Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders

The 42^nd Parliament will face several key issues in Indigenous policy, in addition to matters arising from the Northern Territory intervention (see separate brief).

Administration

The Commonwealth has changed the lines of responsibility in administration in an attempt to get more out of expenditure in this area. The changes target many levels:

• the Commonwealth level, with the transfer of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Commission’s administrative functions to ‘mainstream’ government departments and the setting up of an office of Indigenous Policy Co-ordination
• an agency level, with the Council of Australian Governments trials of a whole-of-government approach
• a community level, with Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) and Regional Partnership Agreements (RPAs), and
• the individual level, by freeing up land tenure possibilities on communal land, encouraging private-home ownership and trying to provide employment and training opportunities in lieu of Community Development Employment Projects. As an extension of the individual approach, resources have been directed away from areas where mainstream services and markets are strong. Where they are not strong, policy settings encourage Indigenous people to seek educational, training and employment opportunities elsewhere.

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission and a recent Audit Office report on Indigenous service delivery provide overview and commentary on these approaches. The debate will continue as these and future reviews are evaluated.

Representation

Since the abolition of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Commission (ATSIC) in 2004, there have been concerns about the adequacy of Indigenous representation and the ability of government-picked members of the National Indigenous Council to contribute effectively to policy development. This issue may become more prominent, given the Australian Labor Party’s commitment to a national Indigenous representative body, and the establishment of a new National Aboriginal Alliance in response to the intervention in the Northern Territory.

Constitutional recognition and reconciliation

In October 2007, then Prime Minister John Howard promised that, if re-elected, he would hold a referendum on recognising in the Constitution the ‘special place’ of Indigenous Australians. He pledged to include in a preamble to the Constitution a ‘statement of reconciliation’. The proposal received in-principle bipartisan support. However, there are indications that a Rudd Government may not see a preamble as having as high a priority as an apology for past injustices. Rudd has also indicated that the wording of an apology would be crafted in consultation with Indigenous people.

Stolen wages

From the late 19th century until well into the 20th century, successive state and federal governments took control of wages, savings and benefits belonging to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. Some of these wages were not distributed appropriately. The issue has come to the fore in recent years with campaigns by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, the Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Committee 2006 inquiry into the subject, and the Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation (ANTaR) launch in August 2007 of its report, Hard Labour, Stolen Wages. Various state and territory governments are also proposing leglistative or administrative action. For an overview of this topic, see the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) ‘Stolen Wages’ resource guide.

Compensation for the Stolen Generation

Compensation for the Stolen Generation has been an issue since the release a decade ago of the 1997 Bringing them Home report, and was the subject of a 2000 Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee report, Healing: A Legacy of Generations. In August 2007, the judgment in Trevorrow v State of South Australia awarded damages to a man removed from his family in 1957. These events have led to a renewed campaign for a national scheme to properly compensate all victims of the Stolen Generation.

Unmet need

While the Commonwealth Government has committed increasing resources to the improvement of Indigenous circumstances, the estimated shortfall in needy areas is still significant. In Indigenous housing, the shortfall is estimated at $3.5 billion. An Oxfam Australia report estimates the shortfall in health is between $350 million and $500 million a year.

Native Title

While recent amendments to the Native Title Act 1993 did not generate the same levels of debate as the 1996–97 amendments, the operation of the Act is likely to remain an active issue in Indigenous affairs. It may be brought into greater focus as reviews of the legislation continue, and academics report on the questionable benefit of many native title agreements.

Library documents

John Gardiner-Garden, ‘Commonwealth Indigenous-specific expenditure 1968–2006’, Background Note, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 8 August 2007.
John Gardiner-Garden, ‘The 1967 Referendum: history and myths,’ Research Brief, no. 11, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2006–07.
John Gardiner-Garden, ‘From Dispossession to Reconciliation’, Research Paper, no. 27, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 1998–99.
Coral Dow, ‘Stolen Generation’, E-brief, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, updated July 2006. 

Documentation
Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet.
Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2007.
Reconciliation Australia web-page.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner.
Native Title Research Unit, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies.