“Aboriginal people and their culture are critical to the future of our State. Their unique knowledge is the defining element in building a sustainable future for Western Australia.”
Indigenous Implementation Board
Report to the Hon. Peter Collier MLC Minister for Indigenous Affairs
February 2011
Table of Contents
FROM THE CHAIR ...... 1 THE BOARD ...... 7 TERMS OF REFERENCE...... 9 THE BOARD’S STRATEGY ...... 11 DEFINITION OF TERMS...... 13 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 15 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 21
Section One RESETTING THE RELATIONSHIP ...... 27 Why the Board was established The Board’s philosophy and strategy Developments regarding regional governance Comment on progress to date
Section Two SUPPORTING THE NEW RELATIONSHIP ...... 53 Promotion of Aboriginal Culture Healing Leadership and Governance Economic Participation
Section Three MAINTAINING DIRECTION ...... 75
APPENDICES ...... 79 Minutes of Regional Roundtables
______
ATTACHMENTS Report on the Goldfields Conversation: Kalgoorlie 2-3 February2010 A new Dreaming: Noongar Dialogue February 24 – 25 2010 Mid West and Gascoyne Conversations
FROM THE CHAIR
Introduction
This is the third and final report of the Indigenous Implementation Board submitted in accordance with its Terms of Reference and Ministerial direction. This report maintains the strategic theme developed by the Board in its initial and second reports of the need for fundamental change to the structures and processes of Government engagement with the Aboriginal people of Western Australia. The need for such strategic change was first identified in the early stages of the Board’s discussions and has constantly been reinforced throughout two years of conversations with Aboriginal community leaders in the regions of the State.
The evidence is clear – the existing strategies are costly and do not deliver sustained change to the well being and prospects of the majority of Aboriginal people in either the cities or the regions. The exceptions to this finding offer some encouragement but, despite the best intent of many hard working people, are too few to justify the expenditure of the existing federal and state programs. Many of the accepted indicators of the effects of Council of Australian Government programs, i.e. education participation, health, engagement with the justice and corrective systems, are worsening for Western Australia. This suggests that the ongoing philosophy of assimilation that is obvious if unstated in underpinning “overcoming disadvantage” and “closing the gap” programs may be a contributor to growing Aboriginal alienation and dysfunction.
The objectivity of these assessments has been hampered by the fact that the Board has been unable to gain from Government an accurate picture of the objectives, costs and outcomes of the existing programs. While the Board has formally noted this as a matter of concern to the Auditor General, it is also readily apparent that program objectives, where they exist, are not developed within anything that would pass for a strategic framework aimed at a sustainable future for Western Australia and its people. Evidence from the broad data available suggests that, despite the growing wealth of the State, the foreseen costs, both financial and social, are, in all probability, unsustainable.
The Board has developed the view that the help and cooperation of Aboriginal people are required if this trend is to be turned around. The fundamental premise is that only Aboriginal people can solve Aboriginal problems and they can only be empowered to do this through shared strategies and plans developed in a partnership that is based on equality and recognises and respects their cultures and knowledge.
1 The Board also recognises that the deliberate and sustained erosion of Aboriginal culture over many years and attempts to replace it with layers of corporate structures makes this empowerment a task of considerable complexity. Over the last ten years Native Title bodies and emerging prescribed bodies corporate have helped form a pathway to more advanced forms of negotiation and participation by traditional owners but they are not sufficiently embracing in their current form to address all the requirements of a successful strategy.
It will therefore require significant resourcing to build the leadership, trust and confidence and to allow the building or rebuilding of culturally legitimate structures that can partner governments in the business of strategy development and governance.
In keeping with its Terms of Reference this report of the IIB identifies Aboriginal views on how this might be done and suggests guidelines for the ongoing work of the Government, particularly the Department of Indigenous Affairs, to engage Aboriginal people in the task of rebuilding their communities and making their culture a central part of Western Australia’s future.
Regional Government
At the request of the Minister for Indigenous Affairs the Board has concentrated its attention over the last period on the development of proposals for regional government in two of Western Australia’s northern regions – the Pilbara and the Kimberley. This activity coincides with the Board’s recommendation in its second report that, as a first step to building a strategic partnership with Aboriginal people throughout the State, Government should begin the process of establishing regional government in one region and form an inter departmental working group to work with all parties to that end. The Board has been working with the Department of Indigenous Affairs and Aboriginal communities as part of this process. A summary of the Department’s recommendations are included in this Report together with the Board’s views on the proposed way forward. Whatever approach is decided by Government to develop the options offered, it is considered to be vital that there is a shared vision of the way in which regional governance will work and the processes by which a legitimate Aboriginal contribution will be generated.
This recent activity has confirmed the Board’s original findings that there are no preceding regional strategies and plans that have engaged Aboriginal people in solutions to their contemporary problems and futures. Rather, there continues to be a series of unconnected and overlapping programs at the end of uncoordinated stovepipes extending from both Canberra and Perth. Recent COAG attempts to coordinate service delivery with Aboriginal participation in selected regions aside, there are no current mechanisms that allow Aboriginal people to contribute to strategies for regional development in a way that empowers them to have control over their own futures. In many ways this lack of power is a reflection of the general malaise that affects all rural communities in Western Australia – Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal.
2 Governance structures in Western Australia continue to reflect the lack of maturity at the time of Federation when the population of an area greater in physical size than Western Europe was less than 250,000. It had grown rapidly to this size from a figure of 50,000 at the time of Proclamation in 1890, primarily due to the gold rush in the Eastern Goldfields in that decade. In all probability the newly declared dominion would not have joined the Australian Federation had it not been for the newly arrived miners threatening to form a separate region and federate without the rest of Western Australia.
An emergent natural aversion to regionalism has left the State with central governance in Perth and more than 140 local government authorities based primarily on the immature philosophy of Country Roads Boards that existed from the time of Proclamation. Most contemporary local government authorities are therefore mendicant in the sense that they generate minimum revenue internally and are almost entirely dependent on grants from both the State and Federal Governments. Such structures are incapable of generating strategic vision and are therefore limited to service delivery of a simple and uncomplicated nature. Capital works other than of a minor nature remain at the discretion and in accordance with the vision of the central governments.
Having been regulated under separate legislation since the time of Federation, Aboriginal people have been faced in recent times with being thrown at the mercy of this dysfunctional governance structure that shows clear signs of even failing to meet the needs and gain the commitment of its non-Aboriginal constituents. These attempts to ‘mainstream’ services in the regions are proving to be very difficult given the dispositions and needs of Aboriginal communities after years of failed policies. Fortunately for them, recent national Native Title legislation has provided for the first time a bargaining position in the regions that demands a much higher level of engagement. Their cooperation has become essential, both to generate the full potential of the State and to invert their contribution to economic growth from a negative, as it now is, to an enduring and sustainable positive. It is with this in mind that the Board has proposed a shift to regional government in Western Australia.
Throughout this process the Board has been faced with the misunderstanding or misinterpretation of its intent as only seeking regional governance for Aboriginal people. Apart from the fact that such an interpretation is patently absurd, the failed precedent of ATSIC with its legitimate regional structures being unable to generate successful separate strategies for Aboriginal people meant that it was designed to fail. Such an approach is clearly not worth repeating. The Board is proposing regional governance for all stakeholders in a region and a requirement for external agencies to comply with the regional visions and negotiate within the regional strategic frameworks generated from them.
3 The Board recognises that such an approach is radical when compared to contemporary approaches where activities within regions are generated on behalf of remote constituencies on the western and eastern seaboards of Australia or, in the case of multi-national corporations, on behalf of global constituencies that have neither understanding of nor commitment to the regions and their peoples. Despite this perception, there is seen to be clear evidence of a shift in Australian and global politics towards regional agendas with greater degrees of self determination. The Royalties for the Regions initiative in Western Australia is one example of this trend. The Board has consistently taken the view that consultation on regional governance reform is a legitimate cost against Royalties for the Regions but has so far failed to gain a commitment to this view. Assuming that Royalties for the Regions remains a part of the Government’s agenda, the need for this initiative to fund governance reform in the regions will need to be pursued.
Reform of the Department of Indigenous Affairs
Throughout its tenure the Board has consistently taken the view that reform of DIA was an essential requirement in improving the Government’s relationship with Aboriginal people. The reinvigoration of the statutory bodies under the Aboriginal Affairs Planning Authority Act 1972 – the Aboriginal Affairs Coordinating Committee (AACC) and the West Australian Aboriginal Advisory Committee (WA AAC) have previously been acknowledged by the Board as important steps forward in placing DIA back at the centre of the policy development and service delivery processes for Aboriginal people, as intended by the Act. The prospects for developing a strategy for Government that goes beyond simple service delivery towards a new relationship have been enhanced by these initiatives.
Progress on the organisational changes within DIA to strengthen its regional engagement is refreshing and has also been welcomed by the Board. It is clear that this reform is in its early stages and remains a work in progress that would have to be accelerated if the Government was to agree to the development of enhanced Aboriginal participation in regional governance. The strategy proposed by the Board would see a more direct role for DIA in ensuring that the Aboriginal position in regional government was properly founded and supported. DIA would have to be adequately staffed and funded for this complex undertaking and would need the direct support of Cabinet to ensure its success.
The Promotion of Aboriginal Culture
The foundation of the Board’s position on Aboriginal empowerment has always been based on the premise that Aboriginal culture is critical to the future of Western Australia. In taking this position the Board has been conscious of the fact that this will be a view not widely shared within the State – primarily because of a lack of understanding of the deep connection between Aboriginal culture and the health of the landscape that will sustain Western Australians throughout the current economic cycle and beyond.
4 The State’s rich Aboriginal cultures - both the living cultures and cultural artefacts in the landscape of an antiquity rarely found anywhere else on Earth – are of profound interest to a growing international fraternity and are therefore tourism and research assets that have yet to be properly developed and marketed. Apart from the fact that these are a potential source of wealth and pride to Aboriginal people, this report also explores the substantial body of international research that shows the beneficial effects for Indigenous people of empowerment on the basis of culture. A much more proactive approach to educating young Western Australians about this shared heritage while helping Aboriginal communities to preserve and rebuild their cultures is a strongly developed view of the Board. The engagement of Aboriginal people in a partnership to address the preservation and restoration of regional ecologies is seen as an essential dimension of this process.
Economic Participation
The Board has found that the most pronounced view on Aboriginal economic empowerment in both the Government and commercial sectors has been about preparation of young Aboriginal people for the workforce – primarily jobs in mining. While there is considerable money and effort being committed to this end, with mixed results, very limited resources have been made available to build business opportunities based on the more sustainable Aboriginal assets of land and culture. The demise of the Aboriginal Economic Development Unit during the Board’s tenure has been previously mentioned but remains a case in point. That it was so readily disbanded in the context of a financial adjustment process without adequate consultation is seen as a statement of how little regard and understanding there is of the need for support of this nature in allowing Aboriginal people to participate in the State’s economy.
The surge in mining in Western Australia and the consequent flow of money and increased business opportunities to Aboriginal communities requires much greater assistance from Government in the building of sustainable ventures and a higher level of scrutiny of the forms of advice being given to bodies corporate and the way in which funds are distributed to the traditional owners. The preparation of Aboriginal leadership to participate in these opportunities is also seen by the Board as critical to the longer term health and sustainability of the cultures.
The Board’s Legacy
The Board has been unanimous in welcoming the opportunity of the last two years to contribute its advice to consideration of this vital issue of the State’s relationship with its Aboriginal citizens. It has interpreted its Terms of Reference as a direction to explore strategic solutions to a profoundly difficult problem that has resisted all attempts to resolve it on terms that are essentially those of a centralised, urban and European culture. This failure can be measured in terms of the alienation reflected in the lack of participation, poor health and incarceration rates of Aboriginal people. All the evidence suggests that it is not simply a matter of money – rather, it is a sense of not having a stake in the future of a State that does not value their cultures and their potential to contribute anything other than their physical labour to the generation of wealth.
5 The Board has drawn attention to the fact that, without a change in direction, the cost of these failed policies will soar to levels that are unsustainable in both financial and social terms. It has suggested that the State should adopt ways of gaining the commitment of Aboriginal leaders to explore and develop new directions in the relationship. The Board has conducted conversations in all regions of Western Australia to determine the readiness to follow this course. In this process the Board has found that it had to work hard to establish its bona fides as an independent, as opposed to a government, broker on this question of relationships before Aboriginal people moved from recrimination about past experiences to being more forthcoming on a shared vision for the future. From these constructive discussions the Board has concluded that the development of regional government is the best way to engage and include Aboriginal people in this new partnership. In coming to this conclusion, the Board has also recognised that the consequences of Native Title legislation have matured to the stage where a new form of engagement is essential. Aboriginal people are developing an awareness of their enhanced power to negotiate. There is an expectation that Government will respond to this emerging reality.
The Board is concerned that the State might acknowledge this need while failing to put in place adequate structures to take advantage of these opportunities. This final report has been structured with this possibility in mind. It offers guidance on how these issues might be moved forward and suggests that the Department of Indigenous Affairs should be reinforced and supported as the custodian of this essential agenda, supported by a trusted, independent body of similar standing to the IIB that can continue to broker the development of regional governance.
Lieutenant General (Rtd) John Sanderson, AC Chairman Indigenous Implementation Board Western Australia
10 February 2011
6 THE BOARD
The Indigenous Implementation Board (Board) commenced operating in February 2009. It is an important part of the State’s commitment to the advancement of Aboriginal Western Australians.
Under the terms of reference, the Board reports to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, with the Department of Indigenous Affairs (DIA) providing the Secretariat. The Board has provided three written reports over two years of operation.
The membership of the Board includes a new generation of leaders and members with a high level of expertise and influence. It comprises a balance of genders with four men and five women. Five of the members are Aboriginal and four are non-Aboriginal.
Members:
Lt General (Rt) John Sanderson AC (Chairman) Mr Brendan Hammond
Dr Mark Bin Bakar Professor Helen Milroy
Mr Kim Bridge Professor Fiona Stanley AC
Ms Ricky Burges Ms Dawn Wallam
Dr Sue Gordon AM
The membership of the Board has between them a high level of knowledge and internationally recognised expertise. The Board is well placed to provide advice on the causes, rather than the well known symptoms, of Aboriginal disadvantage and to develop a proposal for a regionally-based reform agenda.
7 8 TERMS OF REFERENCE
The responsibilities of the Board include: 1. Developing a framework to use to collaborate and focus resources for future agreements with the Commonwealth, Local Governments and other key stakeholders working with Indigenous Western Australians. 2. Establishing accountability mechanisms to monitor achievement against agreed targets and focus resources to maximise positive outcomes for Indigenous Western Australians. 3. Delivering a bi-annual report to Cabinet on progress in the Indigenous Affairs portfolio in Western Australia. 4. Driving fundamental policy shifts through stronger and more accountable Government governance, building trust through consistency and commitment. 5. Building effective participation of Indigenous people, and the broader WA leadership, supporting effective community governance, leadership and structures necessary to engage with Government. 6. Providing advice on human and financial resources required for Indigenous people to participate in decision-making that affects community lives and the way services are provided.
Specific activities to be undertaken in the first two years include: 1. Establishing a Government governance framework to improve coordination and management of service delivery at the regional level. 2. Strategically positioning the State in relation to State, Commonwealth and Local Government responsibilities through relevant bilateral and other arrangements. 3. Developing, with State agencies, clear overarching regional action plans to guide current and future activities linked to bilateral arrangements and State investment priorities. 4. Producing an annual Western Australian report on achievement of Indigenous outcomes against the investment in Indigenous affairs, including specific and mainstream services to Indigenous people in Western Australia. This will also be provided at a regional level. 5. Leading current and future planning to focus the State investment in Indigenous communities that can provide a more sustainable quality of life and enhance the capacity of Indigenous people to contribute to the common wealth of Western Australia.
9 10 THE BOARD’S STRATEGY
The Indigenous Implementation Board will drive the empowerment of Aboriginal people to participate as an equal partner in delivering positive sustainable outcomes for Aboriginal Western Australians. This will require mutually agreed ways of working.
To achieve this it will catalyse fundamental change in four areas: 1. enable the Aboriginal design and delivery of services;
2. ensure the continuation of a vibrant living culture;
3. refocus regional governance to build sustainable communities, economies and environments; and
4. engage all sectors.
Meeting these objectives will necessitate a fundamental rethink about the way that Governments develop and implement policy and programs. The recommendations made in this report provide practical and meaningful advice on how to improve performance and accountability through effective regional engagement and joint participation in the design, delivery and evaluation of services and therefore in the outcomes for Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Western Australians.
The Board developed an action agenda for the first 100 days which included:
1. regional dialogues, commencing in the Kimberley in March 2009 to be followed around the State; 2. facilitating meetings of senior Aboriginal law men and women to advise the board; 3. ensuring the development and empowerment of indigenous leaders; and 4. commencing the redesign of Government process and decision making in partnership with the Aboriginal Affairs Coordinating Committee (AACC) and Western Australian Aboriginal Advisory Committee (WA AAC). The Board recognises the importance of the role of Elders in the preservation of cultural wellbeing. It promotes the role of Elders in maintenance of culture, language and knowledge and seeks to have them supported and resourced to undertake the work required to preserve these important and unique assets.
11
12 DEFINITION OF TERMS
AACC
An acronym for the Aboriginal Affairs Coordinating Committee. This is a committee established under section 19 of the Aboriginal Affairs Planning Authority Act 1972 that comprises key state government department directors general whose mandate broadly expressed is to coordinate services for Aboriginal people.
COAG
An acronym for the Council of Australian Governments.
Indigenous/Aboriginal
For the purpose of this document, the terms “Indigenous” and “Aboriginal” will be used interchangeably to refer to both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Aboriginal Cultures
This term will be used when referring to those broad common connections that relate to Aboriginal peoples and that come from, and are generally passed on from, generation to generation. These are often related to the landscape, place of birth, beliefs, values, stories and the relationships between people and families.
Governance
‘Governance’ is taken to mean the evolving processes, relationships, institutions and structures by which a group of people, community or society organise themselves collectively to negotiate their rights and interests, get things done, and make decisions about:
how they are constituted as a group (who are members and who are not);
who has authority within the group, and about what;
their agreed rules to ensure authority is exercised properly and their decision-makers are held accountable;
how they enforce the decisions they make; and
what arrangements will best enable them to achieve their goals.
13 For the purpose of this document, three sub-types of governance in the Indigenous affairs context are used:
Aboriginal Governance – Culturally legitimate mechanisms and processes by which decisions are made within the Aboriginal community.
Corporate/Organisational Governance – Mechanisms and processes that are required by law and government administration for organisations that manage and/or provide services to Aboriginal communities.
Government Governance – Those mechanisms by which governments make decisions and manage their business including engagement with Aboriginal people about services to communities.
Regional
The term ‘Regional’ will generally be used to refer to regional areas of Western Australia that are used by local governments and the Development Commissions. It will also be used to refer to culturally relevant clusters of Aboriginal communities that may or may not cut across these boundaries.
WA AAC
An acronym for the Western Australian Aboriginal Advisory Committee. This committee is established under section 18 of the Aboriginal Affairs Planning Authority Act 1972 to advise the Department of Indigenous Affairs on matters relating to the interests and wellbeing of Aboriginal people.
14 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On its web page the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development summarises what extensive study has found works to promote sustained, self-determined social and economic development among American Indian nations.
Sovereignty Matters. When Native nations make their own decisions about what development approaches to take, they consistently out-perform external decision makers on matters as diverse as governmental form, natural resource management, economic development, health care, and social service provision.
Institutions Matter. For development to take hold, assertions of sovereignty must be backed by capable institutions of governance. Nations do this as they adopt stable decision rules, establish fair and independent mechanisms for dispute resolution, and separate politics from day-to-day business and program management.
Culture Matters. Successful economies stand on the shoulders of legitimate, culturally grounded institutions of self-government. Indigenous societies are diverse; each nation must equip itself with a governing structure, economic system, policies, and procedures that fit its own contemporary culture.
Leadership Matters. Nation building requires leaders who introduce new knowledge and experiences, challenge assumptions, and propose change. Such leaders, whether elected, community, or spiritual, convince people that things can be different and inspire them to take action.
These sentiments have been expressed to the Board in its conversations with Aboriginal people across the State over the past two years and as Aboriginal people have informed us to Government for many years prior to that. The Board’s own research1 on effective Aboriginal governance also confirms the relevance of these findings to Western Australia. In all its work over the past two years, the Board remains firmly committed to the view that the only way to address the underlying causes of Aboriginal disadvantage is to change the way that mainstream society engages with Aboriginal people and to form partnerships with them in determining strategic social and economic priorities and that this is most effectively done by developing regional governance that includes culturally legitimate Aboriginal representation as a core part of it.
1 A summary of this research is included in the Board’s second report that is available on the Department of Indigenous Affairs website.
15 The Board has observed an increasing momentum among Aboriginal people to work together to form regional structures that can engage with governments and industry at a senior level to more effectively influence planning and decision making. This is not an easy task and is complicated by the divisions that occur as native title is negotiated and settlements reached with industry and governments to allow development on Aboriginal land. There is however, growing recognition that it is essential to unite over issues that affect all groups within a region and to find a way of ensuring that all people within a region are effectively represented and benefit from the opportunities that native title offers.
Attached to this report are the outcomes of regional conversations held in the Goldfields, South West and Midwest and Gascoyne. The outcomes of the Kimberley and Pilbara conversations form part of the Board’s first two reports. Collectively they show that the themes of most importance are:
Commitment to maintaining and growing culture as a central part of a vision for the future of their communities.
Recognition of the strengths of their communities and their ability to build organisational and intellectual capacity that is capable of self determination.
Acknowledgement of differences among groups along with a clear recognition by most that Aboriginal organisations must find a way to unite to develop a strong voice based on culture that can engage with government and business to change the way planning and service delivery occurs in the region.
The need for greater accountability from service deliverers as outcomes for Aboriginal people are poor and a knowledge that this can only occur through partnership with their communities and involvement of their communities in planning and service delivery.
While there is considerable variability across the State in the capacity for engaging in regional governance at this time the Board has observed that processes are occurring to build this capacity. This report describes in some detail developments in the Kimberley and Pilbara as, in response to the Board’s second report, the former Minister for Indigenous Affairs asked for information on how regional governance might operate in these regions. It is also aware that concerted effort is occurring to develop a unified Noongar voice associated with negotiating native title settlement and that this will result in processes and structures that can participate in regional governance in the South West. In the Midwest and Gascoyne the focus is currently on developing sub-regional processes but having met with the board of Yamatji Marlpa the Board believes that they will ultimately begin to work on regional processes. The conversation in the Goldfields concluded with the intent to continue work on developing regional processes, however, changes within key organisations have delayed further work.
16 This report is structured in three sections. The first deals with developments towards creating regional governance in Western Australia. It is titled “Resetting the Relationship” as the Board believes that the relationship with Aboriginal people needs to fundamentally change so that mainstream Australia grows to understand and respect Aboriginal cultures and to take pride in their operation alongside the mainstream. The second deals with promoting Aboriginal culture, healing, leadership and governance and economic participation. These issues have been addressed as the Board believes they are fundamental to supporting a new relationship and regional governance. While the Board has received extensive comment in its conversations with Aboriginal people and others about failures in health, education, early childhood development, housing and community infrastructure it has chosen not to focus on these. It recognises that good health, education, housing and the like are necessary for optimal development and form the foundations for successful economic participation and governance, but its focus has been on how to address the underlying causes of disadvantage rather than its symptoms. The Board believes that strong cultural identity and institutions that can engage on an equal footing with governments, industry and other stakeholders is the way to achieve this. As this is the Board’s final report the third section discusses how the Board’s work can be maintained into the future.
Given the economic and social development within Western Australia, the Board believes it is now time for the Government to commit to regional governance and provide the leadership to enable this change in the dynamics of Aboriginal participation to occur. Consultations indicate that the Kimberley and then the Pilbara Aboriginal communities are ready to undertake the work necessary to establish governance processes that will allow their participation in regional governance. This will involve creating culturally legitimate bodies that represent all their sub-regional communities and have the endorsement of elders and law bosses. These will allow Aboriginal people in the regions to come together to determine their position on regional matters and provide a base from which to provide representation in regional governance. Provided its recommendations are accepted, the recent review of regional development commissions includes proposals that can provide the beginning of a reform process linking these culturally legitimate bodies into a new structure of Government policy development and delivery that will allow all stakeholders to participate in and commit to sustainable social and economic strategies in each of these regions.
To support Aboriginal participation in regional governance work is needed to develop the capacity of leaders within Aboriginal communities in organisational and community governance. Strong local governance will support regional governance and provide the learning required for the next generations of leaders.
17 The Board understands that Aboriginal culture is a vital asset and essential to the future of Western Australia but is aware that this view is not yet fully appreciated by the community at large. Several recommendations are made to promote Aboriginal culture in order to increase knowledge and understanding, aid reconciliation and inclusion and act as a counter to racism. Promotion of Aboriginal culture is also essential to provide a strong sense of personal and community identity for Aboriginal people that will allow them to flourish within the mainstream community.
The effects on Aboriginal people of colonisation and policies of forced removal have been profound and are well documented. The disconnection from family and culture experienced by many individuals has not only affected them but continues to be felt in subsequent generations to the present day. Ongoing systemic racism, albeit much of which is unintended, helps to maintain these damaging effects for many Aboriginal people and their communities and, unless healing occurs, the personal and social damage caused will continue and thereby slow the processes of Aboriginal community development and reconciliation with the wider Australian community. To assist community healing the Board proposes that a substantial fund is established to allow affected communities to determine how best to help themselves.
Economic participation will be a key means by which Aboriginal people are able to generate income that can be used for personal, community and cultural development. In this regard native title will present many Aboriginal communities with unprecedented opportunities for enterprise development that can be sustained beyond the resources boom and for which Government needs to be prepared to provide training and support. In this regard, the Board is critical of current policy that has a heavy focus on employment, particularly in the public sector, while neglecting investment in enterprise development. Western Australia has changed from being a national leader in this latter field before the disbandment of the Aboriginal Economic Development Unit to being a poor performer, even in national terms. By way of example, the Western Australian Government spent $6 million in 2008/09 on Aboriginal economic participation. This equates to 3% of Government expenditure on economic participation and around 0.3% of expenditure on services for Aboriginal people. Even allowing that investment in education and training is accounted for separately this is a remarkably small investment in assisting Aboriginal people to develop businesses and business skills that will enable them to become economically self sufficient and contribute to growing the State’s economy.
18 After two years of work the Board has done what it can to advise Government on the essential changes required to address the causes of Aboriginal disadvantage. It is clear that this change will be an evolutionary process that requires Government commitment and leadership and the continuing work of the Department of Indigenous Affairs to support Aboriginal community aspirations and to coordinate government activity so that silos are broken down and real partnerships are formed with Aboriginal people and their organisations. Past practices of dividing communities in the interests of non-Aboriginal agencies must give way to building communities based on strong culture. Aboriginal people acknowledge that they must also come together to contribute and work for regional governance and develop and use their intellectual and physical resources to this end.
The Board recognises that its message is not widely appreciated at this time and that it is promoting a radical change in the way that the State does business. It is confident that Aboriginal people around Western Australia want the influence and responsibility that will come with regional governance and is sure that non-Aboriginal people in the regions also want greater empowerment. It is less certain of Government desire for this. However, to continue on the current path will be an expensive and largely nugatory exercise. The Board believes that the political and democratic trend is clear and that regional governance is inevitable. It will be a matter of whether it is this Government or a future one that accepts responsibility for this initiative.
The path that the Board has set out and the journey that it has begun through its conversations with Aboriginal people and its advice to Government must continue if a changed relationship with Aboriginal people through regional governance is to become a reality. All too often change in Indigenous Affairs has been stymied through failure to continue with policy initiatives due to an unrealistic expectation that change happens quickly and so fails to allow sufficient time for ideas to be understood and be fully incorporated into the way of doing business by both Aboriginal and mainstream organisations. The Board is confident of the capacity of the Department of Indigenous Affairs to continue to work with Aboriginal people across the State but understands that it will require the support of an advisory group that can act as independent broker and is focussed on achieving regional governance with Aboriginal culture at its core. This group is needed as a successor to the Board and should be comprised of Aboriginal people and others knowledgeable about culturally legitimate governance and how this can link with the mainstream in order to maintain the momentum generated from the Board’s work. A journey has been started on the right path that with goodwill and the combined expertise of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal leaders will result in a partnership that will benefit all Western Australians.
19 20 RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations for the Further Development of Regional Governance
Government commit to regional governance and support processes whereby Aboriginal people develop culturally legitimate representational systems that will allow them to participate in social and economic development for the region. Based on discussions with Aboriginal leaders in the Kimberley and Pilbara this will require the creation of an Aboriginal body that will enable sub-regional groups to develop agreed positions on regional issues and then provide Aboriginal representation on the regional governance body. The Department of Indigenous Affairs should have the responsibility for supporting the development of culturally legitimate representational systems with funding from Royalties for Regions.
If Government pursues the recommendations of the review of regional development commissions these along with the WARDC will become responsible for setting regional priorities and Aboriginal representation must ultimately be statutorily recognised for the State and regional commissions. In the interim the Board supports the recommendation that the Departments of Indigenous Affairs and Regional Development and Lands develop proposals for Cabinet consideration that will acknowledge the importance of Aboriginal partnership and governance and its legitimate position in regional development. If a working party is established to address the urgent need in the Pilbara to strengthen integration of statutory land use planning, regional development and local government service delivery it is recommended that it collaborate with the Pilbara Futures process from its inception to ensure that a solid foundation is established with Aboriginal people across the region from which an ongoing relationship can be developed.
If Government does not pursue the recommendations of the review of regional development commissions the Board recommends that Government pursue the recommendations made by the Department of Indigenous Affairs to develop regional governance in the Kimberley and Pilbara.
21 Recommendations Related to the Board’s Previous Reports
Government continue its support for DIA and ensure that appropriate recognition and resources are provided to develop its regional presence and to implement the Board’s recommendations.
Further iterations of Cabinet targets in Indigenous Affairs include the strategic context for the target and governance framework that operates to correct underperformance. Targets should not be accepted if they are not specific and measurable.
DIA continue to analyse investment in Indigenous Affairs and work with Commonwealth and State Governments and Aboriginal people to redirect investment into areas that build the capacity of Aboriginal people across the State. Strategies for reinvestment should focus on redirecting mainstream expenditure more effectively and reducing waste associated with siloed planning and service delivery. Continuing work to develop accurate estimates of Indigenous investment should include establishing processes for data collection that will enable investment to be measured at regional as well as state and national levels.
The Auditor General considers developing a systematic program of auditing progress in Indigenous Affairs that assesses the value of current investment against intended outcomes. The development of Cabinet targets may provide an opportunity for this.
State and Commonwealth Governments resolve issues in funding interpreter services and the training and accreditation of Aboriginal translators and interpreters so that all Aboriginal Australians are provided with health and legal services in a language they understand.
Recommendations to Promote Aboriginal Culture
Government establish a fund that can be used to leverage support from a range of sectors and organisations to allow Aboriginal language centres to preserve and teach Aboriginal languages.
Departments working with children and young people establish a budget to fund community elders and mentors to teach them about their culture and assist to reconnect them to the cultural life of their people. The size of the budget should reflect the numbers and proportion of Aboriginal children and young people who receive services from the agency.
22 The Department of Indigenous Affairs conduct its review of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 expeditiously with the aim of strengthening the protection of Aboriginal heritage.
The Department of Education and non-government schools develop their curricula to provide increased content on Aboriginal history and culture presented in a positive context in order for Aboriginal students to see that their culture is valued and for non-Aboriginal students to understand the past and appreciate the value of Aboriginal culture.
The Department of Indigenous Affairs continue to promote reconciliation activities and to work with communities and organisations to assist them to identify ways to appropriately promote and acknowledge Aboriginal culture and heritage.
The Western Australian Government develop an Aboriginal cultural centre as an icon for Perth and the State as a matter of priority in its redevelopment of the Perth foreshore.
Recommendation to Promote Healing
The Western Australian Government establish a healing fund to operate for a minimum of 10 years that at least matches Commonwealth expenditure on healing initiatives on an annual basis ($6.6 million per year) and is based on the Aboriginal Healing Framework developed by the Aboriginal Healing Project.
Recommendations to Promote Leadership and Governance
Royalties for Regions allocate recurrent funding for Aboriginal communities to develop culturally relevant processes and structures to enable engagement with regional governance.
The Commonwealth and State Governments invest in developing organisational and community governance capacity within Aboriginal communities using processes that have proved to be effective such as mentoring and skills transfer over time. Investment should be sustained over a sufficient period to allow for skills to be consolidated and for community organisations to develop sustainable capacity. Processes initiated by Aboriginal communities such as Fitzroy Futures and Pilbara Futures provide models that should continue to be supported and extended to other parts of the State.
23 Where leadership programs are developed, particularly those aimed at enhancing the confidence and capacity of young people, the originators consider how these might be linked to ongoing processes and/or education and training that will reinforce the skills learned and potentially contribute to obtaining recognised qualifications.
Recommendations to Promote Economic Participation
Government develop a strategy to promote Aboriginal economic participation and significantly increase the investment in supporting Aboriginal people to develop productive enterprises.
