SCAM ALERT: We will never contact you requesting money. Learn more.

Complaints

Social Justice Report 2004 : Media Pack

Social Justice Report 2004

Launch
of the ATSIC Yilli Rreung Regional Council"s Strategic Plan and the Social
Justice Report 2004 and Native Title Report 2004

  • back to contents

    • Darwin, 27 April 2005

    I would like to begin by acknowledging the Larrakia peoples, the traditional
    owners of the land where we meet.

    I have two tasks this evening. The first is to launch my Social Justice Report and Native Title Report for 2004. The second is to launch the ATSIC Yilli Rreung Regional Council"s Strategic Plan.

    Both are important tasks. And both have a number of issues in common.

    The ATSIC Regional Plan sets out a vision for the Indigenous people of this region for the coming years. And my reports to Parliament establish how my office, as the only remaining independent watchdog, will monitor the efforts of governments to ensure that they recognise and protect the rights of Indigenous peoples - particularly as we move to a world without ATSIC.

    Each year the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare two reports to the federal Attorney-General. The first of these is the Social Justice Report and it is focused on how government activity impacts on the exercise and enjoyment of human rights by Indigenous peoples. The second is the Native Title Report and it focuses on how the native title system impacts on Indigenous peoples and their human rights.

    Both reports are an annual report card for governments on how they are performing on protecting Indigenous rights.

    In brief, this year"s Social Justice Report:

    • Sets out how I will approach the role of Social Justice Commissioner, and indicates some of my key priorities over the coming years;
    • Offers a preliminary analysis of the new arrangements that have been put into place at the federal level for administering Indigenous affairs;
    • Sets out the relevant factors to be met to ensure that the focus on negotiating Shared Responsibility Agreements with Indigenous peoples and communities does not breach the Racial Discrimination Act; and
    • Provides an overview and analysis of the programs available for Indigenous women upon exiting prison.

    This year"s Native Title Report:

    • sets out the findings of consultations conducted with native title representative bodies and other stakeholders that were held last year to promote the achievement of economic and social development through native title;
    • Sets out principles for promoting economic and social development through the native title system; and
    • Considers how the native title system might be better utilised to contribute to achieving Indigenous peoples" economic and social goals, including through a better alignment with the broader policy goals of governments, such as through the new arrangements and COAG trials.

    Since commencing as Commissioner, the key priority of my office has been to closely monitor the unrolling of the new arrangements that have been put into place at the federal level for administering Indigenous affairs.

    These new arrangements include:

    • The abolition of ATSIC at the national and regional level;
    • The establishment of regional coordination centres for the delivery of federal government services;
    • An emphasis on whole of government activity; and
    • The negotiation of agreements at a regional level and at a community or sub-community level.

    This changed approach has only commenced just over ten months ago. Key aspects of it have only just been introduced or are still to be introduced.

    Because of this, the Social Justice Report notes that it is too preliminary to determine whether the new arrangements will be beneficial or detrimental to Indigenous peoples. But the report doesn"t leave it at that and let the government off the hook. Instead, it identifies a number of challenges that the new arrangements raise, as well as some issues where I am concerned about the direction of the government. It places government on notice of how the new processes will be monitored over the coming eighteen months.

    The importance of my being able to launch the report here today is that I can inform you about how I will be monitoring these new processes and to urge you to provide my office with information about how you are being affected by the new processes - either positively or negatively.

    If we commence with the positives of the process, the new arrangements are underpinned by significant commitments to address Indigenous disadvantage. This is through the new Ministerial Taskforce"s 30 year vision for Indigenous affairs and at the level of the Council of Australian Governments, through the adoption of principles for service delivery.

    As I note in the Social Justice Report:

    • In theory, these new arrangements have much to commend them - the focus on coordinated service delivery and improved service delivery by mainstream agencies has been a longstanding problem. It was highlighted in the 2001 landmark report of the Commonwealth Grants Commission, for example.
    • There are also a number of potential benefits in the new arrangements. These include the movement to three year funding cycles - a simple recommendation of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody that has taken nearly 15 years to be implemented - as well as the simplification of grant procedures with the proposal to introduce a single submission for the different programs that currently exist for Indigenous communities and groups.

    But, the commitments made through these new arrangements need to translate into action on the ground. Indigenous people have suffered at the hands of good intentions and worthy commitments from governments of both persuasions for many decades. The Social Justice Report highlights those critical issues that must be properly addressed for the new arrangements to provide the potential benefits and not to repeat or make worse any mistakes of the past.

    Some of the concerns I have raised in the report about the new processes are as follows.

    Perhaps the principle concern that I have expressed has been that the haste with which the government has introduced these new processes has contributed to a lack of clarity about how the new processes will work. The processes seem clear at the top of the bureaucracy, but, as you get further down the chain and the further away from Canberra, the understanding that public servants have about the new processes become more blurred. There have also clearly been different understandings between different departments.

    If public servants don"t have a clear understanding of the arrangements then it is harder to see how Indigenous people and communities will. Again, a key message I have given to government over the last nine months is that it is clear to me that communities do not understand these new arrangements sufficiently. Even now there remains a need to communicate information to Indigenous people better. A failure to do so could significantly undermine progress.

    I have also expressed my concern at the way that the federal public service recruits staff for these new processes. We need to have a skilled public service that can interact appropriately with Indigenous people and communities. There are many dimensions to this issue - promoting recruitment and retention of Indigenous staff; cultural diversity and capacity development training; and valuing skills for engaging with Indigenous people. Progress on these issues to date is not good enough and I make some recommendations in the report about how they can be improved.

    The report also flags a number of issues which are of critical importance but on which the government is not sufficiently advanced to date. I have identified these as challenges for government, which I will be closely watching developments.

    When you see the report, you will note that it includes 10 "follow up actions" that my office will be taking over the next 12-18 months. These are issues on which I was not prepared to simply state "I will be watching closely" but on which I have explicitly identified how I will be monitoring the situation. This will form the basis of my ongoing dialogue with governments and Indigenous communities about the new arrangements.

    In broad terms, these challenges include, although they are not limited to, the following:

    • ensuring that Indigenous peoples are informed and empowered with the knowledge and skills to effectively and equitably participate in the SRA process;
    • ensuring that Indigenous people are able to participate fully in decision making, including through regional representative structures;
    • ensuring that we do not see the introduction of punitive funding models where communities are negotiating for the delivery of basic services and citizenship entitlements - and to this end I have provided a guide as to the relevant factors that must be met for the government to ensure that it complies with the Racial Discrimination Act; and
    • ensuring that appropriate performance monitoring and evaluation processes are put into place.

    Clearly, one of the most critical issues is the ability of Indigenous peoples to participate meaningfully in the new processes. History tells us that processes that do not allow Indigenous people and communities to participate will not work.

    Because of this it is with mixed emotions that I launch the Yilli Rreung Regional Council"s Strategic Plan. This document was developed through community consultation. It establishes priorities into the future for Indigenous peoples in this region. It is a very useful document.

    I hope that it will become a core document in setting the priorities for Indigenous service delivery in the coming years. It should not become a document of what could have been, if only...

    The fact that ATSIC will not be here beyond June to build on the strategy should not deter from the importance of the Strategic Plan. Without reliance on this plan, and those developed by other ATSIC Regional Councils, there is no mandate and no informed basis for governments to determine the regional priorities of Indigenous peoples and communities.

    So I plead to the Commonwealth and Northern Territory Governments: don"t throw the baby out with the bath water. I hope you will use this Strategic Plan to constructively engage with Indigenous peoples in this region.

    And I plead to Indigenous people and communities - don"t be afraid to point out the existence of the Regional Plan and to rely on it in your activities. More than ever before, you have the opportunity but also the responsibility to build on the gains of the past.

    Let me now turn to the Native Title Report.

    The release of the Native Title Report is particularly timely given the current debates about alienability of Indigenous land and potential reform to the Northern Territory Aboriginal Land Rights Act.

    The central message in this report is that native title has been distanced from debates about addressing Indigenous disadvantage and has not been considered a tool for achieving economic prosperity. In order to shift the focus of native title to economic and social development outcomes, governments must develop a policy framework consistent with this goal.

    The Native Title Report notes that there are opportunities in the approach embodied in the new arrangements to extend the role of native title.

