Chapter 3Responsibilities under the National Agreement
Introduction
3.1All Parties to the National Agreement are responsible for its implementation and are jointly accountable for the agreed outcomes and targets. This chapter will set out the responsibilities of the parties and the mechanisms in place to hold them to account.
3.2The Parties to the National Agreement include:
Commonwealth, state and territory governments as well as the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA), and the
Coalition of Peaks which comprise national and state territory non‑government Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peak bodies and certain independent statutory authorities.
3.3All parties to the National Agreement are required to develop implementation plans in relation to their obligations under the agreement and to report on their progress in relation to those plans in publicly available annual reports.
3.4As part of an implementation plan, each party is required to demonstrate a commitment to undertake all actions in a way that 'takes full account of, promotes, and does not diminish in any way, the cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people'.
3.5Under the agreement, Jurisdictional Implementation Plans should be developed and delivered in partnership between governments, the Coalition of Peaks, and other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander partners. These plans must set out how existing policies and programs in the jurisdiction will be aligned to the agreement and provide details of the actions to be taken to achieve the priority reforms and agreed outcomes and targets. The plans should also include information on funding and timeframes for actions, as well as the approach to annual reporting. As part of their jurisdictional plan, the states and territories are also required to explain how they will work with local government to implement the agreement.
3.6The ALGA Implementation Plan is expected to ensure that local governments understand the National Agreement and its commitments and encourage its adoption by local governments. It is expected that the plan will assist state and territory governments to work with local governments in the implementation of the agreement and support strengthened shared decision-making at the local level.
3.7Requirements for the Coalition of Peaks Implementation Plan include details on how information will be communicated about the National Agreement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, communities and organisations. Further, it is expected that this plan will set out actions to build Closing the Gap policy and program delivery expertise amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It also requires actions to build understanding and ownership of the National Agreement amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and organisations.
3.8The Joint Council is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the National Agreement, including progress by the parties against their respective implementation plans. For this reason, each party is required provide their plan to the Joint Council within 12 months of the National Agreement commencing so that it may provide advice on implementation and guidance on how the parties can work together to achieve the agreed outcomes.
3.9Under the National Agreement, the parties have also committed to independent oversight and accountability for progress through four key mechanisms:
an information repository, including a dashboard and annual report to inform reporting of progress against targets and key indicators;
annual public reports by each party;
Productivity Commission review; and
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander led review.
Information repository
3.10The Productivity Commission (commission) is the Australian government's independent research and advisory body on a range of economic, social and environmental issues affecting the welfare of Australians. Under the National Agreement, the commission plays an important role in promoting accountability, including by maintaining a Closing the Gap information repository. The information repository includes a publicly accessible dashboard and an Annual Data Compilation Report.
3.11The public dashboard provides up-to-date information on Closing the Gap targets and indicators. Commissioner Selwyn Button informed the committee that the commission collects information from government agencies across the country for the dashboard. Where possible, the dashboard shows progress against the targets at a national and jurisdiction level, and by geographical remoteness across the country.[9]
3.12Under the National Agreement, the commission is required to update the dashboard on a regular basis and at minimum, annually. The commission is also required to work with the Joint Council, through the Partnership Working Group, to develop the annual data compilation report. The commission published its fourth Annual Data Compilation Report on Closing the Gap in July 2024.
Annual public reporting obligations
3.13In preparing their annual reports, government parties to the National Agreement are required to:
draw from the dashboard and annual data compilation report, to ensure consistent measures of progress;
include information on efforts to implement the agreement's four priority reform areas;
demonstrate how efforts, investment and actions are aligned and support the achievement of Closing the Gap goals; and
list the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled organisations and other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations that have been allocated funding for the purposes of certain clauses of the Agreement, and, subject to confidentiality requirements, list the names of the organisations and the amount allocated to them.
3.14Jurisdictional annual reports are required to be tabled in their respective Parliaments, while the Coalition of Peaks annual report can be tabled in each Parliament (subject to parliamentary rules).
3.15The Commonwealth's most recent report, titled Commonwealth Closing the Gap 2024 Annual Report and 2025 Implementation Plan was published on 10February2025.