The Public Sector Commissioner implement the Board’s recommendations to refine the strategy to increase Aboriginal employment in the public sector to reflect working age population share so that it addresses the imbalance between lower and senior level employment within the public sector; takes into account the uneven distribution of Aboriginal people across the State; and reflects the client base of the agency. No major service delivery agency should employ less than the Indigenous working age population share.
The Public Sector Commission review the effectiveness of section 50D positions in promoting careers in the public sector. There is a potential that these positions are not effectively linked to broader organisational structures and inadvertently serve to limit career progression.
Recommendations to Promote Continuation of the Board’s Work
The Board leaves behind the following markers for what needs to occur:
DIA has the mandate to ensure that Government develops policy and processes that support Aboriginal people attain equal life outcomes to the rest of the population on their terms; that ensure that Aboriginal culture is understood and promoted; and that regional governance with Aboriginal partnership is achieved.
To support DIA in its work to promote regional governance in partnership with Aboriginal people the Board recommends that an advisory body that is independent of government and comprised of Aboriginal and other knowledgeable people is established to assist DIA continue to develop regional governance processes and structures.
24 DIA will need to continue to analyse Government expenditure in Indigenous Affairs and use this information to leverage change so that ultimately expenditure reflects support for functional development rather than ameliorating disadvantage.
DIA needs to continue to increase its regional presence and to continue to engage with central and line agencies to change the culture and function of Government departments.
Aboriginal people will need to pursue regional representational processes that will allow them to agree among themselves on priorities for their social, economic, environmental and cultural development; use their increasing capacity to negotiate through native title to drive the outcomes they want from industry and Government; and work with Government to establish a form of regional governance that will benefit all people in their regions.
The work of Chandler and the Harvard Project has established that strong functioning Indigenous communities have:
Self government
Knowledge of and respect for their culture and the capacity to preserve and teach this for future generations
Local control over basic services such as health, education, policing and child welfare
Control over traditional lands or engagement in processes to establish such control.
These markers can be measured and can be used as indicators of progress and the Board recommends that DIA develop specific performance indicators based on these markers.
25 26 Section One
RESETTING THE RELATIONSHIP
Why the Board was established
The Board was established by Cabinet in December 2008 to provide advice to Government about how the underlying causes of Indigenous disadvantage could be addressed. There was an awareness then that simply continuing with more of the same was not going to make a significant difference. The Apology delivered in February 2008 expressed the national sentiment that past policies, particularly policies of forced removal had been wrong and done grave harm to many Indigenous individuals and to their cultures and that now was a time to reset the relationship to one of mutual respect and work together to remove the discrepancies in life opportunities and outcomes between mainstream Australians and Indigenous peoples. Work by COAG was beginning on “Close the Gap” strategies to overcome Indigenous disadvantage.
“The Board is here to advise the State Government on how to identify and cut through the obstacles and really improve social and economic outcomes with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.”
Indigenous Affairs Minister Dr Kim Hames MLA, 10 Feb 2009
The Board fundamentally agreed with the sentiments expressed in the Apology. Current policies had failed and a new relationship was needed with Indigenous people that fully respected their cultures and respected their capacity to solve their own problems with the support of mainstream Australia. Indigenous people had been advising governments for a long time that they needed to be deciding their own priorities and designing and delivering services to meet these in a way that was relevant to them.
27 When the Board was established very large amounts of money2 were invested in Indigenous affairs but it was obvious that there was little by way of positive gains. Services were failing to address problems and the prosperity generated by the resources boom was largely by-passing Indigenous communities. Circumstances have not changed significantly since the Board’s inception. Government expenditure in Indigenous affairs in Western Australia is estimated to be in the order of $2 billion annually with a large proportion being spent on criminal justice and other indicators of dysfunction. By extension, this level of expenditure into the future is clearly unsustainable.
Services are not being delivered in ways that meet the needs of most Indigenous recipients and therefore young people are failing in the education system, many people are not receiving adequate health care, they are not finding employment and an unacceptable number are entering the criminal justice system. Some progress is being made through “Closing the Gap” programs but it is slow and is yet to make a significant impact.
Native title is now enabling some communities to negotiate lucrative settlements around land use that are providing local benefits. However common complaints about these processes are that benefits are limited to a few, they divide families and communities and some benefits may be lost to future generations due to poor governance. The extent of benefits also varies considerably depending on the degree of mining interest.
The Board’s philosophy and strategy
The Board has built its strategy from a deep analytical process and strategic dialogue at their first meeting. It delivered the foundation on which the Board’s strategy is built: that Aboriginal people and their culture are critical to the future of our State; their unique knowledge is the defining element in building a sustainable future for Western Australia. This strategy was reviewed in depth in January 2010 and the Board reaffirmed its commitment to this tenet and its original strategy.
“Aboriginal people and their culture are critical to the future of our State. Their unique knowledge is the defining element in building a sustainable future for Western Australia.”
Indigenous Implementation Board
2 A report by Access Economics for Reconciliation Australia (2008) An overview of the economic impact of Indigenous disadvantage estimated that if Indigenous disadvantage was remedied around $10 billion additional in today’s terms would be available to the Australian economy in 2029.
28 There are differences in world view and philosophical understanding between Indigenous and mainstream Australian cultures which need to be acknowledged and respected by all. Neither culture is “better” or more suited to contemporary life. However Australia’s past relationship with its Indigenous peoples has generally been characterised by their cultures being regarded as inferior and as being of no value to modern life. This failure to respect Indigenous cultures has contributed significantly to the disempowerment of Indigenous people and to loss of culture and cultural connection for many. Knowledge of culture and a strong sense of cultural connection are now understood to be vital for the emotional and social wellbeing of individuals and communities.
Aboriginal cultures are also the oldest continuing cultures in the world and so have clearly demonstrated a deep knowledge of Australian environments and how human habitation can successfully be sustained while maintaining a very diverse range of ecosystems. This knowledge of the land and sea, its flora and fauna and seasonal cycles is invaluable to the future sustainability of Australia.
The Board believes that the only way that Indigenous disadvantage can be addressed is to deliver a paradigm shift that will see strong engagement and involvement of Aboriginal people with other stakeholders to collectively consider the development of Western Australia. The empowerment and involvement of Aboriginal people needs to be on a cultural and regional basis. For these reasons the Board has consistently advocated for regional governance where Aboriginal people are represented and have a voice in determining economic and social priorities and the way that services are delivered.
Why regional governance?
In its first two reports the Board outlined its reasons for proposing regional governance. These reasons have been confirmed by continuing conversations with Aboriginal communities and will be summarised here. The following section will provide information on developments since the Board’s second report.
There are global and local challenges facing Australia and Western Australia that can best be addressed at a regional level:
The converging issues of global population growth, climate change and environmental degradation are creating unprecedented policy and practical challenges for governments around the world. Increasingly international and national expectations are that governments will address these in ways that enable sustainability of ecosystems and Indigenous cultures.
29 There is a shift in economic and geopolitical power to Asia and, as a consequence, Western Australia is experiencing an unprecedented boom fuelled by the export of natural resources to the burgeoning economies of the Region. This provides a tremendous opportunity for Government leadership in using this wealth to lay the foundation, in a real and sustainable way, whereby the true and full potential of the landscape and adjacent ocean of Western Australia can be realised. This significant and enduring legacy will be based on revitalising the regions of Western Australia which will be the foundation of long term future prosperity and sustainability for all Western Australians.
The regional economic base, outside of extractive industries, is patchy and in many instances unstable or declining. The historical neglect and unwise exploitation of our fragile environment and physical resources has severely degraded and, in some cases, destroyed the viable productive capacity of land and sea. Many communities outside the major metropolitan areas of Western Australia are struggling to maintain their integrity with decreasing population, acute social issues and an inability to maintain sufficient levels of basic infrastructure and services. The critical role of Royalties for Regions in determining the outcome of the last State election is also evidence of the dissatisfaction of those who live and work outside the south west of the State with the way regional needs are being managed.
Aboriginal people are owners or have rights over significant areas of land and sea inclusive of the 27m hectares of State land held by the Aboriginal Land Trust, 2.5m hectares held by the Indigenous Land Corporation and 30% of the State currently under determined native title. In the interests of the economic advancement of Aboriginal people and the development of the State and its resources, Aboriginal land interests need to be represented in regional planning and regional development decision making structures.
Native title compensation agreements are generating significant flows of revenue intended for the use and benefit of claimants and native title holders now and into the future. It is estimated this revenue could exceed $6b over the next 25 years. New regional, community and corporate governance mechanisms are required to ensure the appropriate management of these funds, the equitable sharing of benefits and the direction of these funds to alleviate poverty and reduce welfare dependence.
30 Embracing Indigenous culture as a national asset and including culturally recognised Indigenous participation in regional governance will enhance regional renewal as well as address the discrepancy that currently exists between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Western Australians, promote reconciliation and create a new way of working together that will benefit all. In this regard a broadening and deepening of our understanding of what constitutes an asset is fundamental to the success of any long term vision of prosperity. A move from thinking of value in terms of components of land or sea, towards understanding the immeasurable potential value located in the systemic integrity of the landscape as a whole is required. Aboriginal people and their culture are a critical part of building this understanding and enabling sustainable use of these assets.
Governance that is close to people and the land and sea they care for is the core of any effective strategy of strengthening the regions of Western Australia and providing for the long term prosperity of the state.
Research into effective governance involving Aboriginal people3 makes it clear that it is not realistic to devise a model and apply it generically across Western Australia. What is required is a process of engagement that brings participants together to determine the processes and structures that will work for their region. This process needs to be truly inclusive of all sectors and focused on long term sustainable strategic development for the region.
The characteristics of such a model include:
An overarching and uniting vision to provide coherence to all regional governance structures. This is important in order to focus on ‘big picture’ development and mitigate against ‘crisis management’.
Inclusion of all sectors of regional communities, with a genuine commitment to effective engagement and representation of these groups and focused on long term, sustainable strategic development.
Adaptation to the particular circumstances of each region, meaning that there would be a diverse range of governance arrangements, rather than a ‘one size fits all’ approach.
A ‘thin governance’ approach to coordinate and guide the delivery of services by government, non-government and corporate agencies using local knowledge, rather than adding another level of bureaucracy.
3 Fisher, S. (2009) Experiences in the development and implementation of regional governance models: Report to the Indigenous Implementation Board.
31 A philosophical and practical commitment to the empowerment of Aboriginal people, and a willingness to embrace the paramount role of Aboriginal heritage, language, culture and knowledge in leading all Western Australians towards renewing a profound and spiritual connection to the land and sea.
In its second report the Board recommended that the Government:
“establish a regional governance authority in one region of Western Australia as a first step towards regional governance and based on the principles identified from the Board’s conversations, research and analysis. Central to the functioning of the regional governance authority would be the philosophy that governance close to regional people and the land and sea that they care for is the core to any effective strategy of strengthening regions and providing for long term sustainable prosperity and that Aboriginal culture and knowledge are essential and integral to this. The regional governance authority would have the authority to determine regional development priorities including infrastructure and economic and social development priorities.”
Developments regarding regional governance
In response to the recommendations made in the Board’s second report the Minister for Indigenous Affairs asked the Department for Indigenous Affairs to work with the Board and other key stakeholders to develop potential models for regional governance that could operate in the Pilbara and Kimberley. A meeting of State level stakeholders was held on early October 2010 and this was followed by roundtable discussions with Aboriginal leaders in the Pilbara and Kimberley.
Views of State Level Stakeholders
State level stakeholders included the Western Australian Aboriginal Advisory Council, Department of Regional Development and Lands along with the Board and Department of Indigenous Affairs and other individuals with relevant experience.
There was consensus that regional governance was about empowering Aboriginal people to participate in planning and decision making about regional development and that while Aboriginal input and control is required in all aspects of regional development, infrastructure and land use development may provide the most suitable context for regional governance at this time. It was also acknowledged that the Aboriginal communities in the Pilbara and Kimberley would require some time and capacity building support to be able to fully participate in regional governance and that mainstream processes also had to change in a way that allowed for the operation of Aboriginal governance together with governance for the wider community.
32 There were some differences in views about whether the focus should be on a model of governance where Aboriginal representation joined with non-Aboriginal participants to determine regional matters or whether the focus should remain on Aboriginal representational processes and structures at this time.
Questions also arose about how native title figured in regional governance. As very large areas of land are already or will be under native title in the Pilbara and Kimberley, decisions about how this land is managed will have to become part of mainstream planning rather than through place by place adversarial processes. There was general agreement that native title rights should be recognised and included in the way that the State does business.
The group agreed that it was not possible to recommend a model or models at this time as Aboriginal communities in the regions needed to develop these. What is required from Government is a commitment to regionalisation of planning and decision making with a concomitant shift of budgetary control and program accountability. This would be followed by resourcing bottom up change and capacity building and governance structures would evolve from these processes.
Arguments in favour of regional governance noted in discussion were:
The current complex and expensive planning structures that are single focussed and fail to integrate with one another and exclude the Aboriginal voice.
The value of Aboriginal culture and knowledge to the regions and the benefits of including this in regional planning and development.
The ineffectiveness of the existing system in dealing with Aboriginal disadvantage and the positive outcomes achieved when Aboriginal communities have been partners in land use planning and development.
The need for Government to have regional policy given the fine balance of power in State and Federal Parliaments.
The need for Government and industry to have an effective structure to engage with Aboriginal people.
Views of Aboriginal Leaders in the Pilbara and Kimberley
Roundtable discussions were held with Aboriginal leaders in the Pilbara and Kimberley between 26 - 28 October 2010 and the main points made by participants are summarised here. Copies of the minutes of these discussions are in Attachment 1.
33 Participants at all roundtables stated that current systems of governance had failed Aboriginal people and they were uniformly critical of existing processes of engagement by all levels of government and their failure to acknowledge Aboriginal cultural protocol. Numerous examples were provided of policy changes made without consultation that undermined valued community service delivery; of siloed planning processes and service delivery that do not permit holistic consideration of critical variables or regional rather than local impacts; and of inadequate control over heritage matters. People in both regions want to enter into high level binding agreements with the Government that safeguard their rights to be recognised and included in planning that effects land use, social and economic development, culture and heritage.
In both regions processes are occurring already to develop a unified voice to speak on Aboriginal interests regionally. Aboriginal leaders want to continue with these processes to create a regional entity that has cultural authority and can be the Aboriginal voice for the region. The vision for these bodies is that they would:
promote Aboriginal culture and support its development through promotion of language, preservation of heritage and the like;
develop policy on matters of importance to Aboriginal people and provide the support for negotiating with stakeholders to implement policy;
provide the contact for government and industry to negotiate regional matters with Aboriginal people, particularly around economic development, land use and environmental issues; and
act as a base for Aboriginal representation in regional governance should it occur.
There were mixed views about the role of these bodies in service delivery, however, they would have some say about regional service priorities for Aboriginal people and the way in which services were delivered. The purpose of this involvement would be to address poorly coordinated service delivery that did not address Aboriginal priorities holistically or in a culturally relevant manner.
Processes for developing these culturally legitimate bodies differ between the Pilbara and Kimberley. The Kimberley already has groups such as the Kimberley Aboriginal Law and Cultural Centre, the Kimberley Language Resource Centre and the Kimberley Institute which seek to promote cultural issues across the region and there are also some strong sub-regional groups with similar aims for their communities. In the Kimberley there has been a movement for some time to have a role in regional governance and the issue is more one of how the process will proceed.
34 In the Pilbara the time and energy of leaders has been consumed with dealing with the massive scale of development and settlement of native title. Participants at the roundtable reported being overwhelmed by the amount of development and are greatly concerned about the impact of the imminent next wave of development on their culture and the environment. While there are not the range of cultural organisations that exist in the Kimberley, the Pilbara has begun a process of seeking the support of elders and law bosses from across the region to create a legitimate body to represent the interests of all groups.
Roundtable participants supported the concept of regional governance provided Government is committed and prepared to allow significant decision making and budgetary control at this level. Government would also be required to provide adequate support to processes for developing bottom up processes and structures.
Participants also recognised that strong local and sub-regional governance would be needed to support regional governance and wanted to continue working with State and Commonwealth Governments to develop these capacities within their communities.
Department of Indigenous Affairs Proposals about how to Develop Regional Governance
Following the roundtables with Aboriginal leaders in the Pilbara and Kimberley the Department of Indigenous Affairs presented the following proposals to the Minister for establishing a pilot project providing for regional governance engaging Aboriginal participation.
Kimberley Region
It proposed that governance reform result in the establishment of a Kimberley Regional Authority which combines the functions and objectives of the regional planning committee, Regional Development Commission (RDC) and Kimberley regional council of Local Government. Such a body should include statutory representation from Aboriginal interests and industry and be responsible for the long term planning of the region and Government infrastructure and service delivery priorities. The review of the RDCs is due to be completed by mid 2011. It is anticipated the public comment period for the review will give the Kimberley Aboriginal leadership the opportunity to submit proposals for the incorporation of Aboriginal representation or the development of a representative body that can work strategically with the RDC on future socioeconomic development issues that impact Aboriginal people and communities.
