violence, and then prevent it from re-occurring," he said in a statement.

"Nor does it provide the measures or services to support indigenous people once these changes are made.

"How will people be assisted to safely come off their alcohol or substance addiction?"

He said some of the measures, such as scrapping the permit system, could do more harm.

"Permits have never prevented child care officers or police or any other government official from visiting indigenous communities," Mr Calma said.

"The free movement of non-indigenous people through these communities is likely to create a new raft of difficulties for indigenous people.

"Permits have been a major tool in regulating access to communities - something that will be a key issue in preventing grog running with alcohol restrictions in place."

He also wondered how Aborigines would be made aware of the changes coming.

If the Federal government doesn't want Aboriginal people to be needlessly scared, why don't they lay out in detail the plan for action, and tell people which communities will be visited and when, and say exactly what will happen to them - as Warren Snowdon asks? Refusing to name the communities and not saying what will happen to them is naturally going to frighten people, especially when it is coupled with measures like removing permits and taking control of Aboriginal land, which aren't self-evidently good things, and which aren't self-evidently connected with sexual abuse.

And why don't they seriously involve people with language and interpreting skills? Has any linguist specialising in Indigenous languages been approached? The police officers who are being sent are receiving no training in language. (See here). Let's pray that that the officers and soldiers are getting some training in different local cultural practices. And that the government is sending heaps of good Indigenous officers, and especially female officers.