Social Justice Report 2003: SUMMARY SHEET FIVE: REVIEW OF ATSIC
Media Pack:
SUMMARY SHEET FIVE: REVIEW OF ATSIC
The Social Justice Report 2003 supports
the following recommendations of the ATSIC Review Team:
- to retain ATSIC's 35 Regional Councils and accord higher
priority to the Regional Council planning process as the basis of national
policies; - to reunify ATSIC and ATSIS in one organisation;
- to retain the conflict of interest directions within
ATSIC (p95).
'In supporting the reunification of ATSIC
and ATSIS, I support the retention of the conflict of interest directions
within ATSIC by which ATSIC's elected representatives would continue to
set policy priorities and to decide the broad program allocation of funding
but not have any involvement in making individual funding decisions. The
reunification of ATSIC's structure would overcome a potential tension
that has been created through the creation of ATSIS whereby it is required
to 'take all reasonable steps to ensure that ATSIS conforms to the policies
and strategic priorities established by ATSIC' on the one hand, and 'coordinate
its activities to achieve effective synergies with overall Government
policies and priorities as well as have appropriate regard to overall
Government policies and priorities' on the other hand' (p95).
The report also identifies significant problems with the proposals
of the ATSIC Review Team:
'I also have reservations about the Review Team's proposals
for the creation of a national body and national executive in the format
that they propose. I also consider that the Review Team's model does not
provide adequate support to ATSIC's national structure and consequently
would not provide ATSIC with sufficient leverage or powers to undertake
a broader role of monitoring performance by other government agencies
(at all levels) and in setting priorities to apply across government'(pp95-96).
There must be sufficient attention paid to the importance of
ATSIC maintaining a strong voice at the national level. Any diminution
of ATSIC's role at the national level will ultimately affect its ability
to influence the national policy agenda and will lead to less effective
advocacy for Indigenous peoples. This will be the case even where a diminution
of the national focus is accompanied by an enhanced role for regional
councils (p100).
ATSIC's existing powers should be enhanced by strengthening
the scrutiny role of ATSIC over service delivery and program design by
other government departments. This could be achieved through amendments
to the ATSIC Act which:
- empower ATSIC to set the objectives and guiding principles
for service delivery to Indigenous peoples across all issues (which
they can do under the present legislation), but also to empower them
to be able to develop legally binding directions for service delivery
agencies that accord with these principles; - require the Minister to table in Parliament all such
directions set by the ATSIC Board; - provide that all directions issued by the ATSIC National
Board and subsequently tabled in Parliament have the status of legislative
instruments (or delegated legislation); - require all government departments to include in their
annual reports to Parliament information as to how they implement the
directions of the ATSIC Board in delivering relevant services and programs; - empower ATSIC to evaluate how government departments
and agencies (at all levels) comply with these directions in delivering
services; - provide for regular scrutiny of compliance with these
directions by the Australian National Audit Office or through an enhanced
Office of Evaluation and Audit within ATSIC; and - provide for scrutiny processes by the Parliament, including
through ATSIC reporting to Parliament about deficiencies in department's
complying with directions and for parliamentary committees to scrutinise
the actions of departments through specific inquiries or senate estimate
processes. (pp100-101).
The report supports enhancing the structure
of ATSIC for interface with state and territory government through improved
support for ATSIC's State Advisory Committees (p102).
It also supports the ATSIC Review report's emphasis on the need for enhanced
powers at the regional level and for input from the regional and local
levels to inform policy development and decision-making processes at the
state/territory and national levels (p 103).
Overall, 'the ATSIC Review goes part of the way to identifying
an agenda for change to ATSIC. There is, however, a need to go beyond
what the Review Team have proposed and ensure that there is no relative
weakening in ATSIC's national structure, while also increasing the focus
on supporting innovation at the regional level.'
'Reform of ATSIC is a critical aspect in achieving the effective
participation of Indigenous peoples in decision making processes and supporting
sustainable development. The extent to which the government supports ATSIC
over the coming year to more effectively drive an agenda for change, including
by providing it with sharper legislative powers, will be the litmus test
of their commitment to achieving sustainable improvements in Indigenous
communities' (p105).