Specific actions that may be considered or endorsed by the Minister could include:
35 The creation of a Kimberley Aboriginal Governance Forum (KAGF) convened on a quarterly basis for 2011. The forum to be representative of peak Aboriginal organisations, NGO’s and Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBC) and focus on the main key performance indicators of “Closing the Gap” i.e. education, health, housing and employment. The forum would seek Aboriginal ownership of the major barriers to meeting the targets and promote Aboriginal leadership on policy initiatives and program innovation. The forum would report to the Minister.
The KAGF format would include a meeting of law bosses nominated by KALACC ahead of the main forum. The law bosses meeting would address matters of interest on heritage and cultural maintenance and provide a cultural authority perspective on policy initiatives such as liquor restrictions, driving licenses, justice intervention etc.
It would be anticipated the KAGF would also engage on future governance models for the Kimberley and by 2012 be formally incorporated into a regional governance framework.
Transformation of the Kimberley Development Commission (KDC) as the legislative basis for the incorporation of Aboriginal regional governance or regional representation into the region’s planning and administrative structures. The new authority would report to a Minister.
As an alternative to a Minister being placed in authority over the KDC, the Minister for Indigenous Affairs could chair a Cabinet sub-committee on Aboriginal Affairs to engage the Minister of Regional Development and Lands, Minister for Housing and Minister for Education on initiatives to drive Closing the Gap target outcomes and Aboriginal engagement inclusive of regional governance reform.
Leadership and local area governance initiatives
The Remote Service Delivery National Partnership Agreement (RSD NPA) allows for the establishment of localised governance arrangements in the four priority communities of Fitzroy Crossing, Halls Creek, Beagle Bay and Ardyaloon. The Commonwealth through the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) has funding to contribute to the building of a culturally appropriate local area governance model that can take responsibility for the preparation and implementation of the Local Implementation Plans (LIP’s). It is proposed by the Regional Operations Centre (ROC) to work with KALACC, Kimberley Land Council (KLC), local community councils and Shires to establish the new entities by 2012. This process will allow the review of the Fitzroy Futures Forum to be completed (March 2011) and its potential formalisation as the governance model for the Fitzroy Valley evaluated.
36 The ROC, supported by DIA, has begun discussions with the Halls Creek Shire to incorporate the Local Area Coordination functions of the RSD NPA and the Better Life office functions within the Shire operations. This initiative will provide a pilot study for the incorporation of localised Aboriginal community governance within local government.
DIA, Department of Commerce and the Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations (ORIC) have agreed a MOU that will prioritise governance training for Directors and Officers of Aboriginal organisations covered by both State and Commonwealth legislation. This program, subject to a Royalties for Regions funding bid, will compliment the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) training and other leadership programs being implemented in the Kimberley during 2010-2012.
DIA and the Department for Regional Development and Lands (DRDL) have prepared a joint Royalties for Regions funding bid for regional governance capacity building in the Pilbara and Kimberley. Subject to the success of this bid it is proposed that the KLC/KALACC regional governance model approved in principle at the 2010 KLC AGM be subjected to broad community consultation and independent financial and organisational analysis.
The DIA, Office of Native Title (ONT) and Department of Premier and Cabinet consult on the proposed Kimberley Regional Benefits body corporate (Browse regional benefits) and determine the potential for this entity to form the basis of the broader Aboriginal regional governance structure being proposed by the KLC.
Pilbara Region
The Pilbara region itself and Pilbara Aboriginal people are under immense pressure from the expansion of the resources sector that has been underway since 2002 and in the Pilbara alone has a value in excess of $100 billion. Land access agreements and heritage agreements and related activities such as surveys and negotiations have occupied many of the Pilbara’s key leaders and elders and the majority of other leaders are employed by industry, government or in Aboriginal organisations and businesses which themselves are extremely busy dealing with the impacts of growth or its opportunities.
The relatively limited amount of determined Pilbara region native title and the negotiation pressures on claimants and representative bodies means that the Pilbara is several years behind the Kimberley in reaching the level of stability to be considering aggregated Aboriginal representative structures.
37 The majority of major land access agreements should be concluded by 2012 and it would be anticipated that new sub-regional governance entities will emerge from these agreements that will in the future provide for the organisational and resourcing of regional PBC’s and body corporate including wider benefit trusts and foundations.
It is therefore considered premature to seek to define a regional governance model at this time for the Pilbara but ideal for building governance capacity and investing in future leadership skills particularly for women and youth.
The regional crisis in community governance should however be a priority for 2011/12 and subject to strategic action by the State, Commonwealth Government and Local Government.
The Pilbara Futures Forum initiative has been welcomed by the Pilbara Aboriginal leadership and they are seeking to convene a series of cultural block meetings of elders and leaders to gain cultural authority to enter into discussions with the State, industry, Local Government and the Commonwealth Government over regional governance.
To ensure any models developed have cultural endorsement and authority, it is proposed a council of elders be re-established in the Pilbara to act as a reference group for the forum as it develops regional governance options.
Specific actions that may be considered or endorsed by the Minister could include:
The continuation of the DIA convened Pilbara Futures Forum governance project seeking joint support from the Minister for Regional Development and Lands to lead engagement with the forum on leadership and governance capacity building and the development of Royalties for Regions initiatives that could leverage investment from native title trusts and industry in support of education, training and employment, affordable housing and homeownership.
Indicative support for the reinstatement of a Pilbara council of elders (previously convened by DIA) subject to this proposal being supported by the regional meetings of elders scheduled for early 2011.
Leadership and local area governance initiatives
DIA seeks to provide leadership of the Roebourne Rejuvenation Project from the perspective of building the governance and leadership capacity of the town based on the work in 2010 to support the Roebourne Congress and other engagement strategies with native title PBC’s and Aboriginal organisations.
38 DIA engages with FaHCSIA, Shire of East Pilbara and BHP on a Martu cluster communities project that will seek to address the crisis in community governance in Jigalong, Nullagine and Parnpajinya inclusive of the Jigalong town ready strategy, Jigalong economic development project, normalisation program for Parnpajinya, Irrungadji rejuvenation project and Martu governance training project.
DIA progresses the Yandeyarra way forward project in partnership with the ALT, Yandeyarra community, Town of Port Hedland and Mugarinya Aboriginal Corporation in support of land tenure reform, economic development, town status, incorporation within the Town of Hedland municipal services and revised community governance arrangements.
DIA works with ONT and DPC on Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation proposals for the establishment of support structures for Pilbara PBC’s inclusive of the promotion of the appointment of specialist independent Directors to Aboriginal corporations, training of Directors and the development of leadership skills particularly for women and youth.
Department of Indigenous Affairs Regional Governance Initiatives
The DIA report also made several recommendations to support DIA’s capacity to support regional governance:
That DIA review the Aboriginal Affairs Planning Authority Act 1972 to consider amendments that would allow for the legislative recognition of regional governance entities and how these might aggregate regional representation to work strategically alongside a statewide advisory body currently provided for under the Act as the WA AAC.
That the WA AAC and the AACC consider the establishment of joint high level working groups to consider critical issues impacting on Aboriginal advantage and disadvantage inclusive of those determinants of success for remote communities for advice to the Minister, Government departments and COAG.
That the WA AAC following the appointment of its new members be requested to follow up on the recommendations of the Indigenous Implementation Board on regional governance and identify the opportunities regional governance reform could contribute to reducing the duplication and improving the outcomes from existing Aboriginal consultative processes and advisory committees and boards operating across the public sector in regional areas.
39 Comment on progress to date
Kimberley Region
The Board supports the intent and most specifics of DIA’s proposals as sensible initial steps in a process to developing full regional governance in the Kimberley. Clear Government commitment to the process of developing regional governance is required and the creation of a special Minister for the Kimberley and/or having the Minister chair a representative group of Aboriginal leaders to provide an early means for the Aboriginal voice to influence regional development will demonstrate this commitment. While the Board understands the current focus on COAG service delivery objectives ultimately, Aboriginal involvement in setting policy direction for the Kimberley must be broader than this and encompass a more strategic focus on sustainable social and economic development that suits the particular cultural and physical environment of the Kimberley.
The creation of a KAGF is also seen as a useful start of a process whereby Aboriginal people in the Kimberley determine their own processes for regional representation. These processes must remain connected to the grass roots and Aboriginal people must be involved from the start in developing these processes so that they have cultural legitimacy and will be supported. However, the process cannot stop with a culturally legitimate body representing the Aboriginal communities of the Kimberley. It must continue to develop processes for representation in a regional governance authority that includes all stakeholders but still allows for a strong Aboriginal voice.
The Board agrees that a transformed Kimberley Development Commission could form the base for a regional governance authority in which Aboriginal representation drawn from the work of the KAGF could partner with other regional stakeholders to focus on strategic economic and social development for the Kimberley. This body would need to determine a level of Aboriginal representation that ensures that Aboriginal influence is strong and not easily dominated by other stakeholders.
Pilbara Region
The Board agrees that the Pilbara requires a different approach although ultimately the same outcome is sought. The Pilbara Futures process should continue to be supported with Cabinet endorsement represented by senior Ministerial involvement. This process will allow Pilbara Aboriginal people to influence initiatives while building strong cultural governance processes and structures.
40 Governance Capacity Building
DIA’s proposals for governance capacity building in both regions are supported. Since its first report the Board has recommended that Royalties for Regions funding be used to support the development of governance and leadership in the regions. Strong sub-regional governance based on Aboriginal geographic and language communities as recommended to the Board in its conversations within the Pilbara and Kimberley will be important in supporting effective participation in regional governance.
A caveat to this endorsement of DIA’s proposals is that the Board is conscious that Aboriginal communities are overly governed by corporate and government accountability processes and this is a contributing factor to communities experiencing difficulties in self management. In developing local and regional governance capability the Board wishes to see DIA and other arms of Government reduce this burden on Aboriginal leaders as far as possible.
Department of Indigenous Affairs Reforms
The Board agrees that regional governance will ultimately require legislative recognition of Aboriginal representation but is not convinced that the Aboriginal Affairs Planning Act is the appropriate vehicle. This Act is focussed on Aboriginal matters and does not sufficiently engage with strategic development. For this reason the Board believes that the Regional Development Commissions Act or State planning legislation would form better platforms.
The proposed link to the WA AAC and referral of the Board’s work to its members for further development is also not considered to be sufficiently strong to maintain the direction that the Board knows is required. While the Board would welcome the WA AAC continuing to champion and develop regional governance it understands that the WA AAC is independent and will develop its own agenda. The WA AAC is also an advisory body and it is now time to move beyond advice and to initiate processes that will result in regional governance. This is the role of DIA with Cabinet support.
41
Regional Governance – the Board’s conceptual depiction of relationships
Statutory Authority
Government
Executive Other Aboriginal Local support, Stakeholders Representation Government coordination and finance
Industry
Culturally Legitimate Body
Sub Regional Aboriginal Groups
Review of Regional Development Commissions
Subsequent to the Department of Indigenous Affairs making its recommendations to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, the Minister for Regional Development and Lands released the recommendations of the review4 of the functions and responsibilities of regional development commissions (RDCs) for public comment. There are several recommendations that are relevant to the development of regional governance that require comment.
In broad terms the review recommends that the role of regional development commissions is strengthened and in particular that the following occur:
4 Review Committee (Nov 2010) Structuring Regional Development for the Future: a Review of the Functions and Responsibilities of Regional Development Commissions, Government of Western Australia.
42 That a new statutory authority should be established named the Western Australian Regional Development Commission (WARDC), with the current RDCs becoming regional offices of the WARDC. Each regional office should retain its own board, guiding the functions and priorities of the regional office.
That the Minister should define the roles and responsibilities for the WARDC and regional offices of the WARDC. Importantly, this should include RDC-Regions developing a pre-eminent regional development plan for the region that covers social and economic development and involves all levels of government and the community in its development.
That structural reforms should be supported by:
o the Minister developing a performance management and accountability framework for agencies under the portfolio;
o the Minister arranging a review of government agency regional boundaries;
o a group at chief executive officer level facilitating cross-agency collaboration on regional development;
o the Minister developing a framework for monitoring regional partnerships and forums to ensure their efficiency in achieving horizontal integration and providing ongoing support and guidelines;
o Regional Development and Lands and the Department of Indigenous Affairs identifying solutions to enhance Aboriginal partnership and governance with a view to developing a policy position for Cabinet; and
o all state agencies undertaking a review of their regional locations with a view to co-location where appropriate.
That a working party be created to strengthen integration of statutory land use planning, regional development and local government service delivery in the Pilbara Region.
The Board believes that the proposals from the review have considerable merit and provide a good basis from which to develop regional governance. It is heartened by the extent that the review has accepted the principles and proposals contained in the Board’s submission to it.
43 The creation of the WARDC as a statutory body with increased capabilities reporting to the Minster is supported. There is some risk to regional autonomy with the regional commissions becoming offices of the central WARDC however, provided the policy parameters set by the WARDC are not overly prescriptive and allow each region to respond to its unique circumstances, this is workable and provides a necessary link to State policy processes. The Board is particularly pleased to see the focus on strategic policy development at state and regional levels as it has found the current lack of clear policy for sustainable development to be a major deficiency. The expectation that all sectors of government and the community must be included in the development of sustainable regional strategic plans that are recognised as the pre-eminent plans for the region and that the regional commissions will be required to coordinate this activity and then chief executives of government agencies required to coordinate implementation is also a significant advantage.
The review did not fulfil the expectations of the Board as it did not provide for Aboriginal representation within the regional and state structures. Given this deficiency, the Board strongly supports the recommendation that the Departments of Indigenous Affairs and Regional Development and Lands develop proposals for Cabinet consideration that will acknowledge the importance of Aboriginal partnership and governance and its legitimate position in regional development. Experience shows that unless specific processes for inclusion of Aboriginal representation are made it is unlikely to happen effectively. The Board’s proposals based on the direction provided by Aboriginal people for the development of culturally legitimate governance would align well with the regional structures recommended by the review. Ultimately the Board would expect that statutory recognition is given to Aboriginal representation at regional and state level.
The focus the review places on regional collaboration between government agencies and levels of government is welcome. Recommending a review of department boundaries with the intent to align them wherever possible is also sensible and will facilitate collaboration. The Board recommends that consideration be given to Aboriginal cultural boundaries as part of this process. While it will not be possible to achieve a perfect fit in all cases there would be considerable benefit to improving geo-cultural match with major government boundaries.
44 The recommended creation of a chief executive officer’s group has a parallel with the Aboriginal Affairs Coordinating Committee (AACC) in coordinating service delivery for Aboriginal people. The Royalties for Regions Directors General Group is proposed to be the group as it includes large service delivery agencies as well as regional development agencies. The Director General of the Department of Indigenous Affairs is included in this group and should continue to be included. However the Board believes that at least until Aboriginal representation is structured into the WARDC and regional development commissions that the Director General of Indigenous Affairs should become an ex officio member of the WARDC in the same way as the Director General of the Department of Regional Development and Lands. This would have the benefit of providing the WARDC with the expertise of positions responsible for coordinating Government agencies responsible for regional development (Director General Regional Development and Lands) and human services (Director General Indigenous Affairs).
The Board fully supports the recommendations for the Minister to develop performance management and accountability frameworks and a framework to monitor regional partnerships to ensure that collaboration and integration of effort is occurring to overcome the problems of siloed policy development and service delivery. It believes that specific inclusion of performance indicators around engagement and partnership with Aboriginal people and their governance processes are required. The requirement to develop these should be stated as part of recommendations for implementation of the review’s proposals and as part of the task for the Departments of Regional Development and Lands and Indigenous Affairs in developing proposals for Cabinet regarding Aboriginal participation.
The Board notes and supports the recommendation to establish a working party to address the urgent need in the Pilbara to strengthen integration of statutory land use planning, regional development and local government service delivery. While the Board is aware that the development of Aboriginal governance processes in the Pilbara are at an early phase and will take some time to fully mature it recommends that the working party if established collaborate with the Pilbara Futures process from its inception. This will ensure that a solid foundation is established with Aboriginal people across the region from which an ongoing relationship can be developed. Pilbara Aboriginal people are acutely aware of the risks of inadequately planned development to precious cultural and natural resources such as water and their involvement will significantly enhance the long term outcomes for the region.
45 Recommendations for the Further Development of Regional Governance
Government commit to regional governance and support processes whereby Aboriginal people develop culturally legitimate representational systems that will allow them to participate in social and economic development for the region. Based on discussions with Aboriginal leaders in the Kimberley and Pilbara this will require the creation of an Aboriginal body that will enable sub-regional groups to develop agreed positions on regional issues and then provide Aboriginal representation on the regional governance body. The Department of Indigenous Affairs should have the responsibility for supporting the development of culturally legitimate representational systems with funding from Royalties for Regions.