Productivity Commission review
3.16The National Agreement requires the Productivity Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of progress under the agreement every three years. This should include an analysis of progress in relation to the priority reforms, targets, indicators and trajectories. While the Joint Council is required to provide advice on the terms of reference for the review, the agreement stipulates that the review may include advice to the Joint Council on potential changes to the National Agreement itself, and inform the ongoing implementation of the agreement by highlighting areas for improvement. Following this review, the Joint Council is required to provide a formal response within 6 months of receiving it.
3.17The commission's first Closing the Gap review was delivered to the Joint Council on 24 January 2024 and publicly released on 7 February 2024.
3.18In undertaking this substantial review, the Productivity Commission was tasked with:
analysing progress on Closing the Gap against the four priority reform outcome areas in the National Agreement;
analysing progress against all of the socioeconomic outcome areas in the National Agreement;
examining the factors affecting progress; and
where relevant, providing recommendations to the Joint Council on potential changes to the National Agreement and its targets, indicators and data improvements.
Key findings
3.19The commission's overarching finding was that the reforms agreed to under National Agreement have not been prioritised by governments. Further, despite finding 'pockets of good practice', the commission found that progress against the priority reforms has been 'slow, uncoordinated and piecemeal'.
3.20The commission found that governments have 'largely not fulfilled their commitments under the agreement and failed to fully grasp the nature and scale of the change required'. As a case in point, the commission noted the following in relation to Priority Reform 3 - Transforming Government Organisations:
While governments are pursuing hundreds of actions ostensibly in support of Priority Reform 3, there is no clear strategy for transformation that underpins the individual actions – governments have not deeply examined their systems, structures and operations in the way the Agreement requires.
3.21Emphasising the point that progress has been weak, reflecting 'tweaks to, or actions overlayed onto, business-as-usual approaches', the commission highlighted the need for significant structural reform:
The Commission's overarching finding is that there has been no systematic approach to determining what strategies need to be implemented to disrupt business-as-usual of governments. What is needed is a paradigm shift. Fundamental change is required, with actions based on a clear logic about how they will achieve that change.
3.22The commission found that many plans focus on the 'what' and provide little if any detail on the 'how' or 'why'. It noted that for the most part, there was no strategic approach that would otherwise explain and provide evidence for how government-identified initiatives will achieve the significant transformation envisaged in the National Agreement. The commission concluded that without this information, it was 'near impossible' for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and the broader community, to use the plans to hold government to account.[25]
3.23Despite the clear message received from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people during the review, the commission found that persistent barriers to progressing the priority reforms included:
lack of power sharing needed for joint decision-making, and
the failure of governments to acknowledge and act on the reality that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people know what is best for their communities.
3.24In response to these concerns and the outcome of the review, the commission concluded that:
Unless governments address the power imbalance in their systems, policies and ways of working, the Agreement risks becoming another broken promise to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.[27]
Priority Reform 1: Formal partnerships and shared decision-making
3.25The purpose of Priority Reform 1 is to commit governments to build and strengthen structures that empower Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to share decision-making authority with governments to accelerate progress on Closing the Gap. The commission noted that this reform is about power sharing, which requires more than consultation and partnerships but rather the relinquishment of some control over decisions by government.
3.26In its review, the commission found that:
governments are not yet sufficiently invested in partnerships or enacting the sharing power that needs to occur if decisions are to be made jointly;
contrary to the principle of shared decision-making which underpins the agreement, there appears to be an assumption that 'governments know best'; and
many government organisations view shared decision-making with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as consultation in relation to a pre-determined 'solution' rather than as working together to identify priorities and co-design the most appropriate approach to achieving them.
3.27The commission provided some examples of successful shared decision making while noting that they remain pockets of success. However, its engagement with over 130 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations did not identify systemic change in when and how decisions are made, thereby indicating limited progress towards this priority reform.
Priority Reform 2: Building the community-controlled sector
3.28The purpose of this reform is to ensure that there is a strong and sustainable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community-controlled (ACCO) sector delivering high quality services to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people across the country.
3.29The commission noted that as governments have acknowledged that ACCOs achieve better results for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in relation to delivering a broad change of services, they have agreed that more services should be delivered by ACCOs. However, the commission also found that while some transfer to ACCOs is taking place in relation to the provision of services, efforts are 'slow (or ad hoc) and do not reflect the systemic changes that are necessary to transform service systems and improve outcomes'.