    What has emerged as a result of the Commonwealth's new arrangements are two structures for agreement making within Indigenous communities - native title agreement making and Shared Responsibility Agreements.

    Native title agreements focus on resolving legal issues; managing land use; and addressing compensation. But there is increasing recognition that native title agreements need to be more flexible to ensure practical and sustainable outcomes for all stakeholders.

    The Native Title Report argues that the new arrangements provide an opportunity to take a fresh look at the way in which native title policies and agreement making are structured, in order to deliver better economic and social outcomes for Indigenous peoples.

    There are opportunities to explore sustainable economic and social development goals within native title policies and agreements. The chapter suggests that failure to co-ordinate the goals of native title negotiations with these broader policies not only limits the native title process; it also limits the capacity of the broader Indigenous policy to achieve its objectives.

    Native title brings with it assets, governance structures, and cultural capital. It is an opportunity to build on what already belongs to Indigenous Australians - their traditional ownership of land. However, it needs to be recognised as a tool that can be usefully employed to help achieve the goals that are an urgent priority for the government in the Indigenous policy arena.

    Now, while the report does not consider the current debate about whether the ownership of Aboriginal land should be shifted from community to individual control, I think it is important that I say something about this before I finish tonight.

    I am deeply concerned that this debate has been oversimplified and several important issues inadequately addressed.

    Firstly, land rights legislation in different states already provides a range of options which allow Indigenous people to lease their land to third parties. Under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976 (NT) traditional land is inalienable but can be leased back to the Commonwealth and Territory governments, Aboriginal organisations or even individuals. Some examples are national parks and the Alice-Darwin railway.

    The existing options balance flexibility, in allowing Indigenous communal land to be used to generate capital, with important checks and balances. It tries to ensure that traditional land is not traded away without careful consideration. The regional and state land councils play a critical role in the system of checks and balances, ensuring communal consultation and informed deliberation before land is leased or sold.

    The second issue is whether the creation of capital by the sale of Indigenous lands will be linked to the development of capacity to manage this capital and gain ongoing, sustainable outcomes from it. Because if it isn"t, many Aboriginal communities may lose their land to short-term gains or through foreclosure, and money generated by selling or mortgaging land alone is unlikely to address the underlying social and economic problems in Indigenous communities.

    Governments and communities still have a long way to go in discussing and addressing these problems. Economic and social development in Indigenous communities is the crucial first step in improving wellbeing, but opportunities for generating economic development from traditional lands have not yet been adequately explored in the current debate.

    Many Indigenous communities have already devised imaginative ways of generating economic development from their traditional lands and resources, demonstrating that entrepreneurialism is not limited by communal ownership. The Northern Land Council assists communities in commercial customary harvesting of wildlife, and the Torres Strait Regional Authority is developing aquaculture and commercial fishing opportunities for traditional owners. Other options include using traditional lands for tourism and national parks, land management, airstrips and small enterprises.

    However, these projects can be undermined at times by the failure to allow traditional owners commercial rights and interests in land through the allocation of commercial licences. Land rights need to be accompanied by resource rights which can generate income. Governments at all levels need to first consider supporting these options, and meeting their obligations for the provision of adequate services to communities, to demonstrate a genuine commitment to economic development in Indigenous communities. These are the issues explored in the Native Title Report 2004.

    To conclude, my Social Justice Report and Native Title Report set out a clear vision for how I will approach the role of Social Justice Commissioner. They set out what my main focus will be for the coming years and puts Governments on notice that they have to get it right this time if we are to improve the life status and economic and social outcomes of Indigenous Australians, wherever we live.

    But governments are only one part of the equation. I have attempted to create a solid basis for informing Indigenous peoples and communities about the role of my office and ways for them to let me know if the new arrangements are working or how they might be modified to enable them to work. You will see that I have developed a community guide to the reports - with over 30,000 copies having already been distributed through the Koori Mail and National Indigenous Times. Please take a copy from the back of the room. And please - contact my office if you have issues. My reports are only as good as the information that you provide me.

    And on that note, I hereby launch the Social Justice Report and Native Title Reports. And I take particular pleasure in launching the Yilli Rreung ATSIC Regional Council Strategic Plan.

    Thank you