If Government pursues the recommendations of the review of regional development commissions these along with the WARDC will become responsible for setting regional priorities and Aboriginal representation must ultimately be statutorily recognised for the State and regional commissions. In the interim the Board supports the recommendation that the Departments of Indigenous Affairs and Regional Development and Lands develop proposals for Cabinet consideration that will acknowledge the importance of Aboriginal partnership and governance and its legitimate position in regional development. If a working party is established to address the urgent need in the Pilbara to strengthen integration of statutory land use planning, regional development and local government service delivery it is recommended that it collaborate with the Pilbara Futures process from its inception to ensure that a solid foundation is established with Aboriginal people across the region from which an ongoing relationship can be developed.
If Government does not pursue the recommendations of the review of regional development commissions the Board recommends that Government pursue the recommendations made by the Department of Indigenous Affairs to develop regional governance in the Kimberley and Pilbara.
46 Developments from the Board’s Early Recommendations
In its first report the Board made several recommendations which can be summarised under the following headings:
Reform of DIA
Measuring Progress in Indigenous Affairs and
Services.
There has been mixed success in the take up of the Board’s recommendations in these areas.
Reform of the Department of Indigenous Affairs
The Board has been gratified by the extent to which the reform of DIA has occurred. From a time where there was serious consideration being given to disbanding DIA there has been a significant transformation of the credibility of DIA as an agency capable of assisting Aboriginal people to achieve their due as citizens of Western Australia. DIA is now a respected Government presence at regional and state level and most importantly is earning the respect of Aboriginal people across the State.
The Board is aware of the reinvigoration occurring in DIA’s regional presence and the work occurring to improve coordination among AACC agencies. It is also aware that some agencies outside those mandated to participate are also voluntarily working to improve their service delivery. These changes are due to the committed leadership of DIA, the development of strategic objectives and the commitment of resources to support regional aspirations. It is still early days yet and the Department is developing its capacity to support Aboriginal people but the Board is heartened by the current direction of reform. Given the role DIA will have to take on to continue the Board’s work of promoting and supporting regional governance with strong Aboriginal participation it will require more resources, especially in the regions. The Board now looks to Government to continue its support for DIA and to ensure that appropriate recognition and resources are provided to develop regional governance and supporting recommendations.
47 Measuring Progress in Indigenous Affairs
Targets
In its earlier reports the Board commented on several areas relevant to the ability to understand and measure progress in Indigenous Affairs. The former Minister, Dr Kim Hames, asked that AACC agencies develop targets for Indigenous Affairs that were specific and measurable and could be used to focus action and assess what progress was being made. In its first reports the Board noted the processes that would make target setting and implementation effective as it was concerned that insufficient attention would be given to developing and implementing targets in collaboration with Aboriginal people. Cabinet endorsed targets promoting cultural, social and economic wellbeing set by 11 agencies in August 2010 and there will be bi-annual reporting to the AACC on progress.
The Board has reviewed the targets and believes that they are a positive first step in making worthwhile changes in Indigenous affairs. It acknowledges that target setting in this field is difficult and commends those agencies that have done so. Having targets set by Cabinet is a useful technique and will assist agencies to focus their work in these areas.
To develop this approach the Board makes the following observations. Targets alone lack information about the context in which they sit and the means by which it is legitimate to achieve them. To use an absurd example it would be possible to reduce confirmed child abuse allegations by failing to investigate. There is no suggestion that this is occurring but the example illustrates the value of a philosophy and policy framework and strategy within which the targets fit and form a relevant measure of achievement. For many of the agency targets this is implicit but it would be helpful in future iterations if the strategic context was made more explicit.
Another important context for targets is the governance framework that operates, especially if it becomes evident that they are not being achieved. That is what will happen to identify progress towards the target and what will happen to correct underperformance. Future iterations of the targets could usefully include this information.
The Board noted that the majority of agencies supplied measurable targets by which achievement could be assessed however, there were some exceptions where the targets could best be described as aspirational statements. This implies a lack of conviction that progress is achievable or a fear of failure. Targets have value in focussing effort and with an appropriate governance framework the reasons for lack of achievement can be detected and remedied. Failure with a clear understanding of why and commitment to changing in order to do better is acceptable as it will lead to progress. Failing to set sensible targets is unacceptable.
48 Investment in Indigenous Affairs
The Board has seen some of the data on Western Australian investment in Indigenous affairs that will form part of the soon to be released first National Indigenous Expenditure Report. This report is based on the 2008/09 financial year and finds that State expenditure was in the order of $2 billion covering specific program and estimated share of mainstream program spending. It does not include Commonwealth spending in Western Australia or Local Government spending outside State grants.
Expenditure against the COAG target areas shows that the highest proportion of this spending (40%) is against community safety which includes policing, courts, corrective services and child protection. That is on areas that reflect serious dysfunction. Health is also a large share (20%), however given the age distribution of the Aboriginal population it reflects the need to spend on excessive ill health. A reasonable proportion is being spent on education and training (22%) which is largely viewed as productive investment. However the investment in promoting economic participation is miniscule (0.3%) and may be becoming more diluted since the disbandment of the Aboriginal Economic Development Unit and subsequent mainstreaming of its services through several departments.
In all categories other than economic participation expenditure exceeds population share so that 3.4% of the population receives approximately 10% of State government expenditure. Projected 10-20 years into the future this level of expenditure is clearly unsustainable.
If there was a sense that circumstances were improving for Aboriginal people and that expenditure was likely to decline due to improved life circumstances for most Aboriginal people and the gap between Aboriginal and other Western Australians closed there may be room for optimism. However, when confronted with this information most people would wonder where the money is being spent. Certainly most Aboriginal people the Board has spoken with do not see services commensurate with the level of spending reported.
Further analysis of the data is needed to estimate the proportion being spent on administration and what proportion is converted to services. While accountability for government spending is essential the Board has been struck by the inordinate amount of resources consumed in planning and accounting for spending and outcomes. The Board understands the need for realistic levels of administration but is aware from its conversations about the levels of waste that occur due to the current system of government program delivery that is highly centralised, with rigid program boundaries and onerous accounting requirements.
49 The information supports the Board’s initial estimates of the amount being spent in Indigenous affairs and believes that the data supports its contentions that it would be folly to continue with the current ways of working in Indigenous affairs. Government predominantly sees Indigenous affairs as a service delivery issue rather than as a relationship issue. A new way of relating with Aboriginal people is needed that results in more initiative and far greater control over priority setting and the means of service delivery. This control needs to be devolved to regional and more local levels depending on which is the most efficient level – regional for strategy setting and more local for service delivery.
In future DIA will need to continue to monitor and examine expenditure data to work with Government agencies and Aboriginal people to develop strategies for investment that can guide spending. Even those agencies which now plan with Aboriginal people still plan for their siloed portfolio without consideration for related planning in other areas. Better direction for spending will help improve effectiveness of spending. It will also need to encompass the philosophy behind spending that Aboriginal people advise the Board is needed. Mainstream services will need to adapt so that they are able to engage with Aboriginal service users or funding will need to be directed to Aboriginal providers.
Increased support is required for strategies that will enable Aboriginal people to help themselves. Investment needs to shift into capacity building areas such early childhood development, education, training and economic participation. Spending in health and community safety also needs to shift towards activity that promotes health and safety. The notion of the “welfare mentality” is now well understood and most Aboriginal leaders urge support of strategies that will encourage their people to use initiative and creativity. This will require processes to shift funding from existing mainstream allocations to be used to promote capacity building.
The current information about expenditure is imprecise and future iterations of data will need to be derived from more sophisticated analyses. This will require agencies to develop data collection systems that can report at regional as well as state and national levels.
Report Card by AACC and WA AAC
In its first report the Board recommended that every two years the WA AAC and the AACC present a report card on progress in Indigenous affairs and in its second report acknowledged that due to the lack of data enabling accurate reporting of outcomes against expenditure at regional level that this would be impossible within two years. This task is dependent on the COAG work and the Board reiterates that for this effort to be worthwhile data collection methods enabling investment and outcomes to be measured at regional level as well as state and national levels will be required.
50 Role of the Auditor General
The Board believes that the Auditor General can play a valuable role in assessing progress in Indigenous affairs and has been encouraged by the interest shown in developing projects that will contribute to knowledge about how to properly and effectively achieve policy objectives. At the time the Board tabled its second report the Auditor General had committed to looking to see if he could develop a project. To date no project has been brought to the Board’s attention.
The lack of State policy for Indigenous affairs and the extensive work occurring around the COAG initiatives make this a difficult area for the Auditor General to work in. However, given the extent of resources invested and the developing capacity of agencies to track associated outcomes, the Board believes that a systematic program of auditing is warranted. The recent development of targets also provides an opportunity for independent assessment of progress that the Auditor General may wish to consider.
Services
The Board has intentionally made few recommendations about gaps in service delivery despite many deficiencies reported in conversations with Aboriginal people across the State. This is because the primary focus of the Board is on strategy that will address the underlying causes of disadvantage. An exception to this approach has been its recommendations regarding translator and interpreter services.
In both its earlier reports the Board recommended that State and Commonwealth Governments must resolve issues in funding interpreter services and the training and accreditation of Aboriginal translators and interpreters so that all Aboriginal Australians are provided with health and legal services in a language they understand.
At the time the Board’s second report was made the Department of Indigenous Affairs had provided additional funding to the Kimberley Interpreter Service and the Commonwealth had limited its support to the COAG Remote Service Delivery sites. No progress has been made since then.
Given the poor health and worsening incarceration rates5 of Aboriginal people this lack of regard to ensuring people can understand complex processes that will have a major impact on their wellbeing is unacceptable.
5 Steering Committee for the Review of Government Services (2010) Report on Government Services 2010, Productivity Commission, Canberra.
51 Recommendations
Government continue its support for DIA and ensure that appropriate recognition and resources are provided to develop its regional presence and to implement the Board’s recommendations.
Further iterations of Cabinet targets in Indigenous Affairs include the strategic context for the target and governance framework that operates to correct underperformance. Targets should not be accepted if they are not specific and measurable.
DIA continue to analyse investment in Indigenous Affairs and work with Commonwealth and State Governments and Aboriginal people to redirect investment into areas that build the capacity of Aboriginal people across the State. Strategies for reinvestment should focus on redirecting mainstream expenditure more effectively and reducing waste associated with siloed planning and service delivery. Continuing work to develop accurate estimates of Indigenous investment should include establishing processes for data collection that will enable investment to be measured at regional as well as state and national levels.
The Auditor General considers developing a systematic program of auditing progress in Indigenous Affairs that assesses the value of current investment against intended outcomes. The development of Cabinet targets may provide an opportunity for this.
State and Commonwealth Governments resolve issues in funding interpreter services and the training and accreditation of Aboriginal translators and interpreters so that all Aboriginal Australians are provided with health and legal services in a language they understand.
52 Section Two
SUPPORTING THE NEW RELATIONSHIP
Promotion of Aboriginal Culture6
The predominant view of Aboriginal people and communities presented in the media and in public policy is one of disadvantage and experiencing or creating problems that need to be fixed. While Aboriginal disadvantage is real and must be addressed a sole focus on this omits acknowledging the benefit Aboriginal culture provides to Aboriginal people, the Western Australian community and the national and international community.
The purpose of developing strategy to promote Aboriginal culture in Western Australia is to present a more balanced understanding of Aboriginal people that will assist to promote Aboriginal culture as an asset, aid reconciliation and inclusion and act as a counter to racism. Promotion of Aboriginal culture is also essential to provide a strong sense of personal and community identity for Aboriginal people that will allow them to flourish within the mainstream community.
Oldest Living Culture Aboriginal culture is the oldest living culture in the world. It is unique and irreplaceable and as such is a priceless asset nationally and for world heritage. The world view, spiritual expression, law, social relationships, environmental knowledge and arts of Aboriginal people are rich and complex and have allowed Aboriginal people to flourish prior to European colonisation.
Mainstream Australia has begun to appreciate the inherent value of Aboriginal culture and to move away from the belief that European culture is superior to Aboriginal or other cultures based on a different world view. In the interim racism has led to Aboriginal culture being denigrated as inferior and its expression actively discouraged. This has had a devastating effect on Aboriginal people and resulted in a significant loss of traditional knowledge, language and other aspects of culture and laid the foundation for current day disadvantage.
6 While the term culture is used for convenience it is understood that there are many Aboriginal cultures in Western Australia and even greater diversity across Australia and the Torres Strait Islands.
53 The world is increasingly recognising the worth of Aboriginal culture. Aboriginal art is prized internationally, a high proportion of international tourists seek Aboriginal cultural experience and Aboriginal musicians, dancers and theatrical performers are increasingly gaining international reputations. There is also a growing respect for traditional knowledge of plants and wildlife and the land and sea that maintains them. The Aboriginal world view where people are seen as being part of the land and custodians of it rather than the European view of people being separate from the land and exploiting natural resources is becoming increasingly relevant as the challenges of environmental degradation and climate change face the nation.
Culture and Identity Strong senses of personal and cultural identity are factors that are associated with personal and social wellbeing among First Nations people in Canada7. First Nations communities that retained a strong sense of cultural history and had a sense of cultural persistence into the future experienced few if any youth suicides while those communities that had lost their ties to their traditional past and did not have a sense of cultural future had epidemic levels of suicide. Cultural continuity markers found to predict wellbeing are achievement of a measure of self-government; litigation for Aboriginal title to traditional lands; a measure of local control over health, education, child welfare and policing services; creation of community facilities to preserve culture; and having elected band councils composed of more than 50 percent women.
While all the cultural markers associated with wellbeing among First Nations Canadians may not apply to Indigenous Australians it is evident that the theoretical construct that strong cultural identity is important to personal and community wellbeing does directly apply. Communities where there is knowledge of and respect for culture, the capacity to self govern and ensure that basic services are provided in a culturally relevant way and the capacity to teach culture to the next generations are able to provide the security required for positive individual personal and social development. These factors are taken for granted in mainstream Australia and mirror what Aboriginal people have been telling governments for many years about their need for self determination.
7 Chandler, MJ & Lalonde, CE (2008) Cultural continuity as a protective factor against suicide in First Nations youth, A Special Issue on Aboriginal Youth, Hope or Heartbreak: Aboriginal Youth and Canada’s Future, 10(1), 68-72. Chandler, MJ & Proulx, T (2008) Personal persistence and persistent peoples: continuities in the lives of individual and whole cultural communities, in Sani, F (ed) Self-continuity: Individual and collective perspectives, New York: Psychology Press.
54 The Future
It is imperative that mainstream Australia now support Aboriginal people to preserve, retain and develop their culture. While it is necessary to do this for human rights and altruistic reasons there are also self interest benefits such as national prestige, cultural enrichment and economic gain. Aboriginal individuals with strong personal and cultural identities will be more resilient and capable, as will communities comprised of such individuals. In turn the broader community will benefit from their contributions in all walks of life.
The Board believes that Aboriginal people and their culture are critical to the future of Western Australia and Australia. Aboriginal culture is an asset that must be preserved and allowed to develop alongside mainstream Australian culture in a way that everyone can take pride in. While there are many ways that Aboriginal culture can be promoted the following are key areas where the Board believes action is needed.
Preservation of Language
Language is a fundamental means by which culture is understood and transmitted. There has already been a major loss of the many Aboriginal languages and dialects once spoken in Australia and language centres run by Aboriginal people must be supported to retain those that remain.
Reconnection to Culture
Due to the destruction of much of Aboriginal social structure many Aboriginal people have lost their connection to country and culture. Support is required to reconnect people, especially young people. Providing funding for elders and Aboriginal organisations to teach children and young people about their culture is required.
Preservation of Heritage
A consistent issue raised in conversations with Aboriginal people around the State is the need to review of the Aboriginal Heritage Act to strengthen the capacity of traditional owners to preserve sacred and significant places in the face of development.
Support is also required for oral history taking and archiving of cultural and historical material.
Education
School curricula need to include a greater component on Aboriginal history and culture presented in a positive context in order for Aboriginal students to see that their culture is valued and for non-Aboriginal students to understand the past and appreciate the value of Aboriginal culture.
55 Reconciliation Activities
Sustained support for reconciliation activities that bring Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people together will be important to generate local level appreciation of Aboriginal heritage and modern day culture. Such activities require a long term commitment as their effect is incremental. The work in Western Australia to support the development of Reconciliation Action Plans and the school based Partnerships, Acceptance, Learning, Sharing (PALS) program is to be commended.
Celebrations and Ceremonies
Promoting success and showing pride in Aboriginal culture will benefit all Western Australians. Symbolic gestures of respect such as welcome to country, acknowledging traditional owners, flying Aboriginal flags, having signage that shows Aboriginal place names and the like, if done properly provide a sense of welcome for Aboriginal people and help educate the wider community.
Promoting achievement by Aboriginal people in all fields is important to encourage young Aboriginal people to aspire to a wide range of careers and also helps to break down stereotypes. Increasingly mainstream awards are including categories for Aboriginal endeavour and this is to be encouraged.
The Arts and the Media
Artistic expression of all forms conveys thoughts and emotions more powerfully than most other forms of expression and is an effective means of reaching a wide audience. Aboriginal artistic expression in all forms should be encouraged and supported by both Government and the private sectors. Support should also be provided to Aboriginal media to enable much greater communication between Aboriginal people and the wider community.
Combating Racism
Anti-discrimination policies need to be maintained to address both overt and unintended racism. Equal opportunity legislation, substantive equality policy, cultural awareness training and the like are all important means to combat racism that is still present against Aboriginal people.
56 Recommendations
Government establish a fund that can be used to leverage support from a range of sectors and organisations to allow Aboriginal language centres to preserve and teach Aboriginal languages.
Departments working with children and young people establish a budget to fund community elders and mentors to teach them about their culture and assist to reconnect them to the cultural life of their people. The size of the budget should reflect the numbers and proportion of Aboriginal children and young people who receive services from the agency.
The Department of Indigenous Affairs conduct its review of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 expeditiously with the aim of strengthening the protection of Aboriginal heritage.
The Department of Education and non-government schools develop their curricula to provide increased content on Aboriginal history and culture presented in a positive context in order for Aboriginal students to see that their culture is valued and for non-Aboriginal students to understand the past and appreciate the value of Aboriginal culture.
The Department of Indigenous Affairs continue to promote reconciliation activities and to work with communities and organisations to assist them to identify ways to appropriately promote and acknowledge Aboriginal culture and heritage.
The Western Australian Government develop an Aboriginal cultural centre as an icon for Perth and the State as a matter of priority in its redevelopment of the Perth foreshore.
Healing
The Need for Healing
The effects on Indigenous people of colonisation and policies of forced removal have been profound and well documented. The disconnection from family and culture experienced by many individuals has not only affected them but continues to be felt in subsequent generations to the present day. Ongoing systemic racism, albeit much of which is unintended, helps to maintain these damaging effects for many Aboriginal people and communities.
Unless healing occurs the personal and social damage caused will continue and slow the processes of Aboriginal community development and reconciliation with the wider Australian community.
57 Healing is necessary to:
Assist individuals and communities acknowledge trauma and its adverse ongoing effects
Assist individuals and communities to change destructive responses
Build resilience for the future
Nurture the next generations
Retain and develop culture
Facilitate reconciliation with the wider Australian community
Facilitate full participation of Aboriginal people in Australian society.
The Board is primarily directed towards addressing the structural underpinnings of Aboriginal disadvantage and sees regional governance with Aboriginal people and their culture as central to this. Such a process of self determination is healing in itself but also needs to be complemented by other healing processes to assist enable Aboriginal people and communities to become full participants.
What Healing Is
The conceptual model of healing used by the Board has been developed by Professor Helen Milroy one of the Board’s members.
Her analysis is that trauma that has occurred over generations and continues to be felt has led to an extreme sense of powerlessness and loss of control; a profound sense of loss, grief and disconnection; and an overwhelming sense of trauma and helplessness among many individuals and communities. While there is overlap between these elements each needs to be addressed in its own right as well as collectively to repair social relationships and re-establish healthy community and cultural norms to support the safe development of children and young people.
Healing is a holistic concept8 and based on acknowledging past trauma and its current effects and so providing a basis to begin change. It is a spiritual process based on cultural renewal and therapeutic change. It encompasses the western model of individual damage and intervention but also acknowledges damage to social relationships and the need to restore these relationships and to reconnect at a spiritual level with Aboriginal culture.
8 This definition is based on the nature of healing contained in Voices form the Campfires: Establishing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Healing Foundation (2009) Report by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Healing Foundation Development Team, Commonwealth of Australia.
58 To be effective healing must be owned, designed and led by Aboriginal people and directed towards restoring personal, social and spiritual wellbeing.
The table below presents the outcomes required for recovery and the types of healing interventions appropriate to address each level of dysfunction. Interventions can be directed to individuals, communities or the entire population.
The examples provided are illustrative and do not represent an exhaustive list.
Theme Powerlessness & Loss and Trauma & Helplessness Loss of Control Disconnection Recovery Self-determination Reconnection & Restoration & & community community life community resilience governance Interventions Personal Family re-unification Clinical interventions & empowerment programs rehabilitation programs programs Governance & Individual & Traditional healing management community grief training counselling & ceremonies Culturally Oral history recording Restorative justice determined decision making processes and structures Native Title Cultural celebrations Safety interventions – processes & cultural promotion police, justice, child protection, family violence, suicide prevention Partnerships with Language promotion government and industry Reconciliation processes eg RAPs, Sorry Day, NAIDOC Intervention programs that reconnect participants with their culture
59 Focus on Major Gaps
Following the model developed by Professor Milroy the work of the Indigenous Implementation Board is primarily directed towards supporting self determination and community governance through the promotion of regional governance that includes Aboriginal representation as an essential and central element in determining social and economic development priorities.
The Board supports all the associated processes that are required to support this level of self determination and involvement in setting priorities that affect all citizens of Western Australia. These processes include training in corporate and community governance, business skills and leadership.
At a community level there are also many effective processes and programs occurring that contribute to developing Aboriginal identity and community and cultural life and these must be continued. These include measures being taken by Aboriginal communities to preserve language and the knowledge of their elders and processes that help disconnected Aboriginal people, especially members of the Stolen Generations to find their family connections and reconnect to their culture. Reconciliation processes such as Reconciliation Action Plans that bring Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities together are valuable in connecting cultures so that Aboriginal culture forms part of the mainstream.
However, the Board recognises that for many Aboriginal communities and individuals the damage caused by past dispossession is such that healing needs to occur to enable individuals to recover sufficiently to participate effectively in family, community and broader social processes. While there are culturally relevant programs to assist Aboriginal people deal with alcohol and drug problems and with violence these are insufficient and need to be developed in collaboration with local Aboriginal communities. There are also Indigenous mental health interventions based on western clinical models. However there is a big gap in healing programs at a community and individual level that directly address trauma and severe psychological and spiritual distress using Aboriginal approaches.
The National Healing Foundation has recently been established and is working towards addressing this gap but alone it will not be able to meet the need. Compared to its former Canadian counterpart the National Healing Foundation is very modestly funded ($26.4m over four years compared to $350m). Nationwide only $2 million is available for 2010/11 funding of community healing projects and only three Western Australian projects received funding.
60 The Commonwealth is also funding the following initiatives in Western Australia.
Commonwealth funding for mental health and healing:
$1.5 million each over three years to Kaata-Kooliny Employment and Enterprise Development Aboriginal Corporation (Narrogin) and Ngaanyatjarra Health Service (Warburton) as part of the Personal Helpers and Mentors Program.
These interventions are based on a model designed with the people at Yuendumu. The model promotes spiritual, cultural, mental and physical healing for Indigenous people living with mental illness, trauma or grief.
COAG – transition to adulthood National Partnership Agreement:
$22 million over four years to the Mental Health Commission to establish a dedicated statewide Aboriginal Mental Health Service for people with psychotic illness and severe depression.
$22 million over four years to the Country Health Service for regionally developed social and emotional wellbeing services for young Aboriginal people.
Western Australia also needs to support a healing program to allow communities and individuals to undertake healing including the use of traditional healers if they choose. This need was recognised in the Evaluation of the Impact of the Government’s Response to the Gordon Inquiry9 that identified the absence of healing services to assist victims deal with trauma as a major gap in the response.
The Department of Health with funding from the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) under the Family Violence Partnership Program (FVPP) has developed an Aboriginal Healing Framework. This framework is based on the development over four years of successful healing projects with six communities in Western Australia wanting to overcome the damage associated with family violence and child abuse. The Western Australian Aboriginal Healing Project was a holistic, community driven project that achieved healing in a variety of ways depending on the needs and solutions decided by the communities. Typically funding for this project has ceased at the point it has proven successful and there is no guarantee of ongoing support.
9 Cant, R, Simpson, T, Henry, D, Penter, C & Archibald, J (2007) Evaluation of the Government’s Response to the Gordon Inquiry Action Plan, Department for Indigenous Affairs. 61 To be effective a program of this type needs to be established for at least 10 years and to have the flexibility to support a range of interventions determined by communities. Some may be single events such as a ceremony or a project to record history. Others may be a series of events occurring over time that allow participants to periodically review change. A realistic amount of funding also needs to be available to allow for the large number of community projects likely to be proposed.
The Stolen Generations
In its consultations the Board has been advised that even though the experience of forced removal from family for the Stolen Generations was the catalyst for major personal and social dislocation and trauma and the reason behind the Apology their needs are often being overlooked by healing programs. The understandable desire and need to support others affected by the ongoing effects of past polices that disrupted family relationships and undermined healthy community functioning has resulted in general programs to address dysfunction such as those aimed at reducing family violence, child abuse, alcohol and drug abuse and other signs of dysfunction.
While the Board supports healing interventions that allow communities to address dysfunction positively and holistically these programs also need to attend to the needs of the Stolen Generations and ensure they are not overlooked due to the ill effects of a range of past polices.
Recommendation
The Western Australian Government establish a healing fund to operate for a minimum of 10 years that at least matches Commonwealth expenditure on healing initiatives on an annual basis ($6.6 million per year) and is based on the Aboriginal Healing Framework developed by the Aboriginal Healing Project.
Leadership and Governance
In the first section of this report the Board has described the capacity for regional governance to be developed in the Kimberley and Pilbara and it is evident from this discussion that effective regional governance will depend on there being sufficient capacity for participation among Aboriginal community members and their leaders. Effective regional governance will depend on strong community governance and capable leaders.
62 The COAG process recognised the importance of leadership and governance by creating this as one of the building blocks in overcoming Indigenous disadvantage but did not support its development through funding or specific strategy. Consequently it has been noted as a priority for action by the Commonwealth Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services in his Report for December 2009 – August 201010 as lack of effective leadership and governance at community level is jeopardising outcomes. The Coordinator General commissioned research on governance and capacity building that found:
government under-investment and constant policy churn has contributed to the tenuous state of governance in many communities. If urgent attention is not paid to the ‘governance gap’, initial gains from intensive investment and planning are unlikely to translate into stronger, sustainable and healthier community outcomes in the longer term;
strong, well-governed Indigenous communities and organisations are the key to real success in achieving lasting change on the ground. Specifically:
o strong leadership and locally accepted representation systems are critical to mobilising community participation and sustaining effective governance;
o genuine power to make decisions is required at the local level, which implies acceptance of local responsibility for local decisions; and
o credible decision making must be backed up by the reliable resources and capacity to enforce the implementation of decisions.
government capacity also plays a critical role in building effective, legitimate Indigenous governance.
He went on to say that it is clear through the experience with the Remote Service Delivery partnership to date that a holistic approach to governance and leadership is necessary. This approach must simultaneously deal with: investing in tailored support for community governance; investing in the streamlining of relevant programs; developing community capacity to engage; creating integrated funding and tools required for this support; and investing in building government capacity that is aimed at communities, leaders and organisations. In addition, a more stable and consistent policy framework, tailored to local circumstances, is needed to avoid ‘change fatigue’.
10 Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services (2010) Six Monthly Report: December 2009 – August 2010, Canberra.
63 The Fitzroy Futures Forum was identified as an effective governance structure that had significantly contributed to the improvement in the outcomes from Government programs and investments in the Fitzroy Valley. Notably this forum had been previously supported by the Western Australian Government to develop leadership and governance capacity among the Fitzroy Valley communities.
Effective Aboriginal Leadership and Governance
Several studies have looked at what makes for successful leadership and governance in Aboriginal communities. The Indigenous Community Governance Project11 is perhaps the most cited and identified six key issues and associated recommendations. The Board’s research12 and a more recent study by Limerick13 reinforce these findings and capture the main elements more succinctly. All support a community development approach to developing leadership and governance capability.
Fisher noted that “suitable skills and competencies are central to the exercise of effective regional governance. This is common to all the case studies we have surveyed and, it could be argued, critical to the most successful examples have been competent, skilful and effective individuals. The summary of the findings of the Indigenous Community Governance Project, although concentrating on community rather than regional governance, provides a cogent analysis and overview of the need for strategic approaches to capacity-building: ‘Indigenous governing members and other leaders in organisations require ongoing development in order to better understand their different roles and responsibilities in relation to management and governance. Facilitated, place-based, governance training can support board members and other leaders to clarify their respective roles and develop workable policies. Consideration needs to be given to strategies to reduce the isolation of Indigenous governing members/councillors and leaders in organisations, particularly in remote regions, to enhance their access to wider leadership and information networks, and strengthen their communication with each other’”.
Limerick’s diagrammatic representation of factors influencing effective community governance distinguish between contextual characteristics held by effective leaders and attributes that can be taught.
11 Hunt, J & Smith, D (2007) Indigenous Community Governance Project: Year Two Research Findings, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Working Paper No. 36, ANU. 12 Fisher, S (2009) Experiences in the development and implementation of regional governance models: Report to the Indigenous Implementation Board. 13 Limerick, M (2009) What Makes an Aboriginal Council Successful? Case Studies of Aboriginal Community Government Performance in Far North Queensland, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 68 (4), 414-428.
64
Figure 1. Explanatory Model for Aboriginal Council Performance
Contextual factors Successful governance attributes
Education and skills Separation of powers
Rule of law Exposure to outside
world Shared strategic vision Shape Determine
Effective, stable and Overcoming supported dependency/taking administration
responsibility Performance Council
Community engagement
Council Council Performance ‘Whole of community’ Strategic engagement orientation & with government egalitarian norms
Leaders are more effective when they have a level of education and skills that provide sufficient foundation for engagement in governance; experience of mainstream urban life; a belief that it is better to be independent and self sufficient than welfare dependent; and a view that in the leadership role their focus is the whole community ahead of family obligations. Governance skills and operation found to predict success are:
a clear separation of community board (strategic direction) from community administration roles with the administration left to operate without undue involvement by board members;
the development of clear policies that are adhered to by all community members so that no favouritism is shown to board members or their families;
a strategic vision supported by plans shared by the majority of community leaders and members that can be carried forward as board membership changes over time;
an effective and stable administration that selects and trains staff for the skills it needs, has good human resources practices and strong financial management; and
good engagement with the community and strategic engagement with government.
65 Support for Leadership and Governance
Three broad tasks emerge from the research on leadership and governance. The need to educate and train current Aboriginal leaders; the need to develop future leadership potential; and the need to reform government engagement with Aboriginal communities so that it does not impose unfair burdens and supports Aboriginal governance.
While recognising the importance of leadership and governance the COAG process has failed to invest in it and now finds that this is jeopardising program outcomes. Beyond the local implementation of services there is also a need to prepare communities to manage substantial financial assets derived from native title settlements and royalty payments. Specific investment from the Commonwealth and State is needed to enable communities to:
determine what community governance processes and structures suit them and so what their priorities for support are;
undertake sustained training and support to develop governance and administrative skills favouring processes that allow for mentoring and skills transfer over time to supplement one off courses; and
expose leaders and potential leaders from isolated communities to wider systems so that they can observe how these systems operate.
A range of options will be required depending on the circumstances of communities and the extent to which its members have already developed governance skills.
The Fitzroy Futures process is used as a national example of the benefit of supporting Aboriginal communities to develop their own governance processes but the Board is aware that funding for the Fitzroy Futures process expires at the end of 2011/12. It would be a tragedy to see such a successful process founder through lack of continued investment. It is evident that such processes must be supported over the medium to longer term and applied elsewhere.
Planning to develop tomorrow’s leaders is also an essential investment. Ensuring young people grow up with knowledge and pride in their culture and receive a sound formal education is the foundation for this and must be a priority. There are a range of leadership programs now being offered aimed at developing self confidence in young people and encouraging them to fulfil their dreams. These are desirable but the Board notes that they are often brief single experiences and believes that more attention is needed to link such programs to training or other sustained processes that can reinforce the skills learned and potentially contribute to obtaining recognised qualifications.
66 That Government must adapt to support Aboriginal governance is also a key finding from the research. Imposed processes and timeframes that undermine Aboriginal governance is a major contributor to ineffective program delivery and ultimately community dysfunction. The plethora of funding streams and associated accountability processes, uncoordinated government services and policy churn that Aboriginal communities are forced to operate within are well documented. The development of place based processes such as the COAG Remote Service Delivery sites and the AACC Community Congress model to improve government service delivery is a start but the Board does not believe these processes can be fully effective until they are supported by regional governance where strategic objectives are developed jointly with Aboriginal people and a genuine two way relationship is established. Regional governance is the key to this and government will be required to organise itself so that significant decision making and budgetary control are vested at this level.
Recommendations
Royalties for Regions allocate recurrent funding for Aboriginal communities to develop culturally relevant processes and structures to enable engagement with regional governance.
The Commonwealth and State Governments invest in developing organisational and community governance capacity within Aboriginal communities using processes that have proved to be effective such as mentoring and skills transfer over time. Investment should be sustained over a sufficient period to allow for skills to be consolidated and for community organisations to develop sustainable capacity. Processes initiated by Aboriginal communities such as Fitzroy Futures and Pilbara Futures provide models that should continue to be supported and extended to other parts of the State.
Where leadership programs are developed, particularly those aimed at enhancing the confidence and capacity of young people, the originators consider how these might be linked to ongoing processes and/or education and training that will reinforce the skills learned and potentially contribute to obtaining recognised qualifications.
Economic Participation
The National Indigenous Expenditure Report found that the Western Australian Government spent $6 million in 2008/09 on Aboriginal economic participation. This equates to 3% of Government expenditure on economic participation and around 0.3% of expenditure on services for Aboriginal people.
67 Even allowing that investment in education and training is accounted for separately this is a remarkably small investment in assisting Aboriginal people to develop businesses and business skills that will enable them to become economically self sufficient and contribute to growing the State’s economy.
Policy Evolution
Prior to the Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage Strategy and COAG Economic Development Priorities (National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation) Western Australia had an Office of Aboriginal Economic Development (OAED) that developed a State Aboriginal economic development strategy that was adopted as COAG national strategy in 2006. The objectives of this strategy were:
Increasing workforce participation and employment
Growing Aboriginal business in selected industries – arts, tourism, resources and construction and
Improving outcomes from Aboriginal assets including land, native title and housing.
In 2006 the OAED became the Aboriginal Economic Development Unit (AEDU) within the Department of Commerce with the following roles:
Oversight of the implementation of the Indigenous Economic Development Strategy and coordination of COAG closing the gap economic development initiatives.
Support for Aboriginal organisations and businesses with measures such as development of business plans, provision of consultants, due diligence, legal and incorporation costs, business improvement and governance training.
Sector development strategies such as the arts commercialisation strategy, working with Tourism WA to support Aboriginal tourism operators and the development of Aboriginal controlled housing projects.
The AEDU was valued by Government agencies and the Aboriginal community and had instigated or supported a range of effective initiatives to promote economic participation yet it was disbanded in July 2009 as a consequence of efficiency cuts. The result of this is that Western Australia is the only state not to have a dedicated unit or program supporting Aboriginal economic development and while some of its services are now provided through mainstream agencies this has added to the complex array of programs and organisations that Aboriginal people must contend with. Gaps also remain in services and include:
68 Policy advice to government and government agencies, especially smaller agencies without internal Aboriginal support capacity and loss of coordination between agencies
Assistance to identify economic opportunities resulting from native title, Aboriginal lands and regional development
Corporate governance support for Aboriginal trusts, organisations and companies
Seed funding for Aboriginal businesses and
Loss of focus on the private sector.
The Department of Indigenous Affairs is taking up the policy and coordination roles and the Department of Training and Workforce Development has developed strategy to support Aboriginal employment, but the result has been to take Western Australia from being a leader in the field to a position of having to recreate infrastructure and expertise and to redevelop relationships across the sectors.
COAG Economic Development Priorities (National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation - IEP NP)
The COAG National indigenous Reform Agreement target is to halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade. The elements of IEP NP agreed to in February 2009 are:
Creating real sustainable employment in areas of government service delivery that have previously relied on subsidisation through CDEP program
Strengthening government procurement policies to maximise Indigenous employment
Incorporating Indigenous workforce strategies into all new major COAG reform contributing to closing the gap targets
Reviewing all public sector Indigenous employment and career development strategies to increase employment to reflect population share by 2015.
69 Comment on Progress in Policy Implementation
The Department of Indigenous Affairs has lead responsibility for progressing the IEP NP and ensuring Western Australia meets these commitments, however all agencies have a responsibility to promote this within their portfolios. A report14 prepared by the Department of Indigenous Affairs summarised Western Australia’s progress against the targets:
There was a 20% gap in employment between the Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal workforce in Western Australia in 2008 and based on estimations of population growth some 12,000 new jobs will be required to close the gap. The gap in employment is one of the few areas where Western Australia has a narrower gap than the Australian average.
Recognising the importance of Indigenous economic participation the WA Government has included this strategic initiative in future CEO performance agreements and will ensure the IEP NP is contextualised within a broader Aboriginal economic participation agenda of the State.
CDEP: The WA Government has provided funding of $19 million over four years to create 156 sustainable jobs providing state services from former CDEP positions. The Department of Indigenous Affairs has been coordinating implementation and 134 of the 156 jobs (86%) are now in place (as of June 2010).
Procurement Reforms: The WA Government is currently piloting innovative procurement practices through projects such as the Remote Indigenous Housing National Partnership, which has a target of 20% Aboriginal employment15. Indigenous employment outcomes are already being seen on the ground and lessons learnt from pilots will inform reforms to procurement.
Public Sector Employment: WA is working towards increasing Indigenous employment in the public sector to 3.2% by 2015, based on the projected Indigenous working age population share. A public sector Indigenous Employment and Career Development Strategy is being developed to support this.
The report also provides examples of projects and strategies that are creating employment for Aboriginal people. As the IEP NP was agreed to in early 2009 the summary report is effectively a baseline report and the changes largely reflect the outcomes of prior policy. This is clear in the examples provided that show the benefits of the more broadly based AEDU policy.
14 Department of Indigenous Affairs (2010) Closing the Gap in Indigenous Life Outcomes: Western Australia 15 The Department of Housing exceeded this target in 2010.
70 The Board’s main concerns with the COAG IEP NP policy settings are the almost exclusive focus on employment and how this has been further narrowed to employment in the public sector and the lack of attention to promoting enterprise development that will allow Aboriginal people to develop opportunities based on sustainable assets of land and culture. Attention also needs to be given to building capacity, both for people to become job ready and to meet employment and cultural obligations and for the demands of operating businesses.
Employment
Employment is important and the Board does not underestimate the value of having a job. However the private sector is by far the major employer – 2006 Population Census data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics found 72% of Aboriginal people and 85% of non-Aboriginal people are employed by the private sector in Western Australia - and failing to develop strategy with this sector ignores the area with the greatest potential to increase Aboriginal employment.
In Western Australia the mining industry is entering another boom phase that will stimulate the overall economy and provide opportunity for increasing Aboriginal employment. The role for Government is to assist Aboriginal people become work ready. Fortunately the Western Australian Training together - working together strategy developed by the Department of Training and Workforce Development is focussed on preparing Aboriginal people for jobs required by the private sector and there are examples of constructive private sector initiatives such as the process pioneered by Argyle Diamond Mining to form long term relationships with local Aboriginal communities to develop work readiness and specifically train people for jobs that are available. Training together – working together must continue to be supported and organisations encouraged to invest in Aboriginal people.
While the Board agrees with the strategy to increase employment within the public sector to reflect the population share of Aboriginal people of working age it believes that it needs to be refined as it is implemented in Western Australia so that it also:
addresses the imbalance between lower and senior level employment within the public sector;
takes into account the uneven distribution of Indigenous people across the State; and
reflects the client base of the agency.
Data collated by the Office of Equal Employment Opportunity on the representation of Aboriginal people in employment in the public sector16 shows that:
16 Director of Equal Opportunity in Public Employment Annual Report 2010. The data covers agencies employing more than 100 people.
71 Aboriginal employment remains below the Aboriginal working age population representation of 3%;
Aboriginal employment is still concentrated at lower salary levels; and
Aboriginal employment at senior levels has decreased since 2005 and is at the lowest it has been in a decade.
Ideally public sector employment should reflect the regional working age Aboriginal population, especially in regions such as the Kimberley where Aboriginal people form up to 40% of that group. Agencies with a high proportion of Aboriginal clients also need to reflect this in their employment of Aboriginal people in order to make services more relevant and it should not be acceptable that any major service agency employs less than the State Aboriginal working age population share. Notably the Departments of Health and WA Police employ less than the State population share.
To achieve this goal several strategies will need to be developed that cover:
organisational cultural change so that Indigenous culture is valued and promoted;
attraction strategies that acknowledge the need to develop work readiness skills as well as provide job related training;
career development strategies that develop skills to allow promotion to more senior positions within the organisation and the public sector; and
retention strategies to make a career in the public sector a more attractive choice.
The Board also recommends that the Public Sector Commission reviews the effectiveness of section 50D positions in promoting careers in the public sector. There is a potential that these positions are not effectively linked to broader organisational structures and inadvertently serve to limit career progression.
In October 2010 the Board released a statement on public sector employment and wrote to the Public Sector Commissioner making these recommendations. His response has been positive and the Board expects that these recommendations will be pursued.
Support for Enterprise
Currently the resources sector is providing opportunity for many Aboriginal communities to generate wealth through royalties and employment of the current and next generation but this boom will not last forever and foundations must be established now for when the mine closes. There are also many Aboriginal people who prefer to work in ways that support their culture and heritage such as in conservation, art, tourism and the like and who require support to develop opportunities in these fields.
72 The Board has already noted the paltry investment currently being made in economic participation and the failure to sustain the AEDU that was achieving results. Government must significantly increase investment in supporting Aboriginal people to develop productive enterprises. Currently Western Australia lacks a comprehensive strategy to promote Aboriginal economic participation and this must be remedied. The strategy will also need to be sustained and adequately resourced.
The lessons from successful approaches to developing leadership and governance and assisting people into employment also apply to supporting enterprise development. Capacity building is needed and is successful when cooperative approaches are used with bottom up community involvement and ongoing support is given. There also needs to be a focus on good governance. Sustained programs with gradual transfer of knowledge and skill development using mentoring are effective.
The Board acknowledges that the Commonwealth Draft Strategy for Indigenous Economic Development Priorities for 2010-2012 is a comprehensive strategy that addresses many of the deficiencies of the IEP NP but Western Australia needs to develop its own strategies to suit the particular needs of the State.
Recommendations
Government develop a strategy to promote Aboriginal economic participation and significantly increase the investment in supporting Aboriginal people to develop productive enterprises.
The Public Sector Commissioner implement the Board’s recommendations to refine the strategy to increase Aboriginal employment in the public sector to reflect working age population share so that it addresses the imbalance between lower and senior level employment within the public sector; takes into account the uneven distribution of Aboriginal people across the State; and reflects the client base of the agency. No major service delivery agency should employ less than the Indigenous working age population share.
The Public Sector Commission review the effectiveness of section 50D positions in promoting careers in the public sector. There is a potential that these positions are not effectively linked to broader organisational structures and inadvertently serve to limit career progression.
73 74 Section Three
MAINTAINING DIRECTION
The Board will cease to exist from the end of February 2011 and it will have completed what it can of its terms of reference. It has set out for Government a path that will address the causes of Aboriginal disadvantage if it is willing to follow it.
Aboriginal disadvantage is largely seen as a service delivery issue rather than as the Board understands it to be a relationship issue. The current relationship with Aboriginal people is fundamentally wrong and needs to be reset.
This process starts with respect for Aboriginal cultures, knowledge and people. The history of European colonisation and its effects on Aboriginal society need to be acknowledged as do the differences in world view between Aboriginal and European cultures. When this occurs it will make it possible to find “both ways” processes for working together whereby mutual respect and pride can be developed.
This report sets out processes and potential base structures for regional governance which the Board believes are essential in forming partnerships with Aboriginal people that can meet the aspirations of us all.
The Board also knows that Aboriginal people must take responsibility for their own progress. Empowerment is about creating opportunity so that Aboriginal people can then make their own paths. The concept of moving away from a welfare mentality is often used now and the Board believes that this will be an outcome if its recommendations are followed. In its conversations the Board has consistently promoted the need for Aboriginal people to pursue regional governance for themselves if this is what they want and to recognise that with participation in regional governance comes responsibility for delivering on agreed strategies and their outcomes.
The Board recognises that its message is not widely appreciated at this time and that it is promoting a radical change in the way that the State does business. It is confident that Aboriginal people around Western Australia want the influence and responsibility that will come with regional governance and is sure that non-Aboriginal people in the regions also want greater empowerment. It is less certain of Government desire for this. However, to continue on the current path will be an expensive and largely nugatory exercise. The Board believes that the political and democratic trend is clear and that regional governance is inevitable. It will be a matter of whether it is this Government or a future one that accepts responsibility for this initiative.
75 The path that the Board has set out and the journey that it has begun through its conversations with Aboriginal people and its advice to Government must continue if a changed relationship with Aboriginal people through regional governance is to become a reality. All too often change in Indigenous Affairs has been stymied through failure to continue with policy initiatives due to an unrealistic expectation that change happens quickly and so fails to allow sufficient time for ideas to be understood and be fully incorporated into the way of doing business by both Aboriginal and mainstream organisations. The Board is confident of the capacity of the Department of Indigenous Affairs to continue to work with Aboriginal people across the State but understands that it will require the support of an advisory group that can act as an independent broker and is focussed on achieving regional governance with Aboriginal culture at its core. This group is needed as a successor to the Board and should be comprised of Aboriginal people and others knowledgeable about culturally legitimate governance and how this can link with the mainstream in order to maintain the momentum generated from the Board’s work. A journey has been started on the right path that with goodwill and the combined expertise of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal leaders will result in a partnership that will benefit all Western Australians.
Recommendations to Promote Continuation of the Board’s Work
The Board leaves behind the following markers for what needs to occur:
DIA has the mandate to ensure that Government develops policy and processes that support Aboriginal people attain equal life outcomes to the rest of the population on their terms; that ensure that Aboriginal culture is understood and promoted; and that regional governance with Aboriginal partnership is achieved.
To support DIA in its work to promote regional governance in partnership with Aboriginal people the Board recommends that an advisory body that is independent of government and comprised of Aboriginal and other knowledgeable people is established to assist DIA continue to develop regional governance processes and structures.
DIA will need to continue to analyse Government expenditure in Indigenous Affairs and use this information to leverage change so that ultimately expenditure reflects support for functional development rather than ameliorating disadvantage.
DIA needs to continue to increase its regional presence and to continue to engage with central and line agencies to change the culture and function of Government departments.
76 Aboriginal people will need to pursue regional representational processes that will allow them to agree among themselves on priorities for their social, economic, environmental and cultural development; use their increasing capacity to negotiate through native title to drive the outcomes they want from industry and Government; and work with Government to establish a form of regional governance that will benefit all people in their regions.
The work of Chandler and the Harvard Project has established that strong functioning Indigenous communities have:
Self government
Knowledge of and respect for their culture and the capacity to preserve and teach this for future generations
Local control over basic services such as health, education, policing and child welfare
Control over traditional lands or engagement in processes to establish such control.
These markers can be measured and can be used as indicators of progress and the Board recommends that DIA develop specific performance indicators based on these markers.
77 78 APPENDICES
Minutes of Regional Roundtables
1. Karratha
2. Kununurra
3. Broome
ATTACHMENTS
1. Report on the Goldfields Conversation: Kalgoorlie 2-3 February2010
2. A new Dreaming: Noongar Dialogue 24 – 25 February 2010
3. Mid West Conversation: Geraldton 10 – 11 May 2010 and Carnarvon 13 May 2010
79 Appendix 1
Karratha – Minutes of Regional Roundtable
KARRATHA ROUNDTABLE
Potential Models for Regional Governance
26 OCTOBER 2010 Karratha College Karratha
MINUTES
Present
Community – Michelle Adams, Steven Dhu, Kate George, Patricia Mason, Gene Smith, Marnmu Smyth, Julie Walker
Indigenous Implementation Board and Department of Indigenous Affairs – John Sanderson, Sue Gordon, Duncan Ord, Helen Shanks, Penny Lipscombe, Jacinta Mack
Background
In response to the recommendations on regional governance arising from the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB) Reports (1&2), the Hon Dr Kim Hames MLA, Minister for Indigenous Affairs, has requested the Department for Indigenous Affairs (DIA) to partner with the Department of Regional Development and Lands (DRDL), the IIB and other stakeholders on the development of potential model/s for regional governance that could be implemented in the Kimberley and Pilbara regions.
The Roundtables build on the regional conversations held by the IIB around Western Australia in 2009 and 2010 and other conversations that have been held within the region around governance. As a result of these conversations, the Minister has asked for further consultation with Aboriginal leaders so that he can consider models of regional governance that would work in the Pilbara and Kimberley. The Roundtable held in Karratha was part of this work.