3.30The commission further reported that, even where services have shifted from mainstream providers to ACCOs, governments still retain control over important elements of those programs. For example, they often impose generic, pre-existing models of service and program design, and require reporting against narrow key performance indicators instead of allowing ACCOs to design services and measure outcomes in ways that are most meaningful to the communities receiving those services.
Priority Reform 3: Transforming government organisations
3.31Under Priority Reform 3, the parties to the National Agreement have committed to the systemic and structural transformation of mainstream government organisations to improve accountability and respond to the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
3.32The commission observed that there is a 'stark absence of whole-of-government or whole-of-organisation strategies for driving and delivering transformation' in line with this reform. More concerningly, the commission reported that it was unable to identify any government organisation that has articulated a clear vision for what transformation looks like, adopted a strategy to achieve that vision, and tracked the impact of actions within the organisation towards this priority. Instead, to date, government efforts have focused on small-scale, individual actions rather than system-level changes to policies and practices which is required to implement this reform.
Priority Reform 4: Shared access to data and information at a regional level
3.33The National Agreement states that shared access to location specific data and information will support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and organisations to support the achievement of the first three Priority Reforms. Under the National Agreement, the parties agreed that disaggregated data and information is most useful to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and communities to 'obtain a comprehensive picture of what is happening to their communities and make decisions about their futures'. In short, therefore, Priority Reform 4 focuses on ensuring that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have access to, and the capability to use, locally-relevant data and information to set and monitor the implementation of efforts to close the gap, their priorities and drive their own development.
3.34The commission noted that while Priority Reform 4 requires governments to implement large-scale changes to data systems and practices, governments have made little progress on making these changes. It noted in this regard that:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations continue to report difficulties accessing government-held data, and that
data that is collected by government agencies does not reflect the realities of, or hold meaning for, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
3.35Further, the commission found that there is not a shared understanding of what Priority Reform 4 is trying to achieve. Many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people view Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDS) as the purpose of Priority Reform 4. Indigenous Data Sovereignty is defined as the right of Indigenous peoples to govern the collection, ownership and application of data about Indigenous communities, peoples, lands, and resources. This is not currently reflected in either the text of the National Agreement or government statements in relation to this reform.[43]
Socio-economic outcomes
3.36In addition to the four priority reforms, Parties to the National Agreement committed to 17 socio-economic outcome (SEO) areas that reflect important aspects of the life experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Progress towards these SEOs is measured against national-level targets aimed at overcoming the entrenched inequality faced by many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people relative to all Australians.
3.37In assessing Australia's progress against the SEOs, in its review, the commission identified significant challenges in the design and implementation of these arrangements, advising that progress towards these outcomes is measured against national-level targets, with no indication of how jurisdictions should be held to account for their contributions. Further, the commission argued that government policy should better acknowledge the interplay between different socio-economic outcomes. For example, the outcome regarding housing impacts other outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, with its potential effects on physical and mental wellbeing, education, employment, family violence and incarceration.
3.38Additionally, the commission made clear that the scope of some of the SEOs is not fully captured by current targets and supporting indicators. For example, SEO 3 aims for children to be engaged in high quality, culturally appropriate early childhood education, however the corresponding target only measures the percentage of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children enrolled in year‑before-fulltime-schooling programs.[46]
Productivity Commission recommendations
3.39Throughout this review, the commission emphasised that fundamental structural change is required, with actions based on a clear logic about how relevant changes will be achieved, in order for commitments under the National Agreement to be met.[47]
3.40The commission made the following four key recommendations in support of this goal, which are intended to strengthen the implementation of the priority reforms and to clarify their intent.
Recommendation 1: Power needs to be shared.
Recommendation 2: Indigenous Data Sovereignty needs to be recognised and supported.
Recommendation 3: Mainstream systems and culture need to be fundamentally rethought.
Recommendation 4: Stronger accountability is needed to drive behaviour.
3.41The commission made clear that as these recommendations are interlinked and interact, it is not appropriate that they be acted upon in isolation of each other.[48]
Power needs to be shared
3.42The commission emphasised that for meaningful progress to be made towards Closing the Gap, governments must share power and recognise the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to have control over decisions that affect their lives which is central to self-determination.
