Australian Government Publishing Service Canberra

Australian Government Publishing ServiceCanberra

© Commonwealth of Australia 1990ISBN 0 644 12557 8

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the CopyrightAct1 968, no part may be reproduced by any process without writtenpermission from the Australian Government Publishing Service. Requests andinquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to theManager, AGPS Press, GPO Box 84, Canberra, ACT 2601.

The photograph on the front cover is of the Mosaic Pavement of granite andmortar commissioned in 1987 forthe forecourt of the New Parlianent House.

Artist: Michael Tjakamarra Nelson

William Mcintosh with Aldo Rossi and Franco Cocussi fabrications

Printed in Australia by R. D. RUBIE, Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra

Terms of Reference and Membership viiForeword iyj-Preface xiConduct of Inquiry xyList of Recommendations xvii

Historical Background - Towards Self-determination 1Self-determination and Self-management 3Difference between Self-determination and Self-management 4Problems with Existing Policies 5Education and Training 8Consultation 8

Co-ordination 9Funding 9Advisory Services 10Resource Agencies 10Potential Conflicts with Aboriginal Value 10The Meaning of Self-determination and Self-management 12

Introduction 15The Problem of the Concept of 'Community' 16Factionalism 18Potential Conflicts with Aboriginal Values 19Role of Coucil Members and Community Councils 22Inadequate Skills 24Authority 24Conclusion 25

Introduction 27An Overview of Structures for Incorporation 28

Northern Territory 28Queensland 32South Australia 35Western Australia 37New South Wales 38Victoria and Tasmania 39Commonwealth Territory {Wreck Bay) 40

Other Structures 40Aboriginal and Torres Strait Commission 40More Appropriate Structures 41Conclusion 45

Introduction 47What does 'Consultation' Mean 4 7The Recognised Importance of Consultation 48How Consultation has been Conducted 49Critisms of the Consultative Process 51Aboriginal Perceptions 5 3Quality or Quantity 52Poor Communication 56Towards Negotiation 57

Introduction 61The Need for Women's Services 6 3The Role of Women's Offices and Organisations 64Funding 64Conclusion 65

Introduction 67The Government level 68Too Many Agencies 68Poor Communication 7 3Failure of Bureaucratic Mechanisms 7 5Mainstreaming or Single Agency Service Provision 76Role of Local Government 7 9Poor Co-ordination and Planning at the Local Level 79A Framework for more Effective Co-ordination 81Development of Community Plans 82

Introduction 87Overall Funding Framework 87Implications of the Funding Framework 90Particular Funding Problems 91Need to Streamline Funding Arrangements 92Options for Generating Revenue Locally 96Enterprises 9"?Contract Work 101Rates and Levies 103Cash Accumulation and Infrastructure Deficiencies 105

IV

Introduction 107Conflict with Self-determination 107Accounting Procedures 109Need for Aboriginal Input 109Internal Accountability 110Bookkeeping 111

Introduction 113Background 113The Role of a Community Adviser 114Need for Advisory Staff 115Some Broad Problems 118Nature of the Work 119Industrial Award 120Selection and Monitoring of Staff 122Training for Community Workers 127Possible Future Arrangements 128

Instruments of Self-determination and Self-management 131What is a Resource Agency? 131The Role of Resource Agencies 134Advantages of Resource Agencies 136Factors Working Against Resource Agencies 136The Clients 137Funding 137Future Training Needs 140Conclusion 142

1List of Organisations and Individuals who mademade Submissions 144

2Public Hearings Held and Witnesses Heard 147

List of Exhibits 156

APPENDIX 4List of Informal Discussions and Field Visits 163

APPENDIX 5Advisers to the Inquiry 167

v

The Committee was asked to inquire into and report on theeffectiveness of existing support services within Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander Communitiest including administrative andadvisory services.

33EMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE

Chairman

Deputy Chairman

Members

(35th Parliament)

Secretary to the Committee

Inquiry Secretary

Inquiry Staff

Mr W E Snowdon, MP

Mr W L Smith, MP1

Mr C A Blanchard, MP'Mr I M D Cameron, MPMr M D Cross, MPMr G Gayler, MPMr H A Jenkins, MPMr C G Miles, MPMr R E Tickner, MPMr A P Webster, MP

Mr D R Elder

Mr P Stephens

Ms A BloomfieldMrs J Jurek

Mr D M Cormnoliy, MP resigned from the Committee on 1 December 1988 and wasreplaced by Mr M A Burr, MP, Mr Burr resigned from the Committee on 1 June 1989and was replaced by Mr W L Smilh, MP.

Mr C A Bfanchard, MP resigned as Chairman of the Committee on 6 April 1989 and wasreplaced by Mr W E Snowdon, MP.

Mr G Campbell, MP resigned from the Committee on 18 August 1989 and was replacedby Mr H A Jenkins, MP.

Mr J N Andrew, MP resigned from the Committee on 24 August 1988 and was replacedby Mr A P Webster, MP.

vii

MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE (36th Parliament}

Chairman

Deputy Chairman

Members

Secretary to the Committee

Inquiry Secretary

Inquiry Staff

Mr D J C Kerr, MP

Dr M R L Wooldridge, MP

Mr J D Anderson, MPMr J Gayler, MP *Mr G D Gibson, MPMr M H Lavarch, MPMr P E Nugent, MPMr J L Riggall, MPMr R W Sawford, MPMr L J Scott, MPHon W E Snowdon, MPMr A P Webster, MP *

Mr A J Kelly

Mr P Stephens

Miss S HouriganMr P Ratas

MEMBERSHIP OF THE SUB-

Chairman

Members

Sub-Committee Secretary

Hon W E Snowdon, MP

Mr J Gayler, MPMr A P Webster, MP

Mr P Stephens

* In order to complete the inquiry in the 36th Parliament, the Committee decided to forma sub-committee, onto which it co-opted 2 Committee members from the previousParliament.

VI11

The work for this report was largely undertaken by the previouscommittee under the chairmanship of Alan Blanchard and laterWarren Snowdon, The task has fallen to this committee tocomplete the consideration of the report. To assist in this tasktwo members of the previous committee, Alasdair Webster and JohnGayler, agreed to be additional members of the committee for thispurpose. On behalf of the committee I would like to thank WarrenSnowdon for the considerable effort he has put into thepreparation of the draft report and in chairing the sub-committeein this Parliament. I also thank the other members of thecommittee and the secretariat for their efforts to complete thereport.

Duncan KerrChairman

IK

The production of this report marks the completion of acomprehensive Inquiry by the Standing Committee into theeffectiveness of support services within Aboriginal and TorresStrait Island communities' management.

The Committee is indebted to the patience of the Aboriginal andIslander people who assisted with the Inquiry and welcomed usinto their communities and organisations. It goes without sayingthat without their support this report would have beenmeaningless.

"Our Future, Our Selves" - develops many of the issues raised inthe most recent of the Committee's reports - "A Chance for theFuture" tabled as part of this Inquiry.

Together these reports make it starkly obvious that there hasbeen insufficient effort in marrying the Government's policiesof Aboriginal self-determination and self-management withappropriate planning and management mechanisms to ensureAboriginal and Islander people have the means to the control,that they desire, over their lives.

It is apparent that the consultation process has been largelyineffective, inevitably reacting to the desired outcomes ofGovernment being reached. It has not been a process wheredialogue is a feature. Rather is has been one where views fromabove have been imposed. It is obvious that the consultationprocess should be based on negotiation when Government and otheragencies deal with Aboriginal and Islander people. Negotiationis necessary if meaning is to be given to self-determination.

It is a matter of concern that there has been insufficient effortto co-ordinate Government programs for Aboriginal people, or toprovide them with the means to be fully and actively involved inthe policy development process.

The establishment of ATSIC should provide the necessary stimulusto governments and other service providers, to recognise andsupport ATSIC's central role in co-ordinating the development andadministration of Aboriginal Affairs policy.

Central to the recommendations of the Committee is therecognition of the need to provide Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander people with access to the skills required to manage theaffairs of their community and organisations.

XI

The Committee's recommendations have as their key, the essentialand underlying importance of community development and trainingstrategies which together provide a basis for effective self-determination and self-management.

The Committee's work points to the crucial requirements for arethink of how Governments fund Aboriginal communities andparticularly towards the notion that the existing budgetframework is the most appropriate means of funding Aboriginal andIslander communities and organisations.

It has also become increasingly obvious that there is afundamental requirement that Government field personnel haveappropriate and adequate training and understanding to carry outtheir important tasks.

It is clear that too little has been done to match the policyrhetoric with effective service delivery.

Much more needs to be done to translate the Government's policycommitments into administrative processes that meet the goals ofpolicy and satisfy the needs and demands of Aboriginal people.

In this report, the Committee has again detailed the essentialrole of community plans in general community development.

It is important that these plans not be seen by service providersmerely as a means for developing the physical infrastructure ofcommunities. Such plans should be seen as covering the gamut ofcommunity interests and concerns. The context in which theyshould be developed is one of extensive consultation andnegotiation so that they reflect the priorities and needs of thepeople with whom they are developed.

The negotiation processes in formulating these plans should notbe done simply to satisfy the immediate management or fundingpriorities of government agencies or be limited by the timeconstraints of budgetary processes.

A feature of the Committee's work during this and previousinquiries has been the genuine bipartisan nature of itsdeliberations and subsequent recommendations. It is to thecredit of committee members and the secretariat that consensushas been the order of the day, at a time when the public debateover Aboriginal Affairs has too often been polarised, withAboriginal and Islander people, as before, being the victims ofunremitting, ill-informed and baseless attacks.

During the early course of this inquiry Alan Blanchard MP wasChairman of the Committee, and while Alan is no longer a memberof Parliament, his dedication and sense of fairness played animportant part in setting the framework for the co-operativeapproach that has been a feature of the Committee's work.

XII

The Committee's secretariat warrants special recognition,particularly the former secretary, David Elder, who was anextremely valuable source of knowledge and advice over a numberof enquires. David no longer works with this committee, howeverit is appropriate that his dedication and assistance isrecognised.

Of course the other members of the secretariat who had aformidable hand in this report, especially Peter Stevens andAuriel Bloomfield, also deserve mention, working so effectivelywithin the constraints of a tight timeframe and an enormousamount of information. Peter has also left the committee and hisvalued input will be missed.

It is also relevant to acknowledge the work of the currentcommittee secretary, Allan Kelly, in the final stages of thereport's preparation.

Finally I would like to express by personal thanks to thecommittee for their support whilst I was chairman andparticularly to John Gayler MP and Alasdair Webster MP who stayedon the committee to see this report completed.

Warren Snowdon MPMember for the Northern Territory

Xlll

On 18 November 1987 the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, the Hon.Gerry Hand MP requested the Committee to inquire into supportservices for Aboriginal and Torres Stait Island communities, withparticular reference to the effectiveness of existing support ofservices, including administrative and advisory services.

The inquiry was advertised in national newspapers throughoutAustralia in late November 1987. The Committee sought writtensubmissions from Commonwealth, State and Territory governmentdepartments and agencies which provided support services toAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

During the course of the inquiry it became evident that the broadnature of the terms of reference allowed a wide variety of issuesto be raised. Many interpreted the term "support services" asrelating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander needs forservices ranging from the essential type, such as water,electricity and roads, to basic services such as education,employment, health and housing.

Having regard to the breadth of the inquiry's terms of referencethe Committee was concerned to ensure that it concentratesufficiently on the full range of issues. Accordingly, theCommittee adopted an approach which allowed it to deal in detailwith the diversity of issues which had emerged and to bettertarget the major areas. This was achieved by dividing the broadterms of reference into a number of separate inquiries.

On 3 November 1988 the Committee tabled in Parliament an interimreport outlining this approach and the diverse inquiry issues.The areas of education and training for community management wereexamined first and this report was presented to Parliament on7 September 1989. On 28 November 1989 the Committee also tabledan issues paper dealing with Aboriginal people and mainstreamlocal government.

At the conclusion of the 35th Parliament the Committee hadsubstantially completed its work, although it had not considereda draft report. In order to finalise the report and complete theinquiry within the term of the 36th Parliament, the Committeeformed a sub-committee, onto which it co-opted two members fromthe previous Parliament's Committee.

The present report focuses on the remaining issues identified inthe interim report, namely Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islandcommunity management and control and resource services forAboriginal communities.

Aboriginal community and local government councils visited by theCommittee continually raised the issues of community control andtheir lack of authority within non-Aboriginal structures inrelation to the decision making process. Their principal concern

xv

was that decisions which have a vital effect on their lives onthe and operation of the community councils are usually made bydistantly located public servants with little or no consultationwith the relevant community. Thus, although many organisationshave been given enormous responsibility for making things workin their communities, they have not been given the authority orcapacity to carry them through.

At the same time, Aboriginal community councils and Aboriginaland Torres Strait Island local government bodies are required tobe accountable to a wide range of Commonwealth and Stategovernment agencies, under a variety of different heads ofexpenditure. A major difficulty of these agencies is thediffering accountability requirements, which make the properaccounting for funds a complex administrative and financial taskfor Aboriginal communities.

To investigate these and other concerns,the Committee held publichearings in Canberra, Kintore (NT), Woorabinda (Qld), Brisbane,Perth, Adelaide, Sydney, Darwin and Alice Springs. The Committeeexamined 104 witnesess and took 1124 pages of evidence. A listof witnesses who gave evidence is at Appendix 2. The transcriptsof evidence are available for inspection at the House ofRepresentatives Committee Office, the Australian National Libraryand the Commonwealth Parliamentary Library.

The Committee received, and published 61 written submissionstotalling 3508 pages. A list is at Appendix 1. The Committeealso travelled extensively, visiting Aboriginal and Torres StraitIsland communities throughout Australia. A list of the places isat Appendix 4.

In the latter stages of the inquiry the Committee engaged anumber of consultants. Their advice was invaluable in thepreparation of the final report. Details of the consultanciesare provided at Appendix 5.

The inquiry was conducted during a period of major reform of theCommonwealth's administrative arrangements for AboriginalAffairs. The submissions to the inquiry were made by theseparate portfolio agencies now incorported together under theAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. For thisreason the report refers occasionally to the former Departmentof Aboriginal Affairs and the Aboriginal Development Commission.Any recommendations, however, have been addressed to the newCommission where appropriate.

The Committee would like to acknowledge the assistance itreceived from all the witnesses and from many other individualsand organisations. In particular, the Committee is most gratefulto the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people andorganisations who imparted so much valuable information andshared their concerns with the Committee during informaldiscussions.

xvi

Structures for Aboriginal Control and Management

The Committee recommends that:

1. Governments acknowledge that to give effect topolicies of self-determination and self-management itis necessary to reappraise the effectiveness ofexisting structures and methods of dealing withAboriginal and Islander people. Such a reappraisalshould:

acknowledge that the process of consultation hasgenerally not given rise to genuine dialogue andhas largely been ineffective; and

accept the need for policies and outcomes to bedetermined by a process of negotiation, whichbetter accords with traditional decision makingprocesses.


2. A number of general principles should be observed bygovernments when establishing structures forAboriginal people. These include:

the process of negotiation with Aboriginal peopleshould replace the current process ofconsultation;

when negotiating structures, governments shouldavoid placing undue pressure on Aboriginal peoplein such a way as to achieve an outcome that wouldconform to established government policy or tomeet a government imposed timetable;

structures must be compatible with localAboriginal aspirations and affiliations;

the term 'community' needs to be defined broadlyto take account of social, historical andcultural linkages;

structures should emerge from, and be supportedby, the people they represent or for whom theyoperate; and

structures should be recognised within thebroader power structure of Australian society.

xvi i

Front Consultation to Negotiation with Aboriginal People


3. Government departments and agencies examine theirprocesses of communication with Aboriginal people to:

make greater use of a 'plain English' style indocuments and correspondence in their dealingswith Aboriginal communities;

make greater use of radio and the range of visualmedia such as video, television, comics, postersetc;

where possible and appropriate engage qualifiedinterpreters;

where appropriate encourage staff of to studyAboriginal languages and, as a minimum, make across cultural awareness a precondition forappointment.

4. Negotiations on policies and programs involveAboriginal people at the appropriate level - fromnational through to local - in all discussions towardsa settlement of terms.

5. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissiondevelop guidelines for negotiation that can be used bythe range of departments and agencies that havedealings with Aboriginal communities andorganisations.

6. Reference to negotiation be included in the corporateplans of Commonwealth departments and agencies whichhave contact with Aboriginal communities andorganisations.

7. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissiondevelop appropriate training packages for the range ofstaff involved in negotiation with Aboriginalcommunities and organisations.

XVI11

8. Any training packages developed by the Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander Commission be distributed foruse by other agencies involved with Aboriginalcommunities„

Women


9. the report Womens's Business be the subject of afollow-up review to update its findings and determinethe extent to which its recommendations have beenadopted

10. there be at least one Aboriginal women in the Officeof the Status of Women

11. the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissionpay greater attention to the needs of women and ensurethat their views are actively sought

12. The Office of Aboriginal Women develop guidelines:

to ensure adequate representation of Aboriginalwomen in decision-making forums;

to ensure that all new policies and programs arereflective of the needs of Aboriginal women; and

against which all current policies can bereviewed for their effectiveness and implicationsfor Aboriginal women.

13. These guidelines be circulated to all agenciesinvolved in service delivery to Aboriginal people.

14. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissionimmediately undertake a review of resources requiredto adequately co-ordinate and monitor programs andpolicy for their effectiveness and impact onAboriginal women; and

that the findings of the review be implementedand adequately funded to facilitate improvementsin service delivery where identified.

Co-ordination


15. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissionexamine the economic cost of ineffective co-ordination.

xix

16. The Commonwealth renegotiate agreements with theStates and Territories over their respective roles andresponsibilities for the delivery of services toAboriginal people, in line with the general thrust ofthe report of the Human Rights Commission.

17. As the Aboriginal and Torres Strait IslanderCommission develops its structures and administrativecapacities, Commonwealth, State, Territory and localgovernments view the Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Commission as the co-ordinating agency forworking with Aboriginal people.

18. All Commonwealth agencies involved in service deliveryto Aboriginal people improve co-ordination activitiesof their field staff, particularly in terms of visitsto remote communities.

19. Commonwealth, State and Territory government agenciesdevelop mechanisms to rationalise their discussionswith, and visits to, Aboriginal communities with aview to reducing the number of visits.

20. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait IslanderCommission.and the Department of Employment, Educationand Training develop a proposal for the implementationof an amalgamated field officer structure.

21. The Commonwealth conduct a formal review of theeffectiveness of all bureaucratic co-ordinationmechanisms with the States and Territories in the areaof Aboriginal affairs with a view to the Aboriginaland Torres Strait Islander Commission being givenresponsibility for co-ordination.

22. The question of mainstreaming of service delivery benegotiated between governments and Aboriginal people.

2 3. Training packages be developed by appropriateinstitutions for the training of government agency andcommunity employed staff in community planning andother issues relating to community development.

24. Government agencies assist Aboriginal people todevelop broad-ranging community plans which identifypolitical and administrative requirements,infrastructure and service needs in local regions andwhich also reflect social, economic and culturalaspirations.

25. These plans, once developed, form the basis forco-ordinated action by government agencies in aregion.

26. Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments developorganisational funding arrangements which arecompatible with community development plans.

xx


27. The Commonwealth, in conjunction with the States andTerritories, develop proposals for implementing asystem of block grant funding of Aboriginalcommunities and organisations.

28. Commonwealth, State and Territory governmentsimplement a system whereby Aboriginal communities andorganisations are provided with a minimum level offunding on a triennial basis.

29. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander CommercialDevelopment Corporation support enterprises where theyhave the clear potential to generate additional incomeand employment within communities.

30. Training for involvement in enterprises be provided toAboriginal people.

31. The management structures for enterprises reflect thebroad principles set out Chapter 3.

32. The Commonwealth, State and Territory governmentsprovide ample opportunity for Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander communities to participate in contractwork in and around their community.

33. Commonwealth, State and Territory governmentdepartments and agencies develop guidelines, wherenone exist, to facilitate the participation ofAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities incontract work. These guidelines should include:

methods of directly informing communities oflocal tendering opportunities; and

the provision of preferential tenderingarrangements.

34. Relevant Commonwealth departments and agencies providedetails in their annual reports of tenders let toAboriginal communities and organisations.

35. Where a community is unsuccessful at a particulartender, the Commonwealth, State or Territorygovernment agency responsible for the letting of thecontract provide the community with a writtenexplanation of the reasons why it was unsuccessful.

36. (DELETED)

37. The issues associated with the divestment of community-owned Aboriginal land to individuals and corporations

xx i

for their exclusive use be further investigated.

A formula be devised to establish an appropriate ratelevy to the community - similar to the localgovernment rates that would otherwise be payable ~ forthe use of divested land.

38. In additon to normal funding to Aboriginal communitycouncils Commonwealth, State and Territory governmentdepartments and agencies make full payment for localgovernment services used for all facilities that theyoccupy in those areas.

39. Commonwealth, State and Territory governmentsrecognise the infrastructure and resource deficienciesin Aboriginal communities and allow them to carryover funding where necessary without prejudice totheir level of funding.

40. As part of this recognition, funding of Aboriginalcommunities and organisations be supplemented to allowfor the orderly replacement of capital assets.

41. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission,in conjunction with the Commonwealth Office of LocalGovernment, determine an appropriate mechanism forfunding infrastructure deficiencies in Aboriginalcommunities.

Accountabxlity


42. As a matter of urgency the Commonwealth developuniform accounting procedures for grants to Aboriginaland Torres Strait Islander communities andorganisations

43. All government agencies negotiate with fundedcommunities the development of appropriate performanceindicators for programs and put in place performancemonitoring and assessment mechanisms that havesignificant Aboriginal input.

44. Further research on the development and appropriateuse of performance indicators be undertaken by ATSIC.

45. Commonwealth and State and Territory Governmentsstrengthen the accounting and financial reportingcapacities of Aboriginal communities and organisationsby:

providing sufficient funding to communities andorganisations to enable them to perform thisfunction, which is required of them by fundingagencies;

assisting communities to develop simple butefficient accounting and financial reporting

xxii

systems; and

developing and implementing appropriate trainingprograms for Aboriginal bookkeepers and otherpersonnel working with Aboriginal organisations.

Community Advisers and Community-based Staff


46. Any job advertisements for community-based positionsmake it clear that the community is an Aboriginal orTorres Strait Islander community.

47. Eligibility requirements include the ability tocommunicate and operate effectively with Aboriginaland Torres Strait Islander people and sensitivity tothe issues confronting them.

48. Where accommodation is provided in a community to anofficer who performs a particular function, it be madeavailable to the occupant of the position irrespectiveof whether the person is from the community orelsewhere.

49. With the promulgation of an industrial award forAboriginal community workers and employees ofAboriginal organisations, the Commonwealth andNorthern Territory governments fully fund thecommunities and organisations so that they are able tomeet their obligations without a reduction inservices.

50. Guidelines applicable to the operations ofcommunity-based staff be developed.

51. These guidelines should include a clear statement thatthe primary responsibility of community-based staff isto the Aboriginal organisation which employs them.

52. Where no award exists, all community-based staff beemployed on the basis of written contracts whichoutline in detail job specifications and duties whichcould form the basis for monitoring the performance ofstaff.

52A. Where community-based staff are employed under anaward, a detailed job specification and duty statement,consistent with the award and agreed between the staffmember and employing community, would assist bothparties in performance monitoring.

53. Recruitment of appropriate staff be recognised asintegral to the successful development of a communityor organisation and that funds be made available toenable more rigorous and professional selection ofstaff.

XXlll

54. Commonwealth, State and Northern Territory governmentsfund the establishment of training courses for staffemployed by Aboriginal community councils andorganisations prior to their appointment to providethem with the necessary skills and knowledge to enablethem to effectively perform their role; and that

these courses be officially accredited and leadto a recognised qualification; and

existing community advisers and other staff beencouraged to undertake such courses once theyare established.

55. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission,in association with other appropriate bodies, developshort training packages suitable for communityadvisers and other staff that can be implemented on aregional basis.

56. Once training courses are established, coursequalifications should be considered as highlydesirable for community employment.

57. The basis for staffing Aboriginal communities andorganisations be identified along with training needsin the process of developing community ororganisational plans.

Resource Agencies


58. Resource agencies which have a primary objective ofdeveloping skills and assisting their client group toincrease self-determination and self-management, beprovided with funding subject to negotiatedperformance indicators being met.

59. Funding be provided to organisations at a sufficientlevel to enable them to purchase the necessaryexpertise, whether it be through an Aboriginal ornon-Aboriginal service.

60. Training for Aboriginal people in organisation andcommunity management be a priority for governmentagencies and be concurrent with all program funding,particularly the programs of resource agencies.

xxiv

61. The Commonwealth Department of Employment,- Educationand Training ensure that funding is made available toAboriginal resource agencies to provide them with thecapacity to deliver training programs to smallcommunities such as homeland centres and excisioncommunities which do not have ready access tocentralised training centres provided by State andTerritory Departments of Education and TAFE.

62. The role of resource agencies be identified in thecommunity planning process and adequately funded tobring policy and practice closer together.

xxv

Historical background - towards self-determination

1.1 Aboriginal society operated traditionally under aframework with a complex system of traditional laws involvingfamily relationships, rights and obligations. These were heavilybased on kinship and traditional relationships with the land, andon a tight social structure prescribing individual obligationsto other family members and the land. It included a strongauthoritarian hierarchy based on traditional knowledge. The moretangible manifestations of governance controlling secularaffairs, such as councils, did not exist. These traditionalsystems have been replaced by, or overlaid with, successive non-Aboriginal forms of governance.

1.2 From Federation until the 1960s the dominant policyframeworks adopted by governments throughout Australia inrelation to Aboriginal people were those of protection andassimilation in succession.* The impetus for protection grewout of a belief that Aboriginal people would die out. At timesit was fuelled by the desire to prevent the sustained violenceand brutality inflicted on Aboriginal people and to halt thedisease, depopulation and demoralisation that was affecting them.The provisions of protective legislation adopted during thisperiod were broadly similar in each State and were bothpaternalistic and coercive.

1.3 A chief protector was empowered to remove Aboriginalpeople from urban areas to Aboriginal reserves and to compel themto remain there. Association with Aboriginal people was strictlycontrolled by forbidding unauthorised persons to enter reserves.Marriages needed the approval of the protector, in some casesAboriginal property was placed in official hands and childrenwere forcibly removed from their parents. Protective legislationdefined who were Aboriginal persons and effectively transformedtheir status into a class of Australians without the rightsaccorded to the rest of the community. The policies ofprotection meant that Aboriginal people exercised little or nocontrol over the management of their affairs and lives and theywere held in a state of dependency.

1.4 From the late 1930s through the 1950s the policy ofprotection continued but was being supplanted gradually byassimilation. In September 1951 the Native Welfare Council,comprising Commonwealth and State ministers, met in Canberra and

1 Herein after reference to Aboriginals is meant to includeTorres Strait Islanders

2 Report of the the Aboriginal Women's Task Force, Women'sBusiness, Office of the Status of Women, pp. 101-102

issued the first official statement on the policy ofassimilation. The objectives of the policy were more clearlyspelt out later by the council in a statement saying that:

... in the view of all AustralianGovernments . . . all Aborigines and part-Aborigines are expected eventually to attainthe same manner of living as otherAustralians and to live as members of asingle Australian community, enjoying thesame rights and privileges, accepting thesame responsibilities, observing the samecustoms and influenced by the same beliefs,.hopes and loyalties as other Australians.

1.5 Protection and assimilation policies saw Aboriginalpeople relocated often away from their traditional lands in'central' settlements where it was considered they could beprotected and taught to take up life in the general Australiancommunity - either government or mission-controlled settlements,they were characterised by a lack of any Aboriginal involvementin decision making or management. In the view of one commentator:

... the structure of life is imposed from outside;social changes have been implemented, suddenly, fromoutside with no reference to the Aboriginals living inthe communities and often poorly understood by them... The staff are the directors and controllers; theAboriginals are the directed and controlled.

1.6 Significantly, these were artificial communities whichbore no relationship to traditional Aboriginal residential 'situations. Traditional patterns of interaction were upset andconfused and some settlements were characterised by dissensionand conflict. Differing clan and language groups whotraditionally would not have resided together (and may even havebeen enemies) were forced to interact and even intermarry withinmany settlements. In many communities these problems are stillbeing felt today. Differing groups also developed varying levelsof engagement with the non-Aboriginal managers of settlementswith some groups having close associations while others remainedvery much outsiders. Those groups that were closer to theauthority in settlements tended to be the major beneficiaries ofany employment or services available. This has left a legacy ofcommunities with a range of interest and traditional groups whoseneeds have to be reconciled within the governing structuresimposed from outside and with which the communities are expectedto run their own affairs.

1.7 While Aboriginal people had little involvement in therunning of settlements as non-Aboriginal institutions, some were

3ibid, p. 105.

J. Von Sturmer, 'The place of the community in theeducational process? two Aboriginal settlements inCape York, The Aboriginal child at school. Vol. 1(2),1973, pp. 6-7

able to retain a level of autonomy over their internal affairswithin the settlements. As Tonkinson notes about one communityin Western Australia: 'Within the broad constraints of thecontact situation, the Aborigines are largely free to run theirinternal affairs with a minimum of direct interference fromoutside agencies.' The distinct separation between the runningof the settlement as a European institution ('whitefellabusiness'} and the regulation of social and culturalrelationships of Aboriginal people in the settlement ('blackfellabusiness') was thus a feature of this particular settlement fromits inception.

Self-determination and self-management

1.8 The referendum of 1967 provided the Constitutionalbasis for Federal Government involvement in Aboriginal affairs.In this period the Federal Government was moving away fromassimilation towards a policy that would give Aboriginal peoplethe right to retain their own values and lifestyles and determinetheir own future within the Australian community. This changein direction was reflected in a statement by Prime MinisterMcMahon of a new Aboriginal policy for his Government that wouldencourage and assist Aboriginal people 'to preserve and developtheir own culture, languages and traditions and art'. Aboriginalpeople were also to have 'effective choice about the degree towhich, and the pace at which, they come to identify themselveswith [Australian] society' and be encouraged increasingly tomanage their own affairs - 'as individuals, as groups and ascommunities at the local level'.

1.9 This change in policy direction was taken further bythe Whitlam Government elected in late 1972 and becameincorporated in a policy of 'self-determination'. The approachof self-determination, as enunciated by the Labor Government,recognised the authenticity of Aboriginal culture as adistinctive part of Australian society. Self-determination wasconcerned with achieving greater equality and equality ofopportunity for Aboriginal people. It also envisaged Aboriginalpeople deciding the pace and nature of their future developmentwithin the broader framework of Australian society.7

1.10 The concepts of 'self-management' and 'self-sufficiency' were first enunciated during the period of theFraser Government, and, although the terms are often usedinterchangeably, the shift from self-determination to self-management and self-sufficiency represents an increasing emphasis

5 R. Tonkinson, The Jigalong Mob: Aboriginal Victors ofthe Desert Crusade, Cummings Publishing Company, 1974p. 62

6 Quoted in W Sanders, From self-determination toself-management; in P Loveday (ed), Service Deliveryto Remote Communities, NARU, Darwin, 1982, p. 5

ibid, p. 6 and L Lippmann, Generations of Resistance: forAboriginal Struggle for Justice, Longman Chesire,Melbourne, 1981, p. 73

on Aboriginal people being responsible as managers of their ownaffairs in addition to being involved in decision making anddetermining their own future.

Difference between self-determination and self-management

1.11 A consultant to the Committee noted in a seminarconducted to discuss issues relating to community management andcontrol that:

... there is a distinction ... in broad terms betweenself-determination, which I think has a self-governingcomponent to it, and self-management which is a muchmore administrative notion which I think fits aframework of local government.

1.12 The distinction between the terms is important with'self-management' focusing on efficient administration ofcommunities and organisations. 'Self-determination', on theother hand, goes beyond this and implies control over policy anddecision making, 'especially the determination of structures,processes and priorities'.9

1.13 The difference between the two concepts often providesa dilemma for government agencies. If an Aboriginal organisationencounters problems pressure is placed on government officialsto intervene in the self-management process and rectify matters.By doing this, however, Aboriginal people may end up sacrificingself-determination as control of their affairs is transferred outof their hands. This problem is discussed further in Chapter 8.

1.14 From a government perspective the term 'self-determination' is often used to indicate the involvement ofAboriginal people in decision making. On the other hand.Aboriginal people have used one or other of the terms as ayardstick in order to demonstrate where government policy fallsshort of such expectations. At times Aboriginal people andgovernments have talked past each other because they have usedterminology loosely.

1.15 This report is about both self-determination and self-management. It is about how Aboriginal people can have moreeffective control over decision making processes which affecttheir communities and be in a stronger position to determinepriorities. It is about governments and agencies negotiating withAboriginal people on the policies and programs affecting theirsocial and economic status rather than seeing a continuation ofwhat has hitherto been seen as consultation. It is also abouthow Aboriginal people can more effectively and efficiently manageand administer their organisations and communities.

Transcript of preoceedings of seminar in Brisbane,11-12 January 1990, p.4

Dr J. Bern, Community Management and self-determination,p. 3

Problems with existing policies

1.16 The Committee noted in its previous report that theimplementation to date of policies of self-determination andself-management has been somewhat disappointing and frustratingfor Aboriginal people.1 As the organisation principallyresponsible for these policies, the former Department ofAboriginal Affairs stated that self-determination had become areality in some areas with capable community leadership andcommunity councils providing effective decision making. Thedepartment also noted, however, that 'many Aboriginal communitieshave yet to make the transition to self-determination. Moredisturbing was the conclusion that, in some cases, communitiesare 'just as dependent upon outside agencies as they have beenin the past, despite the implementation of the policy of self-determination .

1.17 The department was not alone in pointing to the failureof self-determination and self-management policies in manycircumstances. Sullivan, for example, noted that thosecommunities in most need are also those least able to implementany form of effective self-management in non-Aboriginal terms:

Their needs are greatest because theirresidents are the least acculturated toEuropean systems and predominantly neitherliterate, numerate, nor proficient in spokenEnglish. On the other hand, those groupsable to function within the terms of thepolicy, through the use of advisers or thefew educated Aboriginal representatives,frequently present the administration withinconvenient decisions which aredisqualified on the grounds of not being'really Aboriginal'.

1.18 He also noted that Aboriginal people in communitieswith the greatest needs may even be unable to enforce recognitionof their needs, and also lack the instrumental ability to achievefulfilment.

1.19 Paradoxically some communities, such as those describedabove, lack the expertise and knowledge to be self-managing andmay find that they are worse off if required to administer theirown communities. The capacity of a community to make its owndecisions is different from its capacity to make those decisionswork. This again raises the importance of the distinction betweenself-determination and self-management referred to earlier. For

10 A Chance for the Future, p. 9.

11 Transcript of Evidence, p. S237.

12 Transcript of Evidence, pp. S253-S254.

13 P Sullivan. The Generation of Cultural Trauma: whatare Antrolpoligists for? Australian Aboriginal Studies1986 number 1, AIAS, p.14

example,self-management and which wishes to assume management of itscommunity, can find that it lacks the authority or power todetermine its own priorities, instead having these dictated byoutside agencies.

1.20 The reasons for the failure of policies of self-determination and self-management are complex, as the earlierdiscussion indicates. This can be attributed to two broadreasons:

1. A failure on the part of government agencies toimplement policies effectively by empoweringAboriginal communities and organisations tocontrol their futures; and

2. Difficulties within Aboriginal communities thatplace obstacles in the way of Aboriginal peopleachieving self-determination and self-management,

1.21 The failure of governments to implement policieseffectively was recognised by the Department of AboriginalAffairs in the following terms:

1. A number of agencies which provide services toAboriginal communities need to improve theirperformance to provide more effective andappropriate services in a more co-ordinatedfashion.

2. There is a need to develop appropriate andsensitive executive management infrastructures tofacilitate genuine self-determination,14

1.22 The problems created by the failure of governments toimplement policies effectively include:

inadequate consultation and the failure ofgovernment agencies to negotiate with Aboriginalpeople;

poor co-ordination and confusion in administrativearrangements between the plethora of governmentagencies involved in Aboriginal affairs;

restrictions on how bodies can spend funds;

the existence of structures for running Aboriginalaffairs which are inappropriate, having beenimposed by government agencies; and

the fact that most of the structures available toAboriginal people are based on a concept of'community' which fails to recognise some importantfeatures of Aboriginal society.

14

Transcript of Evidence, p. S253.

It is also apparent to the Committee that governments have failedto ensure that that staff are qualified and appropriately trainedso that they are sensitive to the needs and wishes of Aboriginalpeople. These problems are elaborated later in the chapter.

1.23 As for those difficulties found within the communitiesthemselves, the Department of Aboriginal Affairs noted that somecommunities are characterised:

. . . by a lack of motivation and involvement, on thepart of community members, in management processes ofall kinds. This general lack of involvement andreluctance to take on management roles minimises theeffectiveness of services that are provided, preventsthe development of functioning community councils andgenerally places almost insuperable obstacles in theway of the transition to self-determination.

1.24 The department attributes many of these problems todifferent values which are essential elements of Aboriginalculture and include 'regard for kinship obligations and decision-making processes and the relative unattractiveness of onerousboring administrative work in terms of Aboriginal priorities inmore traditional communities.' As well as cultural factors itmust also be acknowledged that a perception by Aboriginalcouncils and organisations that priorities are being decidedelsewhere may affect their motivation to get involved incommunity affairs.

1.25 Associated with these cultural factors, submissionshave also pointed to Aboriginal people's lack of skills - suchas English literacy, numeracy, etc - and their lack of knowledgeabout how the governmental system works, as major obstacles tothe achievement of self-determination or self-management.

1.26 The result has been a lack of instrumental capacity onthe part of Aboriginal people to manage their communities and toeffect outcomes that they desire. This situation has beenreinforced by the effects of long-term dependency, Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander communities having spent years under non-Aboriginal management with little input into their own affairs.

1.27 In the remainder of this report the Committee addressesthe obstacles to self-determination and self-management in termsof what is happening at the government level and at the communitylevel. Some brief discussion follows in the remainder of thischapter.

15

16



1.28 In its previous report, A Chance for the Future, theCommittee dealt with education and training for communitymanagement. The Committee found that many existing trainingprograms are ad hoc and have provided communities with few of theskilled people they require for the range of responsibilitiesthey either wish or are expected to assume.

1.29 The Committee strongly supported the need for acomprehensive approach to training in Aboriginal communities. Aspart of the implementation of such an approach, better co-ordination needs to be achieved between agencies involved inproviding training at the community level - where the effects ofpoor co-ordination have their most obvious impact.

1.30 The Committee acknowledged in its report that currentapproaches to training have made concessions to Aboriginalpeople's differing needs in some cases. Some educationalinstitutions have responded in sensitive ways to Aboriginal needsby establishing enclave programs to support Aboriginal studentsand by utilising on-site methods of delivery of programs.Nonetheless, the Committee urged the adoption of more community-based training which it considers to be the most effective long-term approach.

Consultation

1.31 The implementation of policies of self-determinationand self-management, whether by Commonwealth or State andTerritory governments, has often been hurried and undertakenwithout sufficient consultation. This, in itself, represents astrong contradiction: the imposition of programs, policies andstructures without adequate consultation is inconsistent with thenotion of Aboriginal communities being self-determining andhaving the ability to influence and control their affairs. At amore practical level the success of consultation relates directlyto the success of a particular program in a community and viceversa. This view was expressed by the South AustralianGovernment which noted that:

effective consultation is the key element in therealisation of policies (engendered by State andFederal Governments) of self-determination and self-management for Aboriginal communities. The effectivedelivery of services to communities is dependent onthe use of satisfactory consultative processes,enabling the articulation of needs to be properlyconveyed.1

1.32 The question of consultation and the need fornegotiation with Aboriginal people is discussed in Chapter 4.

Co-ordination


1.33 Similarly, inadequate co-ordination of programs forAboriginal communities is a major obstacle to both self-determination and self-management. There is a plethora ofgovernment agencies at the Commonwealth, State and Territorylevels, all providing services to Aboriginal communities. Non-government agencies also play a role. In part, the breakdown inco-ordination is due to jurisdictional difficulties and policyconflicts, such as the conflict between 'mainstreaming' andproviding services from agencies with a specialist brief forAboriginal people. Problems also occur because of poor inter- andintra-agency communications, the failure of bureaucraticmechanisms and a shortage of appropriately trained and committedfield officers. Whatever the reasons, it is inevitably Aboriginalcommunities that bear the brunt of inadequate co-ordination.

1.34 The Committee discusses the issue of co-ordination inChapter 6. It argues in this report that the process of co-ordination needs to be reversed so that government agencieslisten more to what communities want and act on these needsrather than the other way around where communities andorganisations are required to fit into existing programsirrespective of their own priorities. To this end, the Committeeadvocates that co-ordination at the community level take placewithin a process of developing long-term community plans whichembrace the socio-economic, cultural and physical objectives ofcommunities. The question of community planning is discussed inChapter 6 of this report. Such an approach is more consistentwith the policy of self-determination.

Funding

1.35 The Committee recognises that there are limits to theoverall level of funding for Aboriginal communities. There are,however, a number of funding issues of concern to Aboriginalpeople which the Committee addresses in this report. Theseinclude the need to maintain a consistent level of funding tocommunities and organisations, the effects of cut-backs, thecapacity to generate revenue, problems associated with dependenceupon multiple funding sources and the need to manage large sums.The Committee addresses these matters in Chapter 7 and proposessome methods of streamlining funding processes and enhancingAboriginal control over this money. The Committee'srecommendations are consistent with its arguments for improvedco-ordination of programs and policies.

1.36 The problem of inadequate resources is compounded bythe relative poverty of Aboriginal communities when compared withthe general Australian community. Levels of Aboriginalunemployment and dependency on social welfare payments areexceptionally high. Consequently, Aboriginal people generallyhave low incomes, few assets and little capital. This means thatthey are not in a position to make large investments in communityinfrastructure and services that could raise the quality ofinfrastructure and services. Nor can they fund the development

of enterprises that would generate private income. Thus thedependency on government funding must remain a feature ofAboriginal community management and development for theforeseeable future. Inevitably this will limit the degree ofself-determination and self-management Aboriginal communities areable to achieve.

Advisory services

1.37 In the move towards self-determination communityadvisers replaced superintendents and managers as the primarysource of non-Aboriginal expertise in Aboriginal communities. Atthe same time, few Aboriginal communities were provided with thecommunity facilities and infrastructure required to set them upas self-managing entities. At the time of handover of managementresponsibilities, community facilities were often run down,insufficient to meet needs and complex to operate and maintain.This made it difficult for fledgling community councils to manageefficiently these resources and created a dependency on non-Aboriginal expertise to enable them to operate facilities.

1.38 However, advisers have often lacked management,administrative and community development skills. In addition, thepoor conditions of service and inadequate career structure ofwhich most operate under have made it difficult to recruitapplicants and retain quality staff. Other non-Aboriginal staffemployed in communities to provide specialist skills andexpertise face similar problems. As a result, many Aboriginalcommunities have not had available to them the human resourcesthey need to make self-management work. The role and functionsof advisory and other expert staff available to Aboriginalcommunities is considered in Chapter 9.

Resource agencies

1.39 The Committee also addresses the role of the range ofresource agencies operating throughout Australia. In some areasthese bodies fulfil primarily an advisory role to communities.However, in many other parts of Australia resource agencies playan important part in providing services to communities. For manyAboriginal people living on cattle properties, excisions,outstations or in town camps, resource agencies are the mainbodies (or only body) responsible for the delivery of services.Resource agencies have proved to be a cost-efficient means ofdelivering services to Aboriginal people and they offer scope forincreasing Aboriginal control over available resources andservices. The role of resource agencies is discussed in Chapter10.

Potential conflicts with Aboriginal values

1.40 As previously mentioned, it is also necessary to lookwithin Aboriginal communities themselves for factors which maylimit the achievement of self-determination and self-managementin the way in which the policies have been implemented at thecommunity level. There tends to be a false assumption in thetheory of self-determination that if Aboriginal people takecharge of their own affairs, their social and economiccircumstances will improve. The point needs to be made that a

10

potential conflict exists between Aboriginal cultural andpolitical demands and the requirements of efficient adminis-tration and 'rational' decision making. That is to say, conflictpotentially exists between the objective of promoting Aboriginalcontrol over their own affairs, or self-determination, and thebureaucratic requirement placed on Aboriginal communities to beself-managing.

1.41 Aboriginal people have a wide range of kinshipconnections which impose varying degrees of obligation on them.These obligations can make it difficult for Aboriginal people,particularly those living in a traditional community, to operateas disinterested administrators or managers. As Dr Altman noted.Aboriginal office holders and employees are faced with a dilemmain these situations and can place greater importance on theiraccountability to kin in terms of meeting obligations to themthan on their accountability to external funding authorities interms of ensuring that public funds are equitably andappropriately spent.1 This can lead to further reliance onnon-Aboriginal staff who are not inhibited by the sameobligations.

1.42 The problem is deeper than simply the existence withincommunities of differing sectional interests. It concerns thetranslation of a non-Aboriginal concept of representativegovernment into Aboriginal society. Myers notes that inAboriginal society the individual's sense of obligation to othersis not accomplished through a commitment to a corporate aggregatesuch as a 'community' and its representative council, but ratherby a duty to specific people to whom one is related.

1.43 From the Aboriginal perspective then, communitycouncils can lack authority. Consequently it can be difficult tosee community councils as embodying or 'representing' theircommunities in the same way as representative governments in non-Aboriginal society are seen as representing 'the people'.Aboriginal councils often cannot speak for all community members,nor enforce decisions that they reach, as individual communitymembers retain the right to their own voice.

1.44 The essence of the problem relates to the structuresavailable for self-determination and self-management. Communitycouncils are usually non-Aboriginal bodies grafted ontoAboriginal communities for the purposes of self-determination andself-management with varying degrees of success. These matterswill be addressed in Chapter 3.

1.45 In order to gain a better understanding of thesecomplex issues the Committee decided to engage the services ofseveral consultants with expertise in this field. Their advicehas proved invaluable and is reflected in the Committee's

18Transcript of Evidence, p. S2218.

F R Myers, Illusion and Reality: Aboriginalself-determination in Central Australia; in Schireand Gordon (eds), The Future or Former Foragers inAustralia and South Afric, Cambridge, 1985, p. 110

11

findings.

The meaning of self-determination and self-management

1.46 What then should be the response to these problems? Isit time to abandon the whole approach of self-determination andself-management which, in its essence, is concerned withempowering Aboriginal people to manage their communities withinthe context of contemporary Australian society? The answer tothis question must be no, for a number of reasons: despite theproblems it is evident that a great deal has been achieved overthe past 20 years; and, more importantly, self-determinationremains the approach most favoured by Aboriginal peoplethemselves. What is needed is a sorting out of what policies ofself-determination and self-management should involve forAboriginal people, and, of the important distinction between bothterms and a clear direction on how the policies can beimplemented effectively to reflect the wishes of Aboriginalpeople.

1.47 In its previous report, A Chance for the Future, theCommittee considered the essence of self-determination to be thedevolution of political and economic power to Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander communities. The Committee defined self-determination in terms of Aboriginal control over the decisionmaking process as well as control over the ultimate decisionsabout a wide range of matters including political status, andeconomic, social and cultural development. It meansAboriginal people having the resources and capacity to controlthe future of their own communities within the legal structurecommon to all Australians.

1.48 On the other hand, self-management is concerned withthe efficient management and administration of Aboriginalcommunities and organisations. It is about effectivelyimplementing those decisions and priorities that have alreadybeen determined by Aboriginal people. Consequently, non-Aboriginal people who can understand and work within Aboriginalcultural and social aspirations will have a role in assistingsome Aboriginal communities and organisations with theiradministrative responsibilities.

1.49 Policies of self-determination and self-managementshould enable Aboriginal communities to:

define their social, economic and cultural goals;

facilitate the provision of the range of serviceswhich community members want;

control and manage community infrastructure andfacilities;

20 A Chance for the Future, p. 3.

12

increase their self-sufficiency both economicallyand in terms of having less reliance on outsidepersonnel;

liaise and negotiate with government and otheragencies which provide services to them.

1.50 The implementation of the policies also should requireoutside agencies, both government and non-government, to:

liaise and negotiate with Aboriginal communitiesand organisations prior to taking decisions onpolicy or service delivery.

1.51 • If self-determination and self-management are to work.Aboriginal people need to gain the instrumental capacity to beable to determine their own needs and to manage their ownaffairs. The Committee examines in detail a number of areas wherechanges are necessary to bring about this objective. Thisrequires a commitment from government at all levels to supportthe training initiatives recommended in the Committee's previousreport, but also to alter its approach to dealing with Aboriginalcommunities and organisations. This shift needs to encompass amove away from 'consultation' as it is practised currentlytowards 'negotiation' with Aboriginal people.

1.52 For self-determination to work it is important that thepolicies and programs operating in each community relate to thespecific needs and aspirations of that community. The Committeeplaces great emphasis in this report on ensuring that this is so.

1.53 In its previous report, the Committee has emphasisedthat universal solutions or programs will not work because of thediversity of Aboriginal communities. This report deals with arange of discrete communities throughout Australia. TheCommittee's report is also relevant to Aboriginal people livingon pastoral properties, outstations, excision communities or intown camps. Each of these communities has different concerns andexpectations, different skill, resource and infrastructure bases.

1.54 The Committee reiterates in this report that Aboriginalconcepts of community development are part of effective self-determination and self-management at the local level. Theseconcepts of community development do not insist that Aboriginalpeople change their values and culture in order to enhancecommunity life; rather, community development from an Aboriginalperspective is part of a process by which communities can maketheir own decisions about their long-term social, economic,physical and cultural objectives and be in a position to giveeffect to those objectives. Community development is thusintimately connected with both self-determination and self-management .

13

In troductxon

2.1 The incorporation of Aboriginal organisations andcommunities either as local or community governments or asassociations does not automatically lead to an improvement inAboriginal autonomy, better management of communities orenhancement of the quality of life for Aboriginal people.Incorporation is usually seen as a means of tapping intogovernment funding sources and often little consideration isgiven to the implications of such a move. In her study of theEast Kimberley, Bolger is critical of the failure to consider theimplications of incorporation in terms of the responsibilitiesplaced on a community or its impact on self-determination. Shenotes that:

... while it is usually stated that the community maynot understand what incorporation means or theresponsibilities incurred, this is regarded asacceptable so long as the community's affairs are inthe hands of either a resource agency or a communityadviser. There seems to be no attempt to discuss thiswith the community. Any ideas that forming acorporate body might have important implications fora community in terms of self-determination have longsince been lost.

2.2 In reality there are a number of complex issues thatimpact on the effectiveness of community control and managementand, ultimately, on the strength of self-determination and self-management in Aboriginal communities. These problems, which areaddressed in this chapter, are:

the problem associated with the concept of'community' as it has been applied in Aboriginalaffairs and as it relates to structures withinAboriginal communities;

the associated problems created by the presenceof differing factions and groups in communities;

the conflict between Aboriginal culturalobligations and the political/administrativerequirements of community management;

non-Aboriginal structures are often seen as beingunrepresentative and lacking in authority byAboriginal people; and


15

Aboriginal organisations lack authority in thenon-Aboriginal power structure.

2.3 The above problems manifest themselves in a number ofways such as: a lack of participation or interest in communityself-management; the existence of a number of incorporated bodiesin some communities; heavy responsibilities being placed oncouncils; the uncertainty of Aboriginal councils and councillorsabout the precise nature of their role and responsibilities; anddependence on outsiders or community advisers. They are nothelped by the paucity of infrastructure and the absence of theskills required for community control and management.

The problem of the concept of 'community'

2.4 Under the self-determination and self-managementapproaches, funding has been directed primarily towardscommunity-based organisations. In this context the 'community'has tended to be defined basically in terms of a geographicallybound group of people and so organisations exist and receivefunding to represent and deliver services to such a group. Thereis a tacit assumption in this method of support to Aboriginalpeople that the geographically defined 'community' is also a'community' in the sense of being a group of people who sharecommon values and beliefs and have a shared set of interests.This will have a bearing on the appropriateness of communitystructures and the form of their involvement in local orcommunity government. Further, there is an implication that thefunded 'community' or 'delivery' organisations will deliverservices equitably to community residents, act in the interestsof all residents and provide a catalyst for the development ofa number of different groups as a 'community'.

2.5 There are, however, problems with this concept ofcommunity when it is applied to Aboriginal affairs and used asthe basis for funding Aboriginal community control, managementand development. As previously mentioned, many of the formersettlementsf reserves and missions were artificial communities,having been created for the purposes of non-Aboriginaladministrative convenience rather than as distinctivelyAboriginal communities in accord with traditional Aboriginalsocial organisation and shared beliefs and interests. Themixing of groups within these communities often meant discord anda lack of consensus about objectives and directions among thediffering groups as a 'community' . It is easy to understand howthe existence of a number of distinct family or religious groupsmay generate conflict within Aboriginal communities.

2.6 In the light of this it can be difficult for councilsand other organisations to represent all interests in thecommunities and in some they represent the interests of only oneor two clan or family groupings. Even if the interests ofvarious sections within a large community are deliberatelyaccommodated within the community council, it may be difficultthen for the council to operate effectively as a unit because the

Transcript of Evidence, pp. S2214, S2217.

16

competing claims made on it make decision making by consensusalmost impossible.

2.7 However, implicit in the policies of self-determinationand self-management is the notion that the community-basedorganisations receiving funding are representative of the broadercommunity so that they can be used as a vehicle for the deliveryof services, as decision-making bodies and as bodies to consultabout general community needs. Yet if they only genuinelyrepresent the views of one particular section of the communityany claim that they speak and operate on behalf of the wholecommunity is undermined.

2.8 Coherent Aboriginal groups are relatively small, andfamily and individual mobility is marked through the exercisingof multiple residential rights as members come and go from acentral township. The 'community' in a geographic sense is ashifting one. As Dr Altman notes:

In central Australia, for example, people may movebetween a cluster of communities and locations thatincludes Mutitjulu. Docker River, Imanpa, Ernabella,Indulkana, Alice Springs, Areyonga and Papunya.Similar patterns are evident at Warmun and Maningridawith residential shifts being between townships andoutstations, between Aboriginal townships or betweenAboriginal townships and predominantly white-populatedurban centres. Mobility frequently follows a patternthat may be influenced by seasonality or ceremonialcommitments.

2.9 A recent report has also pointed to the concept of'community' for Aboriginal people as being defined in social,cultural and historical terms as well as by residence at aparticular locale:

A particular concept of community is required torepresent the Aboriginal reality. The physical andmaterial aspects of 'community' centre on locale andthe kinds of links individual residents have with eachother. Historical events in the East Kimberley haveled to the creation of a kind of permanence in theform of structures (houses, office buildings, stores,schools, power plants, garages and the like), but thisprovided only one significant aspect of Aboriginalcommunities. Equally important are the multiple-stranded social ties linking individuals, founded inland and shared associations with land and entailingshared obligations and mutual support. The term'community' is used to represent a variableaggregation of people linked by locale and socialties.

23

Transcript of Evidence,p. S2216.24

H C Coombs, et al, Land of Promises: Aborigines andDevelopment in the East Kimberleys, CRES and AIAS,Canberra, 1989, pp. 33-34

17

2.10 The movement of small groups of closely relatedAboriginal people to homeland centres on traditional lands hastended to give greater coherence to many Aboriginal'communities'. Homeland centres themselves can be seen ascomprising a community of association and family connection. Themajor communities from which homeland dwellers have moved alsobecome more coherent as 'communities' because of the reductionof the number of different family groups they contain. Theextent to which these changes will strengthen the authority ofcommunity-based councils and organisations is yet to be seen.

Factionalism

2.11 Related to the issue of funding of Aboriginal peopleand organisations as 'communities' is the concern expressed ina number of submissions about the proliferation of community-based organisations or incorporated bodies. It is claimed thatthis proliferation of organisations ignores existingaffiliations, promotes a splintering of the Aboriginal effort atthe community level by encouraging factionalism, and creates thepotential for duplication between the respective organisations.The community council at Nguiu (Northern Territory) , for example,expressed its concern at being unable to co-ordinate communitydevelopment and management because of the large number ofincorporated bodies in the community. It was claimed that oneof the dangers of having an abundance of organisations is thatauthority in the community may become splintered to the pointwhere an astute community adviser can play one^^ faction offagainst another to the adviser's advantage. Anothercommentator on communities in the Northern Territory has pointedto the use which individual families and clan groups make ofparticular community organisations in order to obtain access tofunding and resources.

2.12 While it is true that a range of organisations in asingle community can divide the efforts of the community andpossibly lead to over-administration or duplication, the reasonswhy a number of organisations can exist in a particular communityneed to be appreciated. First, and overriding the other reasons,is the related issue of funding of structures and organisationsas 'communities' or as 'community representative' bodies and themismatch this creates with the actual situation at the communitylevel which really comprises a range of groups.

2.13 Second, there is the question of politics, both aspractised by governments in relation to Aboriginal communitiesand also at the community level. Governments, pursuing their ownagendas, are sponsors of groups within Aboriginal communitieswhich reflect their policies and approaches. The situation can

25 Precis of Visit to Nguiu, 15 May 1989.

26 D Turner, Transformation and Tradition, May 1986,p.108

27 R Gerritsen, Outstations: Differing Interpretations andPolicy Implications; in Loveday, Service Delivery toOutstations; NARU, 1982, p. 61

18

arise where different levels of government are funding divergentgroups in communities to perform similar sorts of roles. Theconflict created by such situations can be disruptive at thecommunity level. However, the existence of a number of differingfamily and clan groupings within some communities and the rivalryand competition between them can lead to the formation ofdifferent organisations which seek their own sources of funding.

2.14 Third, where structures and organisations which existin communities are not of the communities' choosing but haveresulted from the implementation by governments of their policiesand programs, Aboriginal people may or may not feel associatedwith these structures. Where there is dissatisfaction withimposed structures Aboriginal people have often established theirown organisations which they can better control and which respondbetter to Aboriginal priorities. In the context of a policy ofself-determination it seems contradictory to criticise theestablishment by Aboriginal people of organisations that theyconsider better meet their needs and give them more adequaterepresentation.

2.15 Fourth, the approaches of governments to the definingand funding of programs has actively encouraged a proliferationof organisations. One senior officer of the former Departmentof Aboriginal Affairs referred to the variety of 'buckets ofmoney' which exist to fund even a single program or organisationwithin communities.28 These 'buckets of money' reflect themultiplicity of policies and programs being supported bygovernments in Aboriginal affairs. Given the variety of programswhich exist and the numerous sources of funding, it is hardlysurprising that one effect at the community level is aproliferation of organisations to make use of every availablesource of funding.

2.16 The existence of a range of organisations in Aboriginalcommunities potentially can be inefficient by allowing for over-administration or duplication of effort. It can also encouragedisharmony and conflict, reducing the ability of a community toenhance life for its residents. However, given the disparatenature of some Aboriginal communities, the existence of a rangeof organisations representing different groupings may be areasonable way of ensuring that all sections of the communityhave access to resources. Where Aboriginal people have respondedto imposed structures and organisations by setting up their ownorganisations, this may also be seen as a positive developmentin terms of Aboriginal self-determination.

Potential conflicts with Aboriginal values

2.17 The problem, however, is more complicated than just thepresence of different groupings in communities. It concerns thedifficulties caused by translating non-Aboriginal models ofrepresentative government into Aboriginal society. As theQueensland office of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs noted:

Transcript of Evidence, p. 1108.

19

The notion of delegated authority has not beensuccessfully grafted onto Aboriginal tradition, norhas it found a viable form of expression for thepolitical needs of different family or tribal groupsin co-residence. Consequently the passage of tangibleresponsibility to Councils in recent years has exposedfundamental flaws in the system which can only beworked through by the communities themselves.

2.18 It has already been noted that in Aboriginal societythe individual's sense of obligation to an established orincorporated community can be outweighed by the duty to specificpeople to whom one is related. Consequently it is difficult toconceive of community councils as 'representing' theircommunities in the same way as representative governments in non-Aboriginal society are seen as representing their communities.

2.19 The imposition of council management structures onAboriginal communities has, by and large, ignored the existenceof traditional decision making processes. Aboriginal peoplerarely accept election as conferring legitimacy for the exerciseof authority. Indeed, many Aboriginal leaders do not accept theprimacy of the electoral process over traditional structures andrefuse to stand for election. Authority is derived from one'sposition in the traditional hierarchy and based more ontraditional knowledge and age.

2.20 Many of the people seeking election to the communitycouncil may be younger people who have acquired skills throughwestern education, yet they may not be held in sufficiently highesteem by the rest of the community or they may be locked out ofthe decision making structures which are dominated by olderpeople. The electoral process therefore clashes with theAboriginal basis of authority. This can manifest itself as alack of confidence or interest in the community council andcommunity management.

2.21 This problem was recognised in a number of submissions.The Western Australian Government noted that the formal bindingvote of a council is contrary to the less binding traditionalreliance on 'consensus and family independence'. It suggestedthat representation based on family units may be moreappropriate.30 In multi-group communities conflict arises wherethe electoral process does not acknowledge the primacy ofauthority of those on whose land the community resides. This isa significant issue as Aboriginal people do not recognise theright of others to speak for resources which do not belong tothem. In his evidence Dr Jon Altman noted that in some cases theelected representatives are not the real leaders andrepresentatives of the people and, as such, possessed noauthority.31 In other words, the elected councils could decideanything they wanted but had no real status in the community nor

29

31




20

any right conferred on them by the community to speak on itsbehalf despite having been elected.

2.22 Sullivan notes that community councils work best insmall, homogeneous communities where the council is in effect alladult members of the community and in larger communities whichare also relatively homogeneous in terms of ritualresponsibilities, language and lifelong association. In suchcases the community council and its processes of representationand decision making approach traditional authority structures andmethods of reaching decisions more closely. Whilst thesestructures and methods of decision making may not be seen as'democratic' in the non-Aboriginal context of representativegovernment, they nevertheless work in terms of these communities.The conclusion to be drawn from this is that we should look tomechanisms or structures which are compatible with, or workwithin, existing Aboriginal structures, and which enable areasonable degree of input by all community members and ensurea reasonably equitable distribution of resources.

2.23 The Department of Aboriginal Affairs argued that theprocess of Aboriginal communities becoming self-determining canentail a clash of cultures to the extent that there is a need foran accommodation to occur:

'Progress' and 'advancement' within the broaderAustralian society may require Aborigines taking on,to some extent, non-Aboriginal values and notions ofeconomic and administrative rationality. The pursuitof a traditional lifestyle and the achievement of thisadvancement are not necessarily always compatibleobjectives. Reconciling the need for communitydevelopment with the desire to preserve traditionalcultural patterns is bv no means an easy task forAboriginal communities.

2.24 Ultimately it is for Aboriginal communities themselvesto determine the pace of change and to make accommodations inways they feel are acceptable. This process is alreadyoccurring. In many communities the process of communitymanagement occurs through a careful balancing of Aboriginalrequirements with 'whitefella business' so that council maydecide and deliberate on certain matters but those people withwhom traditional power resides have final say on Aboriginalinterests. In some cases people with traditional authority maybe automatically put on the council. Community meetings may beheld to allow broader participation in decision making.

2.25 The conflict between Aboriginal cultural requirementsand non-Aboriginal political or administrative structures goesbeyond the friction between traditional members or those in

Sullivan, Aboriginal Community RepresentativeOrganisations; Intermediate Cultural Processes inthe Kimberley Region, Western Australia, CRES,1987, p.7


21

authority and those who exercise decision making power on thecouncil. It can also manifest itself in terms of a lack ofmotivation or participation in community management itself. Ifthe structures are considered to be inappropriate or lacking inthe power to determine priorities for Aboriginal people in thatsituation, particularly given the long history of dependence forall matters relating to community management, the reluctance toparticipate in community management is understandable. Thisgeneral lack of involvement and reluctance to take on managementroles minimises the effectiveness of the services that areprovided and, in the view of the Department of AboriginalAffairs, 'prevents the development of functioning communitycouncils and generally places almost insuperable obstacles in theway of the transition to self-determination'.

2.26 The perception exists that councils don't do the sortsof things that Aboriginal people want to do and, consequently,employment in most jobs in the community council is not highlysought after. One community council told the Committee thatpeople were keen to work, but it was difficult to encourage themto take up positions in the council office. Most young men wereoutside-oriented and preferred to work as tractor drivers orcarpenters, etc rather than be inside all day.

Role of council members and community councils

2.27 Aboriginal community councils throughout Australia areexpected to handle a large number of services and perform a rangeof duties they have never before been expected to carry out.Indeed, it can be argued that Aboriginal councils are expectedto grapple with more responsibilities than many mainstream localgovernments without the expertise or resources.

2.28 Aboriginal community councils may be expected toprovide essential services such as electricity, sewerage andwater; manage Community Development Employment Program (CDEP)programs; provide health care, recreation, social welfare andsocial security advice; undertake policy development forcommunity enterprise development; be heavily involved in theschool, provide housing, grade roads; maintain an airstrip;liaise with a myriad of government departments; provide servicesto homelands; become involved in rehabilitation; be responsiblefor financial planning; and management of the council budget; andremain accountable for funds to a range of different fundingsources.

2.29 Council members may be either overburdened or lack anunderstanding of their role and responsibilities. These problemscan generate an ineffective council and may even lead to thesituation where the council loses control and is able to bedominated or manipulated by non-Aboriginal staff. In generalAboriginal community councils are expected to take upresponsibilities for far more matters than the average mainstreamlocal government council.

34 Transcript of Evidence, p. S253

22

2.30 In most cases, community councils suddenly foundthemselves expected to deal with matters they had not previouslyhandled. In its previous report, A Chance for the Future, theCommittee indicated that the devolution of functions tocommunities has outpaced the level of training required forcommunities to adequately perform those functions. WoorabindaCouncil advised the Committee that since it was elected in 1985it has taken on much greater responsibilities than any previouscouncil. It deals, as a matter of course, with a much largernumber of government departments and agencies, suppliers of goodsand services and has a greater involvement in social welfarematters. There has been a marked increase in council's totalincome and expenditure and the planning and co-ordination of itsprograms is therefore more complex.

2.31 Councillors often have so many responsibilities thatthey are unable to focus fully on community management. Theseresponsibilities can include maintenance, community development,oversight of health facilities, liaison with the school, andoversight of a budget. The council office is also the point ofcontact for nearly all non-Aboriginal visitors to a communitysuch as contractors, researchers, government employees, etc,which adds considerably to the council's workload.

2.32 Dr Elspeth Young noted that Aboriginal administrativestaff, whether employed full time by council as town clerks oradvisers or elected as councillors, have to meet responsibilitiesbeyond those normally covered in a council job. These includegeneral liaison with other community members, their need tofulfil their roles in the local social structure and their rolesas leaders. Dr Young argued that this frequently deflects themfrom purely administrative or clerical tasks to the detriment ofconventional office efficiency.37

2.33 Individual council members are also uncertain abouttheir roles. In a number of instances the Committee was toldthat people were unsure of their responsibilities within thelegislation under which their council was incorporated. Onecouncil clerk in Queensland mentioned that no clear guidelinesor instructions had been provided to council, which comes underpressure to become involved in an enormous number of issuesaffecting the community. Essentially the council believed it wasfinding out 'the hard way' what they can and cannot do. Oneproblem facing some councils is the frequency of elections. If,as in the case in some communities, councillors are elected eachyear there is no guarantee of continuity or expertise, nor arecouncil members given sufficient time to come to grips with theirresponsibilities. Under these circumstances it is not surprisingthat councils face problems and that incorporation breachesoccur.

A Chance for the Future, pp. 6-7.

Precis of Visit to Woorabinda, April 1988.


23

2.34 Aboriginal communities are also facing outsidepressures from developers and others who are interested inutilising Aboriginal land for purposes such as development,mining or tourism. In such cases Aboriginal councils andorganisations can be pressured to make decisions quickly aboutmatters that will have an enormous impact on their lives. Accessto good advice and resources and negotiating power and skillswill be crucial in such situations to enable Aboriginal peopleto have some control over developments in their areas.

Inadequate skills

2.35 A further problem is that the human and resource skillsprovided to Aboriginal communities to enable them to effectivelymanage themselves have been inadequate. Aboriginal self-management can and does break down through the failed performanceof Aboriginal organisations responsible for the conduct of acommunity's affairs. These breakdowns are manifested in numerousways and include breaches of incorporation requirements.Examples of this include the failure to hold meetings, holdingimproperly constituted meetings, and AGMs, the manipulation oforganisations and community membership, etc. The formerDepartment of Aboriginal Affairs told the Committee that whenthis occurs it is often petitioned to intervene, usually by thosewho perceive themselves to be aggrieved or disadvantaged. Thisplaces the department in a dilemma as it has no statutory powerto intervene directly.38 Moreover, any direct interventionwould contradict the policy of self-determination and self-management which in theory should allow for communities to beresponsible for the decisions they make.

2.36 Aboriginal communities are unable to draw onsignificant skills from within for their community management.The broad profile of a community tends to be one with a highdependency ratio with a large proportion of the population under18 years of age coupled with a substantial number of non-literate, untrained or transient adults. This means that it isdifficult to guarantee fully operating viable communitymanagement structures, particularly in the smaller communities.

2.37 Apart from inadequate human resources, few Aboriginalcommunities have been provided with the community facilities andinfrastructure required to set them up as self-managing entities.At the time of the change to the approaches of self-determinationand self-management, community facilities were often run down,inadequate and complex to operate and maintain. This made itdifficult for community councils to efficiently control andmanage these resources and created a dependency on non-Aboriginalexpertise to operate their facilities. While governments haveinvested considerable funding in infrastructure in Aboriginalcommunities, many still lack the range and quality of facilitiesavailable in country towns with similar populations. TheCommittee discusses this issue in Chapter 6 under communityplanning.

Authority


24

2.38 Aboriginal community-based councils and organisationshave also failed to function effectively because they have notreceived sufficient recognition by governments as the authoritystructures in communities. Whilst many of the councils have beengiven responsibilities similar to those of local governmentauthorities elsewhere in Australia, they lack the authority andstatus of mainstream local governments. Governments are notimmune to by-passing these organisations and making decisions inisolation from them.

2.39 At least partly, the reason why these organisations donot receive the necessary recognition for them to assertauthority is that they are often not part of the establishedstructure of power in Australian society. Attempts toincorporate Aboriginal communities either as, or on the sameterms as, local government authorities will give communities aplace in the established structure of government. This shouldgo some way towards overcoming the lack of recognition of theirauthority. However, such moves must not become an unwantedimposition of structures on Aboriginal communities. Any movestowards establishment of Aboriginal communities as localgovernments or their equivalent will require negotiation with thecommunities concerned and should reflect the principles outlinedin the next chapter for structures and organisations inAboriginal communities.

Conclusion

2.40 Given the difficulties outlined above, what optionshould Aboriginal communities take? It is ironic that Aboriginalcommunities are being asked to accept non-Aboriginal structuresin order to have greater control over their own affairs.Inevitably compromises are made between Aboriginal culturalvalues and the political and administrative requirements ofservice delivery and community management. For any approach toself-determination and self-management to be effective it isimportant that the issues discussed in this chapter be addressedand that the structures available to Aboriginal communities besufficiently flexible to accommodate their needs. The nextchapter looks at the structures available to Aboriginal peoplethroughout Australia.

25

Introduction

3.1 At present Aboriginal people are presented with a rangeof structures for incorporation that vary between the States andthe Northern Territory. These range from a form of localgovernment in Queensland and the Northern Territory, the only twoplaces where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island communities arereceiving local government grants commission funding, toincorporation under the various associations Acts elsewhere. Inaddition, the Commonwealth has its own Act under which Aboriginalcouncils may incorporate. Of the other States, South Australiais considering an appropriate form of Aboriginal localgovernment; New South Wales has its system of local and regionalAboriginal land councils that provide support to individualcommunities; and Western Australian, Aboriginal communities arelocated within mainstream local government shires and lack strongstructures for community self-management, although the StateGovernment is presently considering the arrangements for servicedelivery to Aboriginal communities.

3.2 For Aboriginal communities or organisations to receivegovernment funding, acquire property, enter into agreements orcarry on business, it is necessary for them to form into a legalentity through some form of incorporation. The Commonwealth'sapproach of direct funding of organisations has seen theincorporation of a wide range of community-based organisations.In discrete Aboriginal communities, community councils have beenestablished with responsibilities for services and facilitiesnormally provided by local governments, although Aboriginalcouncils generally perform a much wider role than theirmainstream equivalents. In addition, there are otherorganisations which are part of the current system of localgovernance in Aboriginal communities. These include housingassociations and social clubs, which may have a clearly definedrole but also interact with the council; homelands resourcecentres, which may either be a subsidiary of the communitycouncil or an incorporated body in its own right; land trustsand, in some cases, local land councils; resource agencies;community enterprises, etc. These structures are discussedthroughout the report.

3.3 The overall picture of administration in Aboriginalcommunities was described in the discussion paper 'AboriginalParticipation and Equity in Local Government' as follows:

The total picture of Aboriginal local governance isone of a complex multi-layered and multi-facetedorganisational structure with no unifying framework.

27

The non-traditional aspects are perhaps linked by thegeneral goals of delivering services to Aboriginalcommunities and translating the ideology of self-management and self-determination into some kind ofreality, but there is no overall coherence.39

3.4 This lack of overall coherence reflects the history offormation of community councils and organisations. In some casesstructures have been set up by governments specifically to giveeffect to policies of self-determination and self-management.In other cases organisations have emerged from within Aboriginalcommunities to meet priorities identified by Aboriginal peopleor to cater to needs and aspirations which were not being met bystructures set up by governments.

3.5 The structures available for incorporation often havelittle to do with self-determination but are concerned primarilywith self-management. The distinction between these two policies,which was discussed in earlier chapters,, means that thestructures which are offered by governments to Aboriginal peoplefor self-management are often unable to accommodate the notionof self-determination and fall short of Aboriginal aspirations.

3.6 Throughout this inquiry, the Committee has visited allthe above States and the Northern Territory and has met with manydifferent communities. The Committee also engaged consultants inorder to gain a more detailed understanding of the structures atwork in Queensland and the Northern Territory. This chapteroutlines the structures available for community managementthroughout Australia. The Committee discusses the situation inQueensland and the Northern Territory in some detail based on itsown consultations with communities and the work of theCommittee's consultants.

An Overview of Structures for Incorporation

The Northern Territory

3.7 In the Northern Territory several legislativeframeworks are available for the incorporation of Aboriginalorganisations:

the Northern Territory Local Government Act 1985(Part VIII) which enables Aboriginal communitycouncils to adopt local or 'community' governmentstatus;

the Northern Territory Associations IncorporationAct under which a range of organisationsincluding community councils are incorporated;and

the Commonwealth Aboriginal Councils andAssociations Act.

3.8 Councils which perform local government functions maybe incorporated under any of the above legislative arrangements

39


28

and are eligible to receive financial assistance from theNorthern Territory Local Government Grants Commission. To datesome 15 communities are participating in community governmentschemes, seven are at the draft community government scheme stageand a further six are engaged in consultation. Overall thereare some 42 Aboriginal community councils, incorporated as eithercommunity governments or under the Northern Territoryassociations legislation, receiving grants commission funding.No Aboriginal community has yet been incorporated under theCommonwealth's Aboriginal Councils and Associations Act althoughthere are 141 bodies in the Northern Territory incorporated underthis legislation.41

3.9 The Northern Territory Government argues that itscommunity government model is best suited to Aboriginalcommunities' needs because it offers flexibility by enablingindividual schemes to be devised to meet a particular community'srequirements. A scheme may be tailored in a number of areas tosuit a community's wishes, such as the boundaries of thecommunity government area; the composition of the communitygovernment council; voting procedures and eligibility; proceduresfor council meetings; the eligibility of persons to be members;the procedure for calling and conducting elections; and thefunctions to be performed by the community government council,including the operation of enterprises and/or the ability toundertake works contracts.

3.10 Thus, for example, the boundaries of the communitygovernment may be defined to include certain sacred sites andclan groupings. Outstations linked to the community may bebrought within the community government areas (though this maybe contentious). Restrictions can be placed on the eligibilityto vote or hold office as a means of ensuring that the structureof the council reflects the social structure of the community.A problem arises, however, as to who determines the socialstructure and on what basis these decisions are made.

3.11 The Northern Territory Government stated that there isno time constraint upon communities to achieve communitygovernment.42 Whilst this may be the case the question doesarise about the pressure being placed on organisationsincorporated under other arrangements to adopt communitygovernment status. Existing organisations need to be given ampleopportunity to come to grips with the implications of alteringtheir status and incorporating as a community government. In herevidence, Dr Elspeth Young described the process in one communitywhich had doubts about the wisdom and benefits of the structureoffered by community government.4 She noted that the issuecame to a head once pressure emerged to take on communitygovernment. In this particular case the community decided againstany change for the time being until it had determined the most


41 Transcript of Evidence, pp. S1306, S2367, S2413.


43 Transcript of Evidence, pp. 848-849.

29

jropriate structures for the range of bodies and enterprises.As Dr Young noted, this was a more sensible way of handling thematter than to have adopted community government and then to havesorted out structures afterwards, an approach which had causedproblems elsewhere.

3.12 Some community councils expressed their concern at thepotential to see control of their affairs transferred away fromthe council and towards the Northern Territory Government by wayof the Local Government Act if they adopted communitygovernment. In many ways the autonomy of community governmentcan be limited and Aboriginal people may feel they have greatercontrol if their organisations are incorporated as associationsrather than as local governments. Local and community governmentsexercise only delegated powers which can be altered, restrictedor withdrawn by the senior government. One concern expressed bysome Aboriginal people was the scope for the Northern TerritoryMinister to sack the council and the council clerk and appointan administrator.

3.13 In its submission, the Northern Territory Governmentnoted that the more recent community government schemes have beenmore innovative than the earlier schemes. This would seem toimply that the earlier schemes were more restrictive and raisesthe question of the extent to which the schemes referred togenuinely respond to Aboriginal aspirations in practice. By wayof example the Committee visited one town with Aboriginal andnon-Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory where a communitygovernment scheme was operating. The Aboriginal people,represented by another organisation, were quite emphatic in theirbelief that community government was failing to meet theirinterests.

3.14 If Aboriginal people are to make an informed decisionabout the appropriateness and shape of structures for self-management they need to be provided with sufficient flexibilityor real alternatives in drafting schemes that are appropriate totheir circumstances. Ultimately communities may see greaterflexibility in remaining incorporated as associations rather thanchanging the status of their organisations to that of a communitygovernment.

3.15 Concerns have also been expressed by some Aboriginalpeople that the Northern Territory Government is devotinginsufficient resources to consulting with communities on the

44 ... ,

xbxd,

45 Visit to the Northern Territory, 15-17 May 1989.

46 ibid.

Transcript of Evidence, p. 1307.48 Visit to the Northern Territory, Precis of Discussions,

29-31 Janaury 1990

30

complex issues involved. Community government schemes can beapproved after two public meetings, a public exhibition periodand when the Minister is satisfied that a substantial majorityof the community is in favour of its establishment. As the landcouncils point out, effective public meetings of residents canbe a massive logistic exercise - for example, one communitygovernment council area is 12 000 square kilometres. Localtransport and communication infrastructure is so poor that,unless a great deal of external assistance is provided, a largenumber of those who would be affected by community governmentproposals would not be able to attend a public meeting. The highlevels of adult illiteracy similarly restrict the usefulness ofthe public exhibition of draft community government schemes, andthe linguistic diversity of Aboriginal communities in theNorthern Territory also present difficulties that need to beovercome if public opinion is to be gauged accurately.

3.16 The Northern Territory Associations Incorporation Actprovides another means by which Aboriginal organisations andcouncils may incorporate. Many Aboriginal community councils are,in fact, incorporated under this legislation as they wereestablished in the 1970s before the Northern Territory LocalGovernment Act gave them the option of incorporating under itsprovisions. Importantly, Aboriginal councils performing localgovernment functions and which are incorporated under theAssociations Act are eligible to receive financial assistancefrom the Northern Territory Local Government Grants Commission.

3.17 The Northern Territory Government considers other formsof incorporation to be inferior to its own Local GovernmentAct. x It argues that there are limitations to theappropriateness and applicability of association status becausethe Northern Territory Associations Incorporation Act in its viewis designed more for social clubs than for communities providinglocal government and other services. Association rules apply onlyto association members.52 In practice councils that areincorporated under the Associations Act instead of the LocalGovernment Act do not face any noticeable disadvantage,particularly as they are eligible to receive grants commissionfunding. As mentioned earlier, some communities may not preferto incorporate under the Local Government Act as this may allowthem to remain at arm's length from government control. TheCommittee believes that the wishes of these communities shouldbe respected.

3.18 Aboriginal organisations may also incorporate under theCommonwealth's Aboriginal Councils and Associations Act. Althoughthere are over 600 associations currently incorporated under thislegislation, to date no community council has been incorporated.Current applications to incorporate community councils under the

Visit to the Northern Territory, 15-17 May 1989.

Transcript of Evidence, p. S2650-2651.


52


31

51

councils provisions of the Act have not been finalised by theRegistrar. Disagreement currently exists between the Territoryland councils and the Northern Territory Government. The landcouncils argue that the Northern Territory Local Government Actconflicts with the Commonwealth Aboriginal Land Rights Act andhave called upon the Commonwealth to provide assistance tocommunities to use the Aboriginal Councils and Associations Act1976 to incorporate as local government bodies. The land councilshave been promoting this objective amongst various Aboriginalcommunities in the Northern Territory.53 The Northern TerritoryGovernment rejects this position and argues strongly that itslocal government legislation is the most appropriate vehicle forincorporation. In its submission to the inquiry the NorthernTerritory Government recommended that the incorporationsprovisions under Part III of the Commonwealth's AboriginalCouncils and Associations Act 1976 be repealed.54 This proposalhad been rejected previously by the Commonwealth Government.

3.19 The Northern and Central Land Councils argued that theNorthern Territory community government legislation derogatesfrom the powers afforded traditional owners under theCommonwealth Aboriginal Land Rights Act. Under the Land RightsAct the land councils have a statutory responsibility torepresent the interests of traditional owners and otherAboriginals living in their areas. The community governmentlegislation, it is argued, conflicts with the Land Rights Act byproviding powers to community governments to develop communitygovernment schemes related to functions performed on Aboriginalland.

3.20 At the end of 1987 the joint executives of theNorthern, Central and Tiwi Land Councils and the PitjantjatjaraCouncil called for a moratorium on the implementation ofcommunity government schemes. The Northern Territory Governmentdismissed this call, insisting that the policy is not negotiable.Furthermore, the Northern Territory Government does not recognisethe legitimacy of the land councils having any involvement in thefield of community government.

Queensland

3.21 The Queensland model for community management of formermissions and government reserves takes two forms:

communities constituted under the LocalGovernment Aboriginal Lands Act 1975 - that is,only Aurukun and Mornington Island; and

communities which have been constituted under theCommunity Services (Aborigines) Act 1984 and theCommunity Services (Torres Strait) Act 1984(including some 18 Torres Strait islands and 14

53

Transcript of Evidence, p. S2653,

Transcript of Evidence, pp. S2375-76.

55 Transcript of Evidence, pp. S2634-2658.

32

mainland Aboriginal communities which are inreceipt of local government grants commissionfunding).

3.22 In addition, a number of other Aboriginal organisationsinvolved with self-management have used other State orCommonwealth mechanisms to incorporate as associations. Thereare, for example, some 125 bodies incorporated under theCommonwealth's Aboriginal Councils and Associations Act.

3.23 During the 1970s the Queensland Government implementedthe Local Government (Aboriginal Lands) Act and establishedAurukun and Mornington Island as local government authorities,conferring upon them all of the functions, powers, duties andobligations of any other local government authority inQueensland. This step was taken to thwart Commonwealthintervention in the two communities following the withdrawal ofthe Uniting Church.

3.24 Since that time the previous Queensland Governmentenacted further legislation in relation to the control andmanagement of land set aside for Aboriginal people through thecommunity services legislation. The community councilsestablished under this legislation are broadly similar infunction to those created under the Local Government Act althoughthe legislation also provides for land to be transferred inperpetuity to the elected Aboriginal and Island councils by wayof a deed of grant in trust.

3.25 Although the detail of the two types of legislationvaries, the theory and practical impact of both statutes at acommunity level is similar. One of the Committee's advisers notedin a seminar held in Brisbane that the community serviceslegislation was an attempt to construct another form of localgovernment that was equivalent in status to mainstream localgovernment:

Both Acts seem to me to be in theory versions of aconventional local government model which is imposedby statute on Aboriginal society as though Aboriginesuntil that point had operated in what amounts to apolitical, social and economic vacuum.

3.26 Although the Community Services Act provides some scopefor modification to the electoral system, in reality allAboriginal councils are structured in precisely the same way andare selected by a uniform process. One notable distinctionbetween the two Acts, however, is that the provisions of theservices legislation allow only for Aboriginals to form thecouncil and for an Aboriginal to hold the position of town clerk.This restriction does not exist under the Local Government(Aboriginal Lands) Act.

56 House of Representatives, Hansard, 24 November 1988,p. 3321

Brisbane Seminar, p. 15.

33

3.27 The Committee notes that the two shire councils atAurukun and Mornington Island are dominated by non-Aboriginalemployees and the prospect of Aboriginals gaining control isremote. There are strong reasons for arguing that both pieces oflegislation actually militate against allowing the system tobecome subject to local Aboriginal control. The complexaccounting and administrative requirements of the LocalGovernment Act, virtually ensure that the town clerk will be anon-Aboriginal skilled in local government administration.Although the Community Services Act does not include the onerousfinancial provisions of the Local Government Act itsadministrative provisions militate equally against the systembeing indigenised. Some examples include the highly bureaucraticway in which by-laws are designed and implemented and the rigidfiscal management requirements.

3.28 The provisions of the Community Services Act includethe preservation of the role of the former Department ofCommunity Services executive officer. Although there is scope tohave that person withdrawn from communities unless that personis specifically requested to stay on, it would appear that thereis still an executive officer resident in every communityoperating what amounts to a form of companion administration tothat operated by the Aboriginal council.

3.29 The ability of both types of legislation to respond toAboriginal aspirations needs to be questioned as such legislationis essentially concerned with enabling councils to providemunicipal services. The Committee was advised that therecognition of 'special functions' of Aboriginal councils seemslargely confined to powers to deal with issues that theauthorities operating in the wider society would prefer to avoid.These include the authority to operate a canteen or for councilsto issue prohibition orders; the ability to charge Aboriginalpolice with the responsibility for ambulance services, firefighting, etc; and an extremely limited ability to regulateaccess to Deed Of Grant In Trust (DOGIT) land. Beyond this,councils are restricted in their ability to deal with matters ofsignificance to their communities. This has meant that in somecases the former Queensland Government did not approve by-lawsthat were determined by the local councils.

3.30 The Committee's consultants emphasised the urgent needto review the deed of grant in trust arrangements. It was theintention of the previous Queensland Government that trust landbe divested to individual residents so that ultimately theselands could be held in private ownership but without alienationfrom the local community council. One of the major problems withtrust land is that traditional land interests are not formallyrecognised and not secured under the DOGIT arrangements.

58 Mr Ross Rolfe, Administrative Arrangements applying toAboriginal People in the Central Peninsula, SeminarPaper pp. 2-3

59 Ibid, p. 3.


34

Similarly the boundaries of the trust areas do not necessarilyreflect traditional ownership or traditional interests.

3.31 The recently-elected Queensland Government is to reviewthe procedures for the management of the DOGIT arrangements andthe structures operating in Aboriginal communities and isexpected to include land tenure as part of this process. TheCommittee anticipates that there will be significant reforms inQueensland in the near future. Whilst the Committee does notconsider it appropriate to prescribe particular models orarrangements that should apply in Queensland, it identifies laterin this chapter a number of broad principles that ought to betaken into account.

South Australia

3.32 When considering the issue of community management inSouth Australia it is necessary to distinguish between the twotypes of Aboriginal communities in the State:

1. People with land rights under South Australianlegislation: people who continue to pursue alargely traditional existence are thePitjantjatjara and Yankunytjara. They reside onland restored to them under the provisions of thePitjantjatjara Land Rights Act and the MaralingaTjarutja Land Rights Act.

2. People residing on land whose title is held bythe Aboriginal Lands Trust: there are a number ofdiscrete Aboriginal communities living onAboriginal lands trust lands. These communitiesare widely dispersed and range from those livingtraditional or semi-traditional lifestyles (forexample, Nepabunna, Yalata) to those living nearcountry towns in a semi-urban lifestyle (PointMcLeay). Many of these communities come withinmainstream local government boundaries but arenot provided with services by the local council.The discrete communities have a council and arefunded primarily by the Department of AboriginalAffairs to provide local government-typeservices.

3.33 Some Aboriginal communities in the State areincorporated under the South Australian Associations andIncorporations Act. The South Australian Government considersthat this form of incorporation is inadequate because it does notprovide for cultural considerations to be taken into account, orfor by-law making powers, or access to local government funds.At present no community in South Australia is receiving grantscommission funding. In the case of the Pitjantjatjara lands, theprimary incorporated body is Anangu Pitjantjatjara, anorganisation made up of all Pitjantjatjara, Ngaanyatjarra andYankunjatjara speakers which holds title to the PitjantjatjaraFreehold Lands under the Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act 1981.

3.34 In 1988 a review of the Pitjantjatjara andYankunjatjara communities of the northwest of South Australia

35

conducted by Neville Bonner was released. The report, entitledAlways Anangu, concluded that the assumption by Pitjantjatjarapeople of responsibility for their affairs remains illusory andthat only in isolated instances can it be said that they exertauthentic control over the nature and pace of change in theircommunities. This conclusion was rejected by AnanguPitjantjatjara and questions were raised as to the effectivenessof the consultation process during the review leading to thereport.

3.35 The review recommended that the South AustralianGovernment pass legislation which will enable communities todesign their own subordinate community government legislation insimilar fashion to the scheme of the Councils and AssociationsAct (councils section) or the Northern Territory communitygovernment legislation. It is envisaged that a system ofcommunity government could replace the vast number of existingincorporations on their lands other than Anangu Pitjantjatjara,the Pitjantjatjara Council, Maraku Arts and Crafts, AnanguWinkiku Stores and other special cases, and for communitygovernment bodies to control community institutions eitherdirectly as wholly-owned subsidiaries where financial risks exist(for example, stores). Anangu Pitjantjatjara, on the other hand,has argued that new legislation for local government opens thepossibility of conflicting with the Pitjantjatjara Land RightsAct 1981. This Act enables Anangu Pitjantjatjara to make by-lawsand perform all the functions of a local government body.

3.36 Since the release of the Bonner report, the SouthAustralian Government has turned its attention towards thedevelopment of culturally appropriate local administrativestructures for Aboriginal communities in the Pitjantjatjaralands, the Maralinga lands and the Aboriginal Lands Trust lands.Former Premier, Don Dunstan was appointed as an adviser by theState Government to consult with these communities on the conceptof community government and to report on possible approaches tothe introduction of community government in South Australia. MrDunstan's report was tabled in the South Australian LegislativeAssembly in February 1990 and is under consideration by the StateGovernment. As noted above, Anangu Pitjantjatjara rejected theproposals for legislation put forward in Mr Dunstan's report,arguing that the Pitjantjatjara Lands Rights Act already enabledtheir body to perform local government functions.

3.37 In his report Mr Dunstan concluded that Aboriginals arenot receiving local government services in South Australia inaccordance with need or at a level comparable with other membersof the community. Present structures for Aboriginal self-management, he said, are not satisfactory for the provision ofsuch services.

3.38 The report argued that it is preferable to replaceexisting incorporated bodies with bodies incorporated under Statelegislation which would have wider powers including control overaccess to the community and the power to make by-laws controllingsocial behaviour. Mr Dunstan noted that Aboriginal communitiesin the State are generally too small and inadequately resourcedto carry out the whole function of local government on their own.

36

Such a function would be possible in conjunction with either acentral body such as a revised lands trust or in a specialrelationship with an existing local government authority. Thereport said that Commonwealth legislation would be inadequate andthat an appropriate way to proceed would be by South Australianlegislation after full consultation with Aboriginal communities.

3.39 Mr Dunstan identified the following possibilities forcommunities in South Australia, excluding those on Pitjantjatjarafreehold lands:

discrete Aboriginal community government;

modified community government;

a regional option under which a reconstitutedAboriginal Lands Trust and Maralinga Tjarutjawould be constituted as the local governing bodyfor their respective communities;

incorporation of Aboriginal communities withinthe relevant mainstream local governmentauthority;

incorporation under the Commonwealth AboriginalCouncils and Associations Act;

retention of the status quo but with communitiesbeing provided access to local government funds;and

retention of the status quo with access to localgovernment funding not provided.

3.40 Mr. Dunstan recommended that extensive consultationwith Aboriginal communities take place before any decisions aremade. The report also recommended that any ensuing legislationbe flexible enough to allow communities to opt for a course toobtain local government services in a manner and at a pace whichthey see as best suited to their needs and aspirations.

Western Australia

3.41 Community management is an issue of particular concernin Western Australia. No Aboriginal community in the State hasits own local government as communities are all located withinmainstream local government shires. The lack of provision ofservices to communities by local government is a recurrent issuein evidence to the Committee and will be dealt with further inthe inquiry into the needs of Urban Dwelling Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander people. Funding responsibility forcommunities in Western Australia has largely been left to theformer Department of Aboriginal Affairs (now ATSIC). Therelatively small contribution and commitment by local and theState government in Western Australia to servicing Aboriginalcommunities has contributed to a lack of policy development inAboriginal affairs at these levels.

3.42 Both DAA and the State Government emphasised the lack

37

of a viable community management/government system for majorAboriginal communities. Local government-type services areprovided by the local Aboriginal council in discrete communitiesand several have limited powers to make by-laws under theAboriginal Communities Act 1979. For its part, the StateGovernment recognises that councils have failed to be effectivein a number of communities and recommends that communitiesstreamline their councils into 'a smaller, tighter managementcommittee in which members have specific tasks'. It is unclear,however, how the State Government would achieve this.

3.43 In August 1988 the Western Australian Department ofLocal Government published a report on the Project on RemoteAboriginal Communities and Local Government. The objective of theproject was to develop structures appropriate for the localgovernment of Aboriginal communities in Western Australia. Thecentral finding of the report was that separate legislation isnot required to provide such structures. Rather, with minormodifications, existing legislation is sufficient to ensure thestructural flexibility required to meet the needs of communities.The report also noted that any structures should recognise thecultural and traditional requirements of the communitiesinvolved.

3.44 The following structure options were identified:

mainstreaming whereby communities are serviced byexisting local government authorities, withministerial approval for them to service reservelands;

modified mainstreaming so that ministerialapproval is not necessary;

a contractual structure whereby the delivery ofmunicipal works is contracted to either the localgovernment or remote community;

using community councils to deliver services;

the creation of separate Aboriginal shires; and

a regional option which is based on co-ordinationand joint co-operative arrangements between aregional body and the Aboriginal community orlocal governments.

New South Wales

3.45 In New South Wales the nature of 'community management'and support services varies according to the circumstances of thepeople concerned. A number of Aboriginal people are living as

Report on the Project on Remote Aboriginal Communitiesand Local Government, WA Department of Local GovernmentAugust 1989, p. 4

ibid, pp. 5-6.

38

discrete groups separately from the general community, generallyon former reserve land. In these circumstances the term'community management' would be applied to the management ofhousing and other bodies that deal with infrastructure by thelocal land council or housing association. These organisationsmay also have a wider role as a focus for other communityactivities and services, especially if the reserve is locatedclose to or in a town where other Aboriginal people live so that,in effect, the 'community' may consist of people from both thereserve and its nearby township. In addition, where theAboriginal 'community' consists of people scattered throughoutan urban area, the 'community' may be represented by a number ofdifferent organisations that serve as a focal point for the needsof Aboriginal people. Such organisations would include medicalservices, legal services, preschools, etc.

3.46 New South Wales has no formally constituted Aboriginallocal government and no Aboriginal community councils in theNorthern Territory mould. In the absence of mainstream localgovernment accepting responsibility for the provision ofservices, a relatively large number of Aboriginal organisationshave assumed municipal-type responsibilities. In a very smallnumber of cases Aboriginal management organisations have beenable to negotiate with local government to provide some services,such as garbage removal, on a fee-for-service basis.

3.47 The needs of Aboriginal people living on smallsettlements in New South Wales are great, as can be seen from theHuman Rights Commission's inquiry into the situation at Toomelah.The land on such settlements is owned by the local (regional)Aboriginal land council under inalienable freehold title and insome cases is managed by the local Aboriginal land council. Inmost cases, however, the responsibility for running andmaintaining the settlements is left to Aboriginal housingcompanies, most of which do not have a formal lease or access toland council funds.

3.48 The New South Wales Government has foreshadowedsignificant changes in its arrangements for the administrationof Aboriginal affairs and service delivery. The Governmentpreviously announced its intention to mainstream the provisionof services. It has also been investigating the three-tier landcouncil system of New South Wales Aboriginal land councils,regional land councils and local land councils. Mr CharlesPerkins, former head of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, wasengaged by the State Government to advise on appropriatestructures for the management of Aboriginal affairs. Althoughthe new arrangements are to be finalised, the State Governmenthas announced its intention to replace the NSW Aboriginal LandCouncil with an Aboriginal Affairs Commission which is to havean overall co-ordination, monitoring and review role.

Victoria and Tasmania

3.49 The Committee received only one submission fromVictoria and none from Tasmania. In Victoria the StateParliament set aside 2000 hectares of land at Lake Tyers forAboriginal people which is managed by the Lake Tyers AboriginalLand Trust. This land is located within the shire of Tambo which

39

es little in the way of services to the community. InTasmania, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre is the major Aboriginalorganisation representing Aboriginal people. The centre'sactivities are wide-ranging and include the provision of healthand legal services.

Commonwealth Territory (Wreck Bay)

3.50 The community of Wreck Bay is located within theCommonwealth Territory of Jervis Bay. Some 403 hectares ofunalienable freehold land were vested in the Wreck Bay AboriginalCommunity Council under the Aboriginal Land Grant (Jervis BayTerritory) Act 1986. The Community Council is established underthis Act and is responsible for community management. TheCommonwealth is responsible for the provision of municipalservices to residents, and other services, such as schooling, areprovided on contract by the Australian Capital TerritoryGovernment. . . .

Other structures

3.51 Throughout Australia a range of bodies are involved inthe provision of support services or act as the focal point forAboriginal people and therefore as vehicles of self-managementor self-determination. These organisations include housingassociations, legal services, medical services, child careagencies, alcohol rehabilitation centres, resource organisations,etc. Invariably these organisations are funded by theCommonwealth Government rather than the States and Territories.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission

3.52 Although the Committee is unable to assess the impactof the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission whichhas recently come into existence, some comment is necessary,particularly in terms of Aboriginal involvement. At the locallevel there is to be a regional council (60 throughout Australia)with the number of members depending on the Aboriginal populationof the area concerned. Membership of the regional councils willbe elected on the basis of universal suffrage by Aboriginalpeople on the electoral roll. The regional councils coalesce toform a zone (17 throughout Australia), each of which elects onecommissioner. In addition three commissioners are appointed bythe Minister.

3.53 The functions of the regional councils are to formulateand implement a regional plan for improving the economic, socialand cultural status of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanderpeople in the area; to put forward a proposed funding program inaccordance with that plan; to represent Aboriginal interests inthe region; and to do any other thing that is incidental orconducive to the performance of the preceding functions.

3.54 Regional councils will not have their own staff and

Transcript of Evidence, pp. S267-268.

40

will rely on the ATSIC regional offices for their needs. Therelationship between the regional council and the regional officewill have a significant impact on the operation of the scheme.One of the Committee's consultants pointed out that the regionaloffices are part of ATSIC's administrative structures and as suchare responsible to their State office and the Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Commission.64 The Committee wishes to stressthat the ATSIC regional offices should be responsive to the needsof the regional councils.

More appropriate structures

3.57 The Committee notes that local government type andother imposed structures cannot by themselves provide a basis forself-determination. Indeed, the structures available forcommunity management in the States and the Northern Territoryhave less to do with self-determination than they have to do withself-management. They have also been developed by government withthe expectation that Aboriginal people will accommodate theirimposition. For this reason, these structures have not alwaysbeen able to meet Aboriginal aspirations.

3.58 The Committee noted previously that where there isdissatisfaction with imposed structures the response ofAboriginal people has been to create their own organisations overwhich they can exercise greater control and which may betterreflect their particular community's structures and betterrespond to Aboriginal priorities. For this reason, the communitycouncil model may not always be appropriate. Dr Elspeth Youngargued for the examination of alternative models that moreclosely resemble the actual structure of the community in orderto take account of the complexities of the social structure,different language groups and people from different areas.

3.59 The structures Aboriginal people see as beingappropriate to their needs do not necessarily conform to what hasbeen made available by government. Dr Young's comments werereinforced by one of the Committee's advisers who noted?

If a matter is perceived by people as being somethingthat is relevant to their interests, something thatthey themselves wish to contribute to in terms of anoutcome or which they feel obliged through family orother pressures to be involved in, then they cometogether as a caucus which will be involved in anumber of different forms of activities that willrelate to the formation of an outcome which usuallygets called consensus. This has a lot of bearing onthe kinds of structures that it may be realistic toexpect people in local communities to adopt in termsof councils that have anything to do with what mightbe called local government.

64 Dr J. Bern, Committee Consultant, pp. 11-12.

65 Transcript of Evidence, p. 846.

66 Brisbane Seminar, p. 153.

41

3.60 The Committee believes it is important to distinguishbetween the two types of organisations or structures availableto Aboriginal people:

those imposed from above, with varying degrees ofconsultation by government departments andagencies depending on their particular policyorientation;

those which emerge from within the Aboriginalcommunities and which reflect Aboriginalaspirations and priorities.

The first may be rejected by Aboriginal people as unsuitable totheir needs. The second type may experience difficulty withfunding if it does not fit into existing policy frameworks.

3.61 The Committee believes that the success of manyAboriginal organisations will depend on whether they aresupported by the people for whom they operate. For the structuresto be supported it is important that they emerge from Aboriginalneeds and desires. They must allow the development of processesand styles that are consistent with Aboriginal needs and can bemanaged in their local context. This view was supported by DonDunstan, former Premier of South Australia, who noted in hisreview of community government that experience has tended to showthat Aboriginal communities work best where decisions are madelocally. He added that if decisions come from afar Aboriginalpeople tend to feel neither involved nor responsible.

3.62 In a number of areas Aboriginal organisations have beenestablished to reflect traditional ownership of land. Land isa crucial component of Aboriginal self-identity and groupidentity. Currently many of the community-based structuresignore or do not reflect the land-based structures. Governmentfunding of communities of the basis of location or residentialstatus is a manifestation of this problem.

3.63 The distinction between an organisation that reflectstraditional interests and one that does not can be seen in anumber of communities. The Committee noted a community inQueensland which is constituted as a local government shire butover which the local Aboriginal people are not able to exercisecontrol and which does not reflect traditional interests. Thatcommunity also has an incorporated body to co-ordinate activitiesoutside the scope of the council. As one of the Committee'sadvisers noted, at a recent annual general meeting of thisorganisation there was an extremely vigorous attack on themanagement of the organisation on the basis that there wasinadequate representation of groups according to traditional landownership. This provides an indication of the priorityattached to the question of land in the eyes of many Aboriginalpeople. Arguably the need to reflect land-based structuresassumes a far greater importance for Aboriginal people, such as

Review of Community Government, July 1989, Section One.


42

those in Queensland, where traditional ownership is notrecognised in law or where land tenure, such as the deed of grantin trust, is not determined on the basis of traditionalownership. Given the history of Queensland communities, wheremany people have been shifted around, this problem may provedifficult to resolve.

3.64 The presence of a number of different communityorganisations may be more in tune with a community's needs. TheCommittee noted previously that the existence of a range offamilies and clan groupings can generate a range of organisationsor incorporated bodies in a community. This may occur becauseparticular groups feel their interests are not represented by thecouncil and it is one way of ensuring that all people have accessto resources. In her evidence to the Committee, Dr Elspeth Youngspoke of one community that had examined its structures in thecontext of considering a community government scheme. In thiscase the directors of the various incorporated bodies andenterprises in the community were extraordinarily resistant tothe notion of the community government council assumingresponsibility for their operations. As a result, the communityitself devised a structure more appropriate to its needs andindicated to the Northern Territory Government that it did notwish to take on community government. As Dr Young noted, thisis a good example of Aboriginal people thinking about theircircumstances and developing a solution that is closer to theirown structure and which takes into account both service provisionand their enterprises. The existence of a range oforganisations may prove more difficult for governmentbureaucracies to deal with, but in cases such as the communityreferred to above, this structure represents an attempt at self-management that is consistent with the principles of self-determination .

3.65 In the Northern Territory, Aboriginal traditionalownership is recognised in law under the Aboriginal Land RightsNorthern Territory Act 1976 and the interests of traditionalowners are represented at the broader level by the respectiveland councils. For many communities or groups in the NorthernTerritory the land council structure represents an importantmeans of support. In general terms the functions of the landcouncils are to ascertain and express the wishes and the opinionof Aboriginals living in the area of the land council as to themanagement of Aboriginal land in that area; to protect theinterest of traditional Aboriginal owners of, and otherAboriginals interested in, Aboriginal land in the area of theland council; to assist Aboriginals in the taking of measureslikely to assist in the protection of sacred sites; to consultwith traditional Aboriginal owners of, and other Aboriginalsinterested in, Aboriginal land in the area of the land councilwith respect to any proposal relating to the use of that land;and to assist Aboriginals claiming to have a traditional landclaim to an area of land within the area of the land council inpursuing the claim.

Transcript of Evidence, pp. 847-848.

Central Land Council Annual Report, 1987-88, pp. 4-5.

43

3.66 While the basis for land council activity is Aboriginalland interests, the Committee was advised that these are sopervasive in their social and political effect as to involve landcouncils in a very wide spectrum of affairs relating to themaintenance and development of Aboriginal social and politicalinterests, including aspects of community decision making andmanagement. Increasingly the land councils are adopting arole that has been described as 'para-governmental' in nature asthey provide assistance and support to communities in a range ofareas such as cattle projects, tourism, etc. It has beensuggested that land councils are operating more and more asguardians of Aboriginal interests and representatives ofAboriginal people's views, partly as a consequence of theinability of Australian political institutions to meet thespecific needs of Aboriginal people.72

3.67 One of the other advantages of a legally-constitutedbody such as a land council is that it provides Aboriginal peoplewith a body that is recognised within the broader power structureof Australian society. As one of the Committee's advisers noted,land councils are recognised bodies that lend strength toAboriginal people in their dealings with government bureaucraciesor companies, etc. It was also noted that big bodies such asbureaucracies or mining companies would prefer to deal with arecognised body such as a land council.

3.68 Not all Aboriginal people who live in the NorthernTerritory and come within the ambit of the Land Rights Actbelieve that Land Councils as currently constituted are the mostappropriate structures to provide them with a support service orrepresent their special interests. They are critical of them andseek the development of alternative structures.

3.69 A range of structures which are not creations ofgovernment appear to be working well. In his evidence to theCommittee Dr Altman said that some unusual models for communitymanagement have been effective, such as that for theadministration of programs for communities in Kakadu NationalPark by the Gagudju Association.74 The Gagudju Association wasthe first association incorporated after the introduction of landrights in the Northern Territory specifically to receive miningagreement moneys (both up-front moneys and subsequent royalties) .Since its inception the organisation broadened its role andassumed a quasi-municipal role as it delivers services throughoutthe park. Physical infrastructure has increased in accordance

Dr J. Bern, Committee Consultant, p. 5.

72 Altman, J C and Dillon, M C, Aboriginal land rights,land councils and the development of the NorthernTerritory. In D Wade-Marshall and P Loveday (eds)Contemporary Issues in Development, North Australia.Progress and Prospects, Volume Darwin: NARU, 1988p. 126


74 Transcript of Evidence, pp. S2219-2220.

with local wishes. Other examples of structures that have emergedfrom amongst Aboriginal people to meet their needs include theTangentyere Council, Julalikari Council and bodies such asAboriginal legal and medical services.

3.70 Another option, which was put to the Committee by aconsultant, is to have regional structures complementing localstructures. One of the overriding reasons for the establishmentof regional structures is that local communities do not haveadequate fiscal and material resources to exercise effectiveself-management. This option may offer greater prospects forAboriginal people in achieving a sense of self-determination intheir lives.

Conclusion

3.71 From the discussion in this chapter the Committee makesthe general conclusion that those organisations or structuresthat have emerged from within the Aboriginal community and whichreflect Aboriginal aspirations and priorities are functioningbetter than other structures that are imposed by government. Asthe former are more likely to have the support of Aboriginalpeople they have a distinct advantage over other structures.

3.72 The Committee does not consider it appropriate to berecommending specific models for community management or forAboriginal organisational structures. In all cases Commonwealth,State and Territory Governments should negotiate appropriatestructures with Aboriginal people in a co-ordinated fashionbetween each level of government. It is important to recognisethat some structures will emerge from within the Aboriginalcommunity and these need to be given support. It is, however,possible to identify a number of general principles that oughtto be observed in the establishment by government of anystructures for self-management. It is worth stating suchprinciples at a time that State and Territory Governments areconsidering possible structures for Aboriginal communities.

Rec ommendat ion

3.73 The Committee recommends that:

that a number of general principles should be observedby governments when establishing structures forAboriginal people. These include:

the structures should be negotiated withAboriginal people and not imposed by anartificial process of consultation;

when negotiating structures, governments shouldavoid placing undue pressure on Aboriginal peoplein such a way as to achieve an outcome that wouldconform to established government policy or tomeet a government imposed timetable;

Dr J. Bern, Committee Consultant, pp. 27-28.

45

the structures must be compatible with localAboriginal aspirations and affiliations;

they must recognise the term 'community' needs tobe defined more broadly and should take accountof social, historical and cultural linkages;

they should emerge from and be supported by thepeople for whom they operate or represent;

they should be recognised within the broaderpower structure of Australian society; and

governments review existing structures inaccordance with the preceding principles.

Introduction

4.1 Consultation with Aboriginal people is widely regardedby Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments as central tothe success of the policies of self-determination andself-management and the delivery of services to Aboriginalpeople. Aboriginal people see consultation as important becausethey can often see alternative ways of delivering services orwould like to see services provided in a way which suits theirneeds. Unfortunately the communication between governmentofficers and Aboriginal people often fails to live up to theexpectations of the community.

4.2 In its interim report the Committee identifiedinadequate or a lack of consultation with Aboriginal people aboutimportant decisions affecting their lives and the control theyhave over their affairs as a major concern of communities. Inthe Committee's previous report, A Chance for the Future, theimportance of consultation with Aboriginal people over the designand delivery of education and training programs was discussed.

4.3 The committee believes that despite the statements ofCommonwealth, State and Territory government departments andagencies, the consultative process is inadequate and ineffectivein many cases. This chapter proposes a shift from what has beenconsidered to constitute consultation towards the notion ofnegotiation. It is only through negotiation that Aboriginalpeople will have any real impact on outcomes and have theirdemands met.

What does 'consultation' mean?

4.4 However genuinely or generously consultation isconducted, it is a process in which initiative and power liesalmost wholly on one side; that side proposes, listens toresponses and then decides by itself.

4.5 Consultation is a term which first appeared inAboriginal affairs policy during the Whitlam Government. Atno stage does it appear to have been clearly defined in policy.However advice sought from the former DAA is that consultationin practice adheres to the Macguarie Dictionary definition usage:(1) to seek counsel from; ask advice of (2) to refer forinformation and (3) to have regard for (a person's interest,convenience, etc.) in making plans.

76 DAA Report of activities for the period 19 December 1972to 30 June 1974, p.7

47

4.6 Consultation in the context of Aboriginal affairs'isusually descriptive of involving Aboriginal people in decisionmaking. Aboriginal people have also come to use terminology suchas 'consultation' as a yardstick to measure the level of theirinvolvement. It is the loose usage of the term 'consultation'without a clear working definition of the process which hascreated confusion. The word 'negotiation' is sometimes usedinterchangeably with 'consultation' but the two are verydifferent processes. The process of negotiation is 'to bringabout by discussion and settlement of terms'.77

4.7 Consultation as it has been practised is a process ofinvolving Aboriginal people in decision making but negotiationinfers that involvement is taken one step further to settlementof an issue. It is the level of Aboriginal involvement in policydevelopment and delivery that is at the heart of self-determination and self-management. When Aboriginal views are'sought' and 'had regard to' without being integral to the'settlement of terms' then it is no wonder that Aboriginal peoplecan be dissatisfied with the process.

4.8 In resolving how self-determination and self-managementcan be implemented effectively, the role and level ofconsultation must be defined and clearly understood by all peopleto maximise what the Committee understands to be a process bywhich Aboriginal people's views and needs are injected intopolicy development and delivery. The Committee believes thatsuch a clarification would, if not improve the process, at leastminimise complaints from Aboriginal people 'that they have notbeen fully consulted' or that 'they (government officers) willmake up their own mind anyway'. Statements by Aboriginal peopleto this effect usually mean that the policy or service does notmirror the ideas proposed by the community.

4.9 The Committee believes that consultation betweengovernment departments and Aboriginal people as it is currentlypractised is not a case of equal partners negotiating an outcome.It is by precedent, and within legal and political constraints,a communication process which at best offers a choice within agiven set of parameters and at worst permits Aboriginal peopleto give assent to plans made for them.

4.10 This is however not a situation which is readilyaccepted by Aboriginal people. If in fact the intention is toinvolve Aboriginal people in decision making to facilitateself-determination and self-management then the process must beimproved.

The recognised importance of consultation

4.11 The importance of consultation was referred to byCommonwealth, State and Territory Governments in their respectivesubmissions to the inquiry. These statements can be taken asself-imposed standards for measuring the need for and success or

Macquarie Dictionary

7 8

H. Ross, Just for Living, pp.152-153

otherwise of the consultative process yet there is cause toquestion how often these standards are met. They emphasise,quite rightly, that the effective delivery of services tocommunities is dependent on the use of satisfactory consultativeprocesses, enabling the articulation of needs to be properlyconveyed. The DAA submission, for example, considers it has aresponsibility to ensure that effective consultation takesplace.

4.12 The South Australian Government listed consultation asone of the three principal elements involved in the delivery ofservices to Aboriginals, a notion with which the Committeeagrees. The other two important aspects it saw were Aboriginalcommunity control and self-management. The South AustralianGovernment argued strongly in favour of consultation withAboriginal communities saying that:

It is essential that Aboriginal people, communitiesand organisations are properly informed aboutgovernment policies and programs, and know whatopportunities are available to them and what theiroptions are as it is only in this way that they cangain effective control of their own affairs and ofbasic services such as health, education and housingso that those services are provided in a form and ata standard that meets Aboriginal 8needs as defined bythe Aboriginal people themselves.

4.13 The above quote clearly recognises the process ofconsultation as it is usually practised. In other words, itrecognises that the discussion with Aboriginal people isconducted within the parameters of government policies andprograms. However, the Committee believes that consultation withAboriginal people should go far beyond access to information.Consultation represents a crucial bridge between Aboriginalpeople and non-Aboriginal values, between Aboriginal structuresand the non-Aboriginal providers of services. As a process ittherefore assumes great importance because it is intended tobridge the cultural gap between Aboriginal communities and thebroader society. But consultation without the elements ofnegotiation has contributed to the ambiguity and multiplicity ofservices and organisations identified in the previous chapter.A more thorough process of negotiation would be an improvedmechanism towards ensuring that the sorts of services providedto Aboriginal communities are actually wanted by the communityand are delivered in a way that is appropriate to theircircumstances, expectations and values and alleviates currentduplications.

How consultation has been conducted

4.14 The way in which Aboriginal people are involved in theplanning process has a direct bearing on the ultimate success ofprogram delivery. Although the process differs depending on the

7 9

Transcript for Evidence, pp.S229-280SO

Transcript of Evidence, p.S2202.

49

issue involved and the people concerned, typically Aboriginalinvolvement is via community meetings, with the community councilor individual councillors, talking to administrative and otherkey staff such as the community adviser, health workers, CDEPco-ordinator, etc. or by holding discussions with the variousincorporated bodies in a community.

4.15 The DAA stated that it conducted its 'consultation' ina number of ways: on an informal basis through regular andongoing contact by departmental field staff; the establishmentof working groups, committees and other forums; special ad hocmeetings covering particular functional interests; frequentcommunity meetings with departmental officers; and through thesponsorship of Aboriginal advisory organisations, committees andgroups. This process is common to other government departmentsand agencies.

4.16 The establishment of community councils has assistedgreatly the work of government agencies. Community councils areseen as the primary point of contact within a community and, assuch, provide the basis for Aboriginal involvement. As Sullivannoted, community councils are assumed to occupy a point ofconvergence between non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal culture and,as such, lend themselves to being the focus of involvement andgaining agreement in the eyes of government agencies.

4.17 Community advisers also can be useful to governmentdepartments when seeking to consult with communities. Theirpersonal experience is extremely valuable to outsiders.Community advisers are more readily able to make direct contactwith community members and should be able to identify splits andfactions in the community. From the community's perspective agood community adviser can be used to explain the optionsavailable in regard to a particular issue.

4.18 It is important to bear in mind, however, thatdiscussions conducted primarily through the council or advisermay have their limitations. As the Committee noted in Chapter 2,the council may not represent all groups in the community andmay, in fact, lack the authority in the eyes of community membersto speak on its behalf. Similarly, if discussions are conductedlargely with the community adviser the genuineness of the processneeds to be questioned as it is hard to see the adviser'representing' the community. There also exists the danger ofhaving non-Aboriginal staff controlling visits or information fortheir own purposes.

4.19 It is difficult for government departments and agenciesto assess the effectiveness of their 'consultative' mechanismswith Aboriginal people particularly because many operate on aninformal basis at the community level. It should be noted that,in submissions to the inquiry by government departments withdirect dealings with Aboriginal communities, few misgivings wereexpressed about their processes of 'consultation'. Given thecriticisms from Aboriginal people and others about the processes,


82 P. Sullivan, 1987, P.5

50

this complacency reflects either a quite different perspectiveon consultation from that taken by Aboriginal people or a lackof self-criticism by government agencies about their ownprocesses.

Criticisms of the consultative process

4.20 In her study of the East Kimberley, Audrey Bolger wasstrongly critical of consultation in the region and stated that:

At present it is doubtful if anyone knows whatcommunities really want because the process ofconsultation is so poor.

4.21 A number of major problems exist which preventsuccessful communication with Aboriginal communities including:

Aboriginal perceptions and suspicions of theprocess of consultation;

the failure of government to accept thatconsultation should involve negotiation;

the failure of government departments to consultbroadly enough in a community, to take intoaccount the structural nature of the community orthe various factional views;

the ad hoc nature of consultations and thefrequent demands placed on communities bygovernment to consult;

poor communication on the part of governmentagencies which is compounded by a lack ofunderstanding of issues and the implications ofparticular decisions on the part of thecommunity;

lack of training, commitment to and awareness ofAboriginal needs on the part of department oragency personnel; and

certain government agencies basically have theiragendas set before they go into communities and,as a result, they only hear what they want tohear.

4.22 The Committee has encountered numerous examples ofattempts at consultation that illustrate the shortcomings of theprocess. In his study of the East Kimberley, Sullivan providedthe following example:

... In this instance a white adviser was sittingoutside having a delicate conversation with a numberof influential Aboriginal men on how to arrange thesending of supplies to the site of an initiation

83 Transcript of Evidence, p.S970.

51

ceremony. This entailed imparting some sensitiveinformation about the ceremony which was discussed inhushed voices with some reticence. Into the middle ofthis gathering strode a stranger, later identified asthe managing director of a mining company, accompaniedby his liaison person. The miner then held out a handto the most amenable looking Aborigine and 'eliciteda grinning display of excessive goodwill' whilst theothers looked away. He then asked a series of directquestions - 'What is your name? Who is your boss?Where is he?' The group of Aborigines got up anddrifted away. The miner explained to the adviser hewanted to consult the community about a drillingprogram already under way in the vicinity. Theadviser was able to point out a series of mistakesmade in the first few minutes of this attempt atconsultation.

The man approached was a town drinker, not a member ofthe community assembled. The miner had recorded hisname, the name of the community, and its chairmanincorrectly. Apart from the name, the leadership hadrecently changed. The present chairman had beensitting silent in front of him. In any case theseAborigines had no connection with the site of theminer's operations, and were from a different languagegroup:

According to Sullivan, an impasse was reached from which futurediscussions never recovered.

4.2 3 The Committee was also told of an occasion when acommunity was to have been consulted about its education needs.The person responsible for the conduct of the consultationsvisited the community and asked the local school principal tofill out a short questionnaire. The principal suggested thatbroader discussions were required with council members, someyoung unemployed people and school leavers, but his offer wasdeclined and the officer quickly left the community.

Aboriginal perceptions

4.24 At the community level the perceptions of theconsultation process are different from those of governments.Almost invariably they reflected dissatisfaction. When thesubject was raised by the Committee during informal discussions.Aboriginal communities were repeatedly dismissive and sometimeseven derisive about attempts at 'consultation' by all levels ofgovernment as their previous experiences had led them to believethat it would achieve very little. There was a strong perceptionthat whenever consultation occurred it was inadequate.

P. Sullivan, Aboriginal Community RepresentativeOrganisations: Intermediate Cultural Processes in theKimberley Region, Western Australia, CRES, p.13


52

4.25 For some communities, after years of having decisionstaken for them by outsiders, to be suddenly allowed to beinvolved in matters affecting the community was a novelexperience and viewed with some surprise and scepticism.Decisions on matters such as whether to provide a bore, healthservices, or whether to upgrade a road, etc. were previously madefar away from the community in Darwin, Brisbane or Canberra, etc.or by a superintendent or mission manager without reference tothe community. Now the Aboriginal people were being involved inthe discussions but still felt that the decisions were beingtaken far away.

4.26 The submission from Home Care Services (NSW) noted thatAboriginal people with little experience of government servicesin the State were not used to coping with outside assistance.Some of these communities, which the Committee visited in itstrip to New South Wales, were so lacking in basic services andamenities that the prevailing community attitude was one offrustration. The communities had been neglected for so long thatthe people did not know where to begin seeking assistance becausetheir needs were so great.

4.27 Despite this, Aboriginal people valued the opportunityto consult with government departments and saw it as vital ifself-determination and self-management were to mean anything.As one submission noted:

I cannot say strongly enough that by 'consultation' wemean that we ne&d to actually participate and allowthe whole community ... to participate in decisionsabout what will happen. Telling us what will happenafter the decision is made is quite useless.

... anything else than a recognition of our right tobe a fully self-determining people in our own right isjust another attempt to manage us.

4.28 Aboriginal communities were also critical of governmentdepartments that used consultation with them to ratify decisionsthat had already been made. With only limited time available atcommunity or council meetings and with departments often havingdeveloped 'preferred outcomes' in advance it is not difficult toguide a meeting towards agreeing to a particular proposal. Toillustrate with an example, the Committee was given an instanceof a timetable for the introduction of a CDEP scheme having beendetermined before the community had even been approached aboutit. The Committee notes that similar and even more concerningallegations of manipulation are not uncommon.

4.29 In its submission the Aboriginal Cultural and TrainingInstitute referred to dissatisfaction with consultation processes

86

87

Visit to NSW, Namoi Aboriginal Community, 13 February1989

Transcript of Evidence, p.S863


53

in the following terms:

It has been our experience that while some staff atmiddle management and field level do endeavour toconsult with their client groups - the decision makersin Government show little skill in this area.

It is noticeable that when visiting in remotecommunities Government staff frequently avoid speakingwith Council members preferring to speak only withadministrative staff.

The submission went on to say that it was also noticeable thatgovernment staff rarely meet or speak with target client groupsin a community such as women or youth.

4.30 Some communities prefer government officers to come tocommunity meetings so that everyone can receive information.This goes some way towards passing information on to relevantgroups in the community but does not guarantee effectiveinvolvement in decision making. Although the community meetingcan be a useful forum, not all members are able to be present.Young people, for example, may be away at work around thecommunity. Many people will be inhibited about speaking up atthese meetings which may be dominated by older people. The rolesplayed by people at a non-Aboriginal structured meeting are oftenvery different from the role and power they hold in thecommunity.

4.31 The size of some communities or the number of distinctgroups involved also makes it difficult to assess communityfeeling. Officials need to be sensitive to the various factionsin a community and to take more time obtaining the views of allgroups.

4.32 The failure to consult broadly in a community and totake into account the range of views on a given subject ensuresthat a balanced overall view may not be obtained and that theoutcome does not reflect Aboriginal views or receive localcommitment. Many officials see consultation as a one-stopprocess, talking solely with the council or with onlyadministrative staff or the community adviser and then going awayto write the program. If self-determination is the goal itrequires maximum involvement in discussions and negotiation onthe acceptable outcomes from both an Aboriginal and governmentperspective.

Quality or quantity

4.33 A further problem with the consultation process is thatagencies do not seem to have arrived at a reasonable balance inthe frequency of consultations. No other group in Australia isexpected to actively participate in the consultative process asmuch as Aboriginal communities. The large number of agenciesproviding services to Aboriginal communities translates into alarge number of visits by government officials, most of whom have

89


adopted the approach that the policy implementation contains anelement of contact with the client group in some shape or form.

4.34 On the other hand, a community in western New SouthWales told the Committee that consultation was a rare phenomenonand when it occurred the people were not sure what was expectedof them. When they were consulted about their housing project,for example, they did not know what they could achieve or whatoptions they could consider. The people said that they lookedat the plans for houses but were not sure about what they weremeant to be discussing. For this community the main priority wasjust to get new houses, given the poor conditions in thecommunity.

4.35 Bolger noted that one of the problems seems to be thatvisits are erratic and badly planned thereby placing unnecessarypressure on the communities.

There may be none for several months, threein quick succession which, it sometimesseems, could have been reduced to one withbetter planning. In the dry season visitsare often planned to take along visitingsenior officers from Perth or Canberra.These visits often seem to be unnecessary orabout trivial matters and are often seen asmore in the nature o f a j aunt, to takeadvantage of the pleasant conditions in theEast Kimberley at that time of the year,than as serious consultation.

4.36 These examples highlight the need for quality ratherthan quantity in arranging consultation with Aboriginal people.Bolger argues that ideally each community should be visited atsix-weekly intervals by the DAA (now ATSIC) field officer andtwice yearly by the area officer. Less frequent but co-ordinatedpurposeful visits should in no way diminish the quality ofcontact with Aboriginal clients and in fact may well improve it.

4.37 The often erratic nature of visits and the frequentrequests from different departments to meet with communitiespoints to the failure of departments to co-ordinate informationprovision and collection with communities. More often than notmatters would be better dealt with by having officers fromseveral departments travelling together. The same applies tohaving joint State/Territory/Commonwealth visits to communities.Government agencies need to co-ordinate issues better and setpriorities so that routine matters are not constantly treated asurgent and communities constantly badgered for their assent orcomments. This issue is discussed further in Chapter 6 where theCommittee makes appropriate recommendations on therationalisation of field visits to communities.

4.38 As Bolger noted, real consultation requires a longerprocess of discussion allowing time for feedback and internal

90


55

debate. However, in practice officers tend not to allow enoughtime for proper consultation and expect to have an answerprovided to their requests in the course of a single visit.Officials have a tendency to rush through communities in shortvisits trying to cram in as much 'consultation' as possible onthe day.