3.43The commission recommended the following actions to support self‑determination in addition to an amendment to the National Agreement to clarify the purpose and broader scope of Priority Reform 1:
(a)Governments need to treat ACCOs as essential partners in program and service design;
(b)Government ministers need to meet regularly with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peak bodies, without departmental officials present, at least twice per year;
(c)Governments must adequately resource the implementation of the National Agreement, particularly for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and organisations to enable them to apply their knowledge and expertise to the implementation of the agreement; and
(d)Governments need to write implementation plans more strategically and articulate how the agreed strategies and actions will contribute to the desired changes.[50]
Indigenous Data Sovereignty needs to be recognised and supported
3.44The commission's second recommendation proposes that the National Agreement be amended to support Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDS) under Priority Reform 4.
3.45IDS refers to the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to exercise ownership over Indigenous data. Ownership can be expressed through the creation, collection, access, analysis, interpretation, management, dissemination and reuse of data.[52]
3.46This recommendation proposes the establishment of a Bureau of Indigenous Data to:
support governments to embed Indigenous Data Governance (IDG) into their data systems and practices,
invest in enhancing the data capability of organisations and communities, and
consolidate and oversee data development work for the agreement.[53]
Mainstream government systems and culture need to be fundamentally rethought
3.47This recommendation follows the commission's finding that governments have not grasped the scale of change required let alone the shift they have committed to in the National Agreement. The five identified actions to address these structural challenges include:
(a)departmental transformation strategies which set out a clear theory of change, underpinned by an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led assessment of the department's historic and current institutional racism, unconscious bias and engagement practices;
(b)central agencies' review and update of their funding and commissioning rules so that they explicitly incorporate accountability for funders to abide by the priority reforms when commissioning programs;
(c)establishment of a senior leadership group to drive change throughout the public sector in each jurisdiction;
(d)review and update Cabinet and Budget processes undertaken by central agencies to ensure that all submissions demonstrate the impacts of the policy proposal on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and how the policy aligns with the priority reforms; and
(e)imbed responsibility for improving cultural capability into the employment requirements, performance agreements and KPIs of public sector CEOs, executives and employees.[54]
Stronger accountability is needed to drive behaviour change
3.48This recommendation seeks to address the lack of effective accountability mechanisms in relation to the National Agreement as identified by the commission. This recommendation proposes four actions to address this critical gap as follows:
(a)requiring an independent accountability mechanism to be established in each jurisdiction with robust powers to independently examine progress on all aspects of the National Agreement;
(b)ensuring that all other government agreements that impact on the inequality faced by many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, reflect the government's commitments under the National Agreement;
(c)ensuring greater transparency by requiring all documents developed under the agreement to be published, including stocktakes, partnership agreements and transformation strategies; and
(d)requiring all government organisations to include a statement in its annual report on the substantive activities undertaken to implement the agreement's priority reforms.[55]
Joint Council response to Productivity Commission review
3.49Joint Council met in July 2024 and agreed to the commission's four key recommendations and to fifteen of the sixteen recommended actions. In relation to the outstanding action, the establishment of a Bureau of Indigenous Data, Joint Council agreed to undertake further work before deciding how to progress this action, including establishing a data policy partnership to report back to Joint Council on this recommendation.[56]
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander led review
3.50The National Agreement provides that an independent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander led review will be carried out within 12 months of the Productivity Commission's review. This review should highlight areas of achievement and improvement as well as identify priority areas where greater effort of the parties is required. The agreement explains that this is also an opportunity to capture the lived experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities in relation to the implementation of the agreement.
3.51On the advice of the Coalition of Peaks, Joint Council is required to set the scope and conduct of this review, including mechanisms to ensure its independence.
3.52The review should involve a Coalition of Peaks' facilitated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Assembly on Closing the Gap, to provide for a wider group of people and organisations to participate formally and encourage broader ownership of the agreement. Once complete, the review's report will be provided to Joint Council before being made public.
3.53At a public hearing on 6 March 2025, the committee was informed by Ms Pat Turner, Lead Convenor of the Coalition of Peaks, that the Jumbunna Institute from the University of Technology Sydney has been contracted to commence the independent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander led review.