4.39 Visitors should give communities as much notice aspossible before arrival and advise on the areas likely to bediscussed. It is unreasonable for government officials toannounce that they are to visit and that they expect key figuresto be available on a particular day, morning or afternoon to talkabout matters. A community in Western Australia, for example,has a policy of formal visitor requests and the preparation ofagendas in advance. This approach has been largely ignored bygovernment departments who continue to arrive without formalpermission and who fail to advise the community of possiblediscussion items. The result is communities preparing formeetings without knowing what is expected of them.

4.40 It is important for communities to understand exactlywhat they are being consulted about and the full range of optionsavailable. One of the major problems today is that the range ofprograms and resources about which Aboriginal people are askedto make decisions is so great that few people understand theimplications of their choices.

4.41 Some Aboriginal people have become adept at thenon-Aboriginal process of communication and decision making whichforms the basis of consultation. But there are many more whohave not. The Committee has observed a reluctance of Aboriginalpeople to speak openly at meetings with departmental officerspresent. This reluctance may be due to a number of reasonsincluding lack of confidence, language problems, not being usedto asserting their claims to non-Aboriginal people, or regardingthe process as a waste of time. It is also important tounderstand that some communities are unwilling to be seen tocriticise government departments for fear of having funding cut.

4.42 Aboriginal people often ascribe knowledge to positionsheld when dealing with government personnel in the same way theyare linked in Aboriginal cultures. Therefore they seldom demanda widening of the terms of reference for consultation believingthey have been told all they need to know. Secondly, they havebecome accustomed to non-Aboriginal people exerting control overthe decisions and as a result they defer to their supposedsuperior knowledge and power.

4.43 The Committee acknowledges that its own communicationprocess with Aboriginal people in some cases needs to beimproved. The Committee will examine its methods of consultationwith Aboriginal people with a view to developing a morecomprehensive process for Aboriginal involvement.

91 ., . ,

ibid9 7


56

4.44 The Committee believes that communication between somegovernment departments and Aboriginal people is a problem. Manyof the complaints and misunderstandings about the roles andactivities of various agencies seem to arise because of poorcommunications. In addition the volume of correspondence anddocumentation flowing into communities is now increasing.

4.45 In many cases the problem comes down to the type oflanguage used in letters and documents which can often beincomprehensible to communities. The problem of complicated andunfamiliar language in correspondence and documents was referredto by Bolger in her study of the East Kimberley. She noted,somewhat ironically, that the language used in correspondencetended to get more complicated the further away from thecommunity they come so that letters from Perth or Canberra tendedto be more difficult to understand than those from Kununurra.She argued that the government departments would do well to lookat the correspondence from non-government agencies that havedaily dealings with Aboriginal people and which is visuallysimplified and comprehensive.94

4.46 Government departments and agencies should make moreeffort to ensure that material is comprehensible to Aboriginalcommunities. This includes the use of simplified language or'plain English' versions in documentation and correspondence.Some good examples of this already exist such as materialrelating to health problems, etc.

4.47 The use of complicated language assumes that there willbe someone available to read and interpret correspondence to thebroader community which is not always the case. Ideally thisperson should be someone who is conversant with non-Aboriginalinstitutions. In remote communities, however, the people mostlikely to have this knowledge and a grasp of such language wouldbe younger people who may not have sufficient standing in theeyes of the community. 5

4.48 If letters are hard to understand then documents fromgovernment departments which contain funding rules andregulations are almost incomprehensible. To illustrate thisproblem Bolger discussed the case of an agreement which neededto be signed by a number of communities in order to participatein a training program. Even though the program had beendiscussed in advance, one community leader refused to sign thenecessary documentation because when it arrived it contained manypages of legal terminology which were not understood. Eventuallythe matter was resolved but it is a good example of communitiesbeing asked to commit themselves in writing to obligations theyare not familiar with.

93

Transcript of Evidence, p.S94494 ., . .

ibid95


57

4.49 The Committee is concerned that communities throughoutAustralia enter into agreements or commitments that they do notunders tand with government departments and agenc ies. Onoccasions it may be necessary for government officials to makeuse of qualified interpreters if they are to have effectivedealings with Aboriginal people and if Aboriginal people are tohave a full understanding of the implications of what is beingput to them. Similarly there is also a strong argument in favourof the promotion of fluency in Aboriginal languages amongstdepartmental and agency staff. Where appropriate agency anddepartmental personnel should be encouraged to study relevantAboriginal languages. At the very least these staff shouldundertake cross-cultural awareness courses. These should beprovided through their employing agency if not otherwiseavailable.

4.50 Logistical problems, particularly in the case of moreremote communities, do not help consultation. Some communitiesdo not have mail services and may only be contacted byradiotelephone. Bolger reported instances of communities beingwritten to by departments and asked to respond by telephone whenno facility existed.96


Government departments and agencies examine theirprocesses of communication with Aboriginal people to:

to make greater use of a 'plain English' style indocuments and correspondence in their dealingswith Aboriginal communities;

to make greater use of radio and the range ofvisual media such as video, television, comics,posters etc;

where possible government departments engagequalified interpreters as appropriate; and

where appropriate encourage staff to studyAboriginal languages and, as a minimum, make across cultural awareness a precondition forappointment:.

Towards Negotiation

4.52 It is clear from this chapter that Commonwealth, Stateand Territory agencies need to clarify the purpose of, andimprove drastically, their processes for involving Aboriginalpeople in decision making. Despite statements about theimportance of 'consultation' as a part of service delivery toAboriginal communities, it is mainly carried out on an ad hocbasis and does not always assume the importance which is ascribedto it.

4.53 Part of the problem has been the lack of clear guidance


58

and purpose of consultation. The Committee believes that, as amatter of priority, departments and agencies involved withAboriginal communities need to review how they relate toAboriginal people and how policies are formulated. As part ofsuch a review some broad guidelines need to be developed thatwould assist staff operating in the field. The benefits of suchguidelines would be to acquaint staff with the reasons forinvolving Aboriginal people and to develop an awareness of someof the difficulties involved with a view to improving the qualityof future discussions and policy and program delivery.

4-54 It is not just a matter, though, of setting guidelines.There is also a need to change the emphasis in the consultativeprocesses from one of listening to, and advising, communities toone where communities have a more direct say in deciding finaloutcomes. Instead of merely being involved. Aboriginal peoplemust be integral to deciding policy and programs which directlyaffect their lives. This is the difference between consultationand negotiation as discussed earlier in the chapter.

4.55 The Committee believes that the complete and extensiveinvolvement of Aboriginal people in decision making must becomea requirement, not an option. Instead of Aboriginal involvementbeing one element of the process of policy development andservice delivery, it must pervade the whole process and becrucial to the final outcomes.

4.56 The Committee concluded from the evidence provided toit that the practice of 'consultation' does not support the levelof Aboriginal involvement required to realise the policies ofself-determination and self-management. Aboriginal people needto be actively involved in the settlement of the terms of thepolicies and programs as they apply to them and at a level whichis more accurately described as 'negotiation'.

4.57 The Committee recommends:

negotiations on policies and programs mustinvolve Aboriginal people at the appropriatenational through to local level in alldiscussions towards a settlements of terms.

the Aboriginal and Torres Strait IslanderCommission develop guidelines for negotiationthat can be used by the range of departments andagencies that have dealing with Aboriginalcommunities and organisations; and

reference to negotiation be included in thecorporate plans of Commonwealth departments andagencies which have contact with Aboriginalcommunities.

4.58 The existence of guidelines, though, will have littleimpact unless they are supported by departmental action. Oneapproach favoured by the Committee is the development of trainingpackages for officials involved in negotiation with communities.Clearly the capacity to develop such packages already exists

59

within departments. The DAA annual report for 1988-89 noted thatstaff resources had been deployed to formulate ATSIC trainingstrategies and to design, develop and deliver programs so thatstaff were able to operate efficiently when ATSIC commenced.97

An emphasis on the importance of negotiation should be animportant part of this process.

4.59 The Committee recommends thats

Aboriginal and Torres Strait IslanderCommission develop appropriate training packagesfor the range of staff involved in negotiationwith Aboriginal communities; and

that any training packages developed by theAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissionbe distributed for use by other agencies involvedwith Aboriginal communities.

97 DAA Annual Report, 1988-89, p.162

60

Introduction

5.1 The Committee wishes to make special reference to the needsof Aboriginal women because it believes that their views are notalways sought or taken into account. This occurs even though theviews of Aboriginal women are crucial in determining whetherparticular services will meet the needs of the community.

5.2 The first comprehensive inquiry into the needs andaspirations of Aboriginal women across Australia was undertaken by theOffice of the Status of Women in the Department of the Prime Ministerand Cabinet. The report of their Aboriginal Womens's Task Force,Women's Business, was completed in July 1985. Women's Business firmlyplaced Aboriginal women's needs on the political agenda, emphasisingthe necessity of their recognition in policy and program development.

5.3 The Task Force, speaking of the role of Aboriginal womentoday, said:

Despite all the vicissitudes of the last 200 years theyremain the nurturers and teachers of the young, both theirown and those they foster. In particular it is the womenwho are responsible for teaching young children about theirAboriginal identity.In traditional times both parents (and the extended family)shared the responsibilities for raising the young children.As the children grew older ceremonial education of younggirls was organised by the women according to kinship ties:that of the boys, by the men. The parallel roles of foodproviders and child raisers and the separate ceremonies andland ownership of women and men formed the basis of a

98

complementary and balanced social structure.Where ceremonial practices no longer exist the majorresponsibility for the children of both sexes and all ageshas fallen on the women, though both sexes still retainsome of their traditional values and practices.

5.4 Women's roles in the extended Aboriginal family aredescribed as:

vitally significant and much respected. Their roles asmothers, aunts, sisters and grandmothers encompass theresponsibility for the raising, care and discipline ofchildren. Families revolve around the women and dependupon them to counter outside influences and maintain the

98

Report of the Aboriginal Women's Task Force, Women'sBusiness, Office of the Status of Women, 1986, pp.1-2

61

99

strength and togetherness of their families.

5.5 The environment within which the women live and work is alsoseen as a major consideration:

They must carry our their difficult tasks within an overallenvironment which exacts heavy tolls on their health,strength, dignity and self esteem. For many, overcrowdedliving conditions are a way of life. There are neverenough houses and it is not unusual to find family membersspanning three or four generations under the one smallroof. Given the rights, obligations and reciprocalexpectations of the family, the small and substandardhousing that most Aboriginal people are forced to occupy isinappropriate. Bigger and more costly accommodation isgenerally not an option since most exist on low incomeswhether they have a job or not.

Women ensure that clothes, food and sleeping arrangementsare provided for all the family members residing with them.Stress and tension are ever present because the struggle isaccompanied by low incomes, little education or training,and unemployment. Drug and alcohol abuse, poor health andearly deaths are all too often the result for those whocannot cope with the continual pressure which affects allmembers of the family.100

5.6 The major recommendation of Women's Business is thatconsultation with Aboriginal and Islander women needs to be anintegral part of any governmental consultation with Aboriginalcommunities. The report states:

... Women's position within their own communities is suchthat to ignore their input would be to ignore a whole rangeof experience and knowledge.

5.7 Aboriginal women are reluctant to speak freely in mixedgroups of white and Aboriginal, men and women. In the absence ofdissent their silence is often wrongly taken as agreement with whathas been said. Of particular concern are women's rights in land whichshould be clearly recognised and respected.

5.8 Women are individually reticent about their own personalneeds and are more likely to raise the needs of others. In matterssuch as nutrition, food preparation, sex education, contraception andchildbirth women believe their needs are not being met. A recentQueensland Health Department report shows that Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander women are 17 times more likely to die from diabetesthan white women in Australia. They are 13 times more likely to diefrom pnuemonia, 9 times more likely to die of cervical cancer and 7times more likely to die from bronchitis, emphysema and asthma. Manywomen are still being removed from communities weeks beforechildbirth. They and their families often do not have suitableaccommodation near the hospital. Giving birth in a non-Aboriginal

99 ibid

100 ibid

101 ibid

62

environment with males present disrupts traditional practices andoften leaves the woman with little or no personal support.

5.9 Women and children are frequently the victims of domesticviolence stimulated by alcohol. A recent report shows that one infour deaths of women in Alice Springs town camps resulted from alcoholrelated violence.102 Women have been at the forefront in seekingmechanisms to ameliorate the impact of alcohol on Aboriginalcommunities.

5.10 The report of the Aboriginal Women's Task Force found thatamongst Aboriginal women there was an overall lack of detailedinformation about existing government services and programs. The taskforce noted that women were unsure of how to deal with governments -that is, where or how to secure funding for projects; where or how togather information about and to apply for benefits; and therelationship between Commonwealth and State bodies. The reportobserved a lack of awareness and sensitivity towards Aboriginal womenon the part of public servants and a lack of confidence amongAboriginal women in making inquiries of non-Aboriginal staff.

The need for women's services

5.11 Historically Aboriginal women have been ignored by visitinggovernment officials, field workers and anthropologists. Thesevisitors were most often non-Aboriginal males and related with andlistened to the Aboriginal men and their needs. The subsequent formalstructures which were established to bridge Aboriginal andnon-Aboriginal people and culture have generally not includedwomen.104

5.12 Just as Aboriginal people generally formed resource agenciesto provide for otherwise unmet needs and services, so have Aboriginalwomen have formed their own gender specific services. Aboriginalwomen found that the existing Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal mechanismswere not providing adequate access to services. The Committee wastold that women feel strongly that they are ignored by governmentofficers. Women feel reluctant to speak in front of a male governmentofficial even if they are on the community council (where few womenhold executive or official positions anyway) . It was also put to theCommittee that men may fail to represent the views of women tooutsiders even though they may take notice of them within acommunity.105

5.13 One of the earliest formally established women'sorganisations was the Ngaanyatjarra, Pitjantjatjara, YankunytjatjaraWomen's Council in 1980. This council was formed because the Anangu

102

What everybody knows about Alice, Tangentyere Council,June 1990, p.l

Women's Business, p.3

Ngaanyat j arra, Pit j ant j at j ara, Yankanyt j at j araWomen's Council, 1990, p.l

Transcript of Evidence,p.S946

63

women believed that their ' . . . issues were not being properlyconsidered ...'. The women's council is not in competition withother services; it has a separate yet complementary role to thePitjantjatjara Resource Centre.

The role of women's officers and organisations

5.14 In 1986 the then Department of Aboriginal Affairs (DAA)established '... an Office of Aboriginal Women (OAW) and its networkof women's co-ordinators at the State office level and women's issuesofficers at the regional office level.'107 The OAW and its networkof officers, which is now part of ATSIC, has the role of advising thegovernment and ensuring that the commission considers the impact andeffectiveness of their programs on Aboriginal women.

5.15 The Ngaanyatjarra, Pitjantjatjara, Yankunytjatjara Women'sCouncil pointed out to the Committee that their horizons were notlimited to the domestic sphere; that the council has empowered thewomen and provided access to informaton and decision-making processesto the point that they now feel confident to present their opinionson issues such as land, politics, education, law and culture, to bothAboriginal and non-Aboriginal forums and agencies.108

5.16 Aboriginal women's services are also being provided byadditional positions being attached to Aboriginal serviceorganisations and resource agencies. These positions usually existto provide services in the domestic sphere, such as homemakers,childcare services, domestic violence outreach, etc. This is not todemean these programs but simply to comment that there has been awider divergence of issues being addressed when separate organisationsare formed by the women.

Funding

5.17 The Office of Aboriginal Women has an annual appropriationto fund '... community-based services for Aboriginal women with anemphasis on the needs of women from rural and remote areas who havelimited access to mainstream services.' Funds are provided forprogram development and administrative initiatives - for example,women's resource centres, conferences, transport, shelters,exhibitions, history and culture.

5.18 Budget constraints have prevented the payment of women forsome ongoing programs and the Committee found instances where thewomen have continued to provide the services regardless of payment.For example, a group of women in one community in the NorthernTerritory is continuing to carry out ' . . . camp patrols to helpovercome the domestic violence and alcohol-related problems that occur

106 . . . .

ibid107 DAA Annual Report 1987-88, p.61 Oft

Ngaanyatjarra, Pitjantjatjara, Yankanytjatjara Women'sCouncil, 1990, p.l

109 ... ,

ibid

in the town camps.'110 The group was funded in 1987 to purchase avehicle but has not been successful in receiving ongoing recurrentfunding. The local women are currently rostering themselves on avoluntary basis to undertake the patrols which commence at 3.00 pm andgo through until 4.00 am - 5.00 am.

Conclusion

5.19 Unless particular approaches are developed to listen toAboriginal women, there is a risk that the consultation process, andconsequent policies and programs in Aboriginal affairs, will beineffective in relation to Aboriginal women. Strategies need to bedeveloped to ensure that Aboriginal women are listened to and activelyinvolved in decision making processes. Any approach should include:

adequate representation of Aboriginal women inpolicy/decision making forums;

the establishment of specific mechanisms in whichAboriginal women co-ordinate and define the servicesrequired to meet their needs.


the report Women's Business be the subject of afollow-up review to update its findings and determinethe extent to which its recommendations have beenadopted

there be at least one Aboriginal woman appointed tothe Office of the Status of Women to ensurerepresentation of all Australian women

the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissionpay greater attention to the needs of women and ensurethat their views are actively sought

the Office of Aboriginal Women develop guidelines -

- for ensuring adequate representation of Aboriginalwomen in decision-making forums;

- for ensuring that all new policies and programs arereflective of the needs of Aboriginal women; and

- against which all current policies can be reviewedfor their effectiveness and implications forAboriginal women; and

These guidelines should then be circulated to allagencies involved in service delivery to Aboriginal

Hansard Precis, Visit to the Northern Territory 29-31January 1990

65

5.21 The Committee notes that OAW has a network of women'sco-ordinators and women's issues officers located in State andregional offices; however, it is concerned that OAW may not beachieving its full potential. For example, on Cape York Peninsulathere are two female project officers to 500 women in ten or morecommunities. The expectation that these officers can fly intocommunities for two or three days and adequately respond to the needsof the women is unrealistic.

Rec ommendation


the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissionimmediately undertake a review of resources requiredto adequately co-ordinate and monitor programs andpolicies for their effectiveness and impact onAboriginal women; and

that the findings of the review be implemented andadequately funded to facilitate improvements inservice delivery where identified.

Transcript of Proceedings of Seminar, Brisbane, 11-12January 1990, p.133

66

Documents

Australian Government Publishing Service Canberra