Issues Raised in the Discussion
The discussion meeting began with a statement derived from the views of Pilbara people involved in the Pilbara Futures Forum about how the resources boom has affected Aboriginal people in the region:
Karratha Roundtable – Potential Models for Regional Governance Page 1 of 3 26 October 2010
The Pilbara is unique in that it has borne the brunt of the resources boom for over 40 years and everyone is agreed that things cannot keep going the way they have. The impact has been to create widespread trauma through the divisive impact of Native Title legislation and processes and through the loss of culture. There is now emerging evidence of the connection between unaddressed cultural and historical loss and trauma shown through mental health and intergenerational impacts in the Pilbara. A lack of trust by Aboriginal people has developed for government and mining companies. There is a strong sense of urgency that it is now the last chance to do something before the predicted expansion of the Pilbara completely overwhelms Aboriginal culture in the region. There is strong agreement that Aboriginal people need to come together with one voice and that its focus needs to be on heritage protection and cultural development. Attention must also be given to addressing trauma to enable people to function again and to repair the rifts in relationships.
Opportunities are seen with the development of the Pilbara but Aboriginal people must have a greater say in planning and greater control over heritage matters. Participants noted the failure of the State and Commonwealth Governments to engage with Pilbara Aboriginal people and noted models such as the South Australian state heritage agreement and the Canadian national agreement with its native peoples. What is wanted is a high level agreement whereby Aboriginal representatives can agree with the State and have this bind the actions of departments so that there is not the need to have to deal department by department and face continual funding uncertainty.
A bottom up process is called for to decide regional priorities and to have this process recognised at a high level. Examples were given of top down policy changes without consultation that have had the effect of defunding existing infrastructure and destroying the work associated with it. The top down approach is also not enabling sufficient information about mining impact to be considered, especially in relation to water resources.
Participants were clear that the status of Aboriginal people as key decision makers in relation to land use and heritage needs to be enshrined in legislation and a form of agreement between Aboriginal people and the State. Legislation affecting heritage such as the Aboriginal Heritage Act, the Environmental Protection Act and the Mining Act needs to be amended to give greater control to Aboriginal people as currently it is weighted towards development.
There was support for regional governance provided Government was genuinely committed and prepared to allow significant decision making and budgetary control at this level. This would be demonstrated by a statement of intent and commitment to a funded process to enable Aboriginal people to develop representational processes. The final structure would also include adequate Aboriginal representation to allow a strong voice and not override or outnumber Aboriginal views. To help safeguard the Aboriginal voice a distinct entity for regional Aboriginal representation is supported and this entity would provide and support representation in the broader regional governance processes.
Karratha Roundtable – Potential Models for Regional Governance Page 2 of 3 26 October 2010
Elaborating on the role of the Aboriginal entity, it should be autonomous and funded to provide policy development, advocacy and possibly service delivery, especially in relation to promoting culture and addressing trauma. The focus would be to develop an Aboriginal voice for the region and to contribute to regional planning to prevent Aboriginal interests being overridden by the next wave of development. The planning focus also needs to extend beyond mining and include social and economic development taking into account heritage protection, cultural promotion and environmental sustainability. There was a preference for a statutory authority to increase the likelihood of it surviving State and Commonwealth government policy changes. Potential sources of longer term funding discussed included a combination of government funding, a percentage of royalty payments and contributions from native title beneficiaries.
An empowerment model was considered essential to developing the Aboriginal entity and voice and it was agreed that the processes used had to be supported by elders and include all Aboriginal people in the Pilbara. While Aboriginal people have to have carriage of whatever form the united Pilbara voice takes, it was acknowledged that Aboriginal people still required advocates, allies and champions from the mainstream community and government. The Pilbara Futures process that has started was seen to be the right platform to pursue this process of empowerment.
Next Steps
DIA and the IIB will inform Minister Hames of the views of Aboriginal people about the potential to develop regional governance in the Pilbara. In developing appropriate governance models for each region, it is recognised that an ongoing process of development will be required to allow for culturally appropriate consultation and decision making to take place ahead of any process for seeking endorsement by Aboriginal people and other stakeholders at the regional level.
In the Pilbara the Pilbara Futures process and the planned Tribal Nations Get-togethers that are being supported by DIA are seen to be a good platform for further work to develop governance and will continue to be used to develop the governance projects already underway. If Government supports the development of regional governance as recommended by the participants of the Roundtable this process can also be used to develop a Pilbara regional governance model.
Karratha Roundtable – Potential Models for Regional Governance Page 3 of 3 26 October 2010 Appendix 2
Kununurra – Minutes of Regional Roundtable
KUNUNURRA ROUNDTABLE
Potential Models for Regional Governance
27 OCTOBER 2010 The Kimberley Grande Kununurra
MINUTES
Present
Community – Judi Butters, Vicki Butters, Josie Farrer, Desmond Hill, George Lee, Ethel McLennon, Bryan Miller, Kenneth Rivers, Trevor Waina
Indigenous Implementation Board and Department of Indigenous Affairs – John Sanderson, Selina Swan, Penny Lipscombe, Chris Coomer, Michelle Manning, Jessica Lumley, Rob Baker
Background
In response to the recommendations on regional governance arising from the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB) Reports (1&2), the Hon Dr Kim Hames MLA, Minister for Indigenous Affairs, has requested the Department for Indigenous Affairs (DIA) to partner with the Department of Regional Development and Lands (DRDL), the IIB and other stakeholders on the development of potential model/s for regional governance that could be implemented in the Kimberley and Pilbara regions.
The Roundtables build on the regional conversations held by the IIB around Western Australia in 2009 and 2010 and other conversations that have been held within the region around governance. As a result of these conversations, the Minister has asked for further consultation with Aboriginal leaders so that he can consider models of regional governance that would work in the Pilbara and Kimberley. The Roundtable held in Kununurra was part of this work.
Issues Raised in the Discussion
Participants were clear that government needs to relate differently to Aboriginal communities as existing processes were ineffective in meeting community needs and were subject to policy changes without consultation that created significant problems for service continuity. As one participant expressed it she was happy to jump on any bandwagon going if it would help her people but participants are frustrated by processes that get started and then change without creating anything lasting.
Kununurrra Roundtable – Potential Models for Regional Governance Page 1 of 2 27 October 2010
A clear message is that processes must be built from the ground up and Aboriginal people must be involved in the design from the beginning.
There was support for the concept of regional governance that had strong Aboriginal representation and participants favoured models where language and geographic groups within the region came together and provided representatives to a regional Aboriginal body which in turn provided representation on a regional body that included government and industry representation.
Some discussion occurred about sub-regional representation and how it might be organised. It was agreed that there are several options and this had to be worked out by communities and would depend on the focus of regional governance committed to by Government. If communities are to take this further Government would need to commit to the process and provide support for consultation and development to occur.
The focus of regional governance favoured by participants was on a high level relationship with government that directed economic and social planning. Participants felt that a greater share of the wealth generated in the Kimberley ought to be retained in the Kimberley and that the Aboriginal voice was essential to better directing its use.
Some scepticism was expressed about the likelihood of government sustaining its policy commitment to regional governance. While not explicitly stated the sense from the discussion was that processes should be established in legislation to give as much certainty to sustainability as possible.
There was also a concern that regional governance had to adequately represent the East Kimberley as there is a tendency for major processes to centre on Broome. Further development of regional governance will need to bring together the East and West Kimberley groups so that everyone is party to the one discussion.
Participants also agreed that an extensive education process was needed to allow people from across the region to develop knowledge and skills in business processes and organisational governance so that there was strong local governance and a larger group of people were able to effectively participate in regional governance. The potential for an Aboriginal organisation to undertake some of this role was noted.
Next Steps
DIA and the IIB will inform Minister Hames of the views of Aboriginal people about the potential to develop regional governance in the Kimberley. In developing appropriate governance models for each region, it is recognised that an ongoing process of development will be required to allow for culturally appropriate consultation and decision making to take place ahead of any process for seeking endorsement by Aboriginal people and other stakeholders at the regional level.
Kununurrra Roundtable – Potential Models for Regional Governance Page 2 of 2 27 October 2010 Appendix 3
Broome – Minutes of Regional Roundtable
BROOME ROUNDTABLE
Potential Models for Regional Governance
28 OCTOBER 2010 Indigenous Coordination Centre Broome
MINUTES
Present
Community – Wayne Barker, Dickie Bedford, Patsy Bedford, George Brooking, Irene Davey, Ari Gorring, Patrick Green, Wes Morris, Anne Poelina, Joe Ross, Marty Sibosado, Anthony Watson, William Watson, Dorothy Spry
Indigenous Implementation Board and Department of Indigenous Affairs – John Sanderson, Mark Bin Bakar, Duncan Ord, Ian Thomas, Penny Lipscombe Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs – Belinda Collins
Background
In response to the recommendations on regional governance arising from the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB) Reports (1&2), the Hon Dr Kim Hames MLA, Minister for Indigenous Affairs, has requested the Department for Indigenous Affairs (DIA) to partner with the Department of Regional Development and Lands (DRDL), the IIB and other stakeholders on the development of potential model/s for regional governance that could be implemented in the Kimberley and Pilbara regions.
The Roundtables build on the regional conversations held by the IIB around Western Australia in 2009 and 2010 and other conversations that have been held within the region around governance. As a result of these conversations, the Minister has asked for further consultation with Aboriginal leaders so that he can consider models of regional governance that would work in the Pilbara and Kimberley. The Roundtable held in Broome was part of this work.
Issues Raised in the Discussion
Participants agreed that government must recognise and respect Aboriginal processes for planning and decision making and support their development in the Kimberley through adequate funding. Current non-Aboriginal processes have failed and several examples were given of the problems caused by major policy changes without consultation – for example the changes to CDEP and the loss of organisational funding for the language centre. There was a strong desire for government to be held accountable for its commitments and intended outcomes.
Broome Roundtable – Potential Models for Regional Governance Page 1 of 2 28 October 2010
Participants also agreed that regional level strategy and governance was needed and that Aboriginal representation needed to significantly shape this. There was a preference that whatever processes and structures were ultimately developed these needed to be supported in legislation to reduce the likelihood of them collapsing when policy changed. There was also a rights based element to this part of the discussion and the desire to enshrine Aboriginal rights in legislation.
While limited time was spent discussing what a regional strategy might be a view was that the Kimberley required a process whereby Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people could develop a sustainability strategy that conserved both culture and the environment and set a basis for economic growth that would last well beyond resource sector investment. Within this vision Aboriginal cultural, social and economic development would be central and at sub-regional and local levels traditional owners would have control over development on their lands.
At the regional level most participants agreed that an Aboriginal body was needed to bring Aboriginal people together to develop a united voice on matters affecting the region. This body would then be able to participate in regional governance. A minority view appeared to be that sub-regional groups should represent themselves and focus on the interests of their constituents.
All participants agreed that work to develop local governance capacity should continue and that current work occurring through the COAG and native title processes should not be disrupted.
Participants had different views on how the process to develop a unified Aboriginal voice should proceed. Kimberley Futures argued that they should manage the process; however another view was that this risked other major stakeholders declining to participate and that this would weaken any resulting proposals. A proposal to set up a meeting of major stakeholders from across the Kimberley to determine if agreement could be reached on how further work could occur was not strongly supported and it is uncertain if this is achievable at this time. DIA agreed to support a further meeting of stakeholders to discuss whether there was agreement to pursue regional governance and if so how this should occur. DIA will email and ask who should be at the meeting. Participants were also asked to identify who should facilitate the meeting.
Next Steps
DIA and the IIB will inform Minister Hames of the views of Aboriginal people about the potential to develop regional governance in the Kimberley. DIA will also support a further meeting of stakeholders if this is agreed by participants.
In developing appropriate governance models for each region, it is recognised that an ongoing process of development will be required to allow for culturally appropriate consultation and decision making to take place ahead of any process for seeking endorsement by Aboriginal people and other stakeholders at the regional level.
Broome Roundtable – Potential Models for Regional Governance Page 2 of 2 28 October 2010 Attachment 1
Report on the Goldfields Conversation: Kalgoorlie 2-3 February 2010
REPORT ON THE GOLDFIELDS CONVERSATION KALGOORLIE 2-3 FEBRUARY 2010
Prepared by Kado Muir Marnta Media Pty Ltd PO Box 13 Leonora, WA, 6438 Mobile: 0419 866 506 www.kadomuir.com The Goldfields Conversation
The Goldfields Conversation
Contents
WELCOME TO COUNTRY ...... 4 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 6 ABOUT THE AUTHOR/FACILITATOR ...... 6 SCOPE OF THE REPORT ...... 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 8
RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 9
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND & METHODOLOGY ...... 10 BACKGROUND TO THIS GOLDFIELDS CONVERSATION ...... 13 METHODOLOGY OF THE CONVERSATION ...... 13 FUNDAMENTAL PROPOSITIONS ...... 13 SIX CORE THEMES ...... 14 CONTEXT DISCUSSION: FORUM THEMES ...... 15 THEME 1: CULTURAL SUSTAINABILITY ...... 15 THEME 2: ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY ...... 16 THEME 3: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ...... 16 THEME 4: HEALTH ...... 17 THEME 5: EDUCATION & TRAINING ...... 18 THEME 6: REGIONAL GOVERNANCE ...... 19 SECTION 2: THE CONVERSATION ...... 20 THE AGENDA ...... 20 OPENING ADDRESSES ...... 20 (1) WELCOME BY RICKY DIMER ...... 20 (2) OPENING OF FORUM BY TREVOR DONALDSON ON BEHALF OF THE GLSC ...... 21 (3) INTRODUCTION BY LT GENERAL JOHN SANDERSON...... 22 THE GOLDFIELDS CONVERSATION: DISCUSSION ON ISSUES ...... 26 TABLE OF THEMES, DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIONS ...... 27 SECTION 3: MOVING THE CONVERSATION FORWARD ...... 37 THE ISSUE OF REPRESENTATION ...... 37 ACTIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD ...... 38 RESOURCES FOR MOVING FORWARD ...... 38 CONCLUSION ...... 38 APPENDICES ...... 39 APPENDIX 1- PARTICIPANTS, OBSERVERS AND FACILITATORS ...... 39 APPENDIX 2 – AGENDA GOLDFIELDS CONVERSATION ...... 43 APPENDIX 3 – SOME THOUGHTS ON GOLDFIELDS POLITICAL STRUCTURES ...... 45
3
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Welcome to Country
by Ricky Dimer.
I'd like to welcome everyone along here to the Goldfields. Kalgoorlie is a very
special place to myself and a lot of other people around here. There's people
from the South, from the East, North and from the West. Kalgoorlie is a very
meaningful place for us and I'd like to welcome everyone here. Also with this
here (The Conversation) I hope that something comes out of it, that we can
get something positive. With this being the first meeting in the Goldfields
anyway I'm really humbled by that. But I have a saying with anything what I
do, If I'm going to do something new I always go back and review the things
that were done in the past, the successes that we've had and the failures that
we've had. Because I always think that there's an old saying that I got from a
few old people in my time, “that you can never ever put a cross threaded nut
onto a new bolt without the wheel going to fall off”. So bear that in mind and I
hope you fella's have a good forum. Thank you.
4
Page The Goldfields Conversation
List of Abbreviations
AAAC Aboriginal Affairs Coordinating Committee
AAC Aboriginal Advisory Council
ATSIC (The former) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission
CDEP Community Development Employment Project
DEEWR Department of Employment Education and Workplace Relations
ICC Indigenous Coordination Centre
IIB Indigenous Implementation Board
ILC Indigenous Land Corporation
IBA Indigenous Business Australia
NGO Non-Government Organisations
RTO Registered Training Organisation
WA Western Australia
GLSC Goldfields Land and Sea Council
NNAC (The former) Nooda Ngulegoo Aboriginal Corporation
5
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Acknowledgements
The facilitator, Kado Muir of Marnta Media acknowledges the support of the Goldfields Land and Sea Council (GLSC), the Nooda Ngulegoo Aboriginal Corporation and the Wongutha Birni Aboriginal Corporation in sponsoring The Goldfields Conversation.
The Goldfields Conversation also acknowledges the financial support of the Department of State Development. GLSC hosted the event with assistance from Bega Garnbirringu Aboriginal Corporation. The Department of Indigenous Affairs provided funds for logistics.
The Goldfields Conversation also acknowledges Lt. General John Sanderson, the Chairman of the WA Indigenous Implementation Board, for his support and participation in the forum.
Special thank to the participants, the people who gave up their time to travel across the Goldfields to discuss issues of common concern and advance thinking about regional cooperation and cohesiveness.
Thanks also to: Dr Susan Gordon, Ms Ricky Burges and Dr Mark Bin Bakar (members of the Indigenous Implementation Board), Ricky Dimer, Traditional Owner for Welcome to Country, Trevor Donaldson, Operations Manager GLSC.
About the Author/Facilitator
The facilitator, Kado Muir of Marnta Media is a Ngalia man from Leonora, of the Tjarurru skin group, his people are from the northern Goldfields and form one of the many tribes of the Wangkatja Nation.
In this report the tense is personal to reflect that it is written by a stakeholder of the region and the shared struggle of the Aboriginal community.
The presentation of this report has been delayed owing to personal circumstances of the author/facilitator. However the author is mindful of the extremely important nature of this Conversation and has worked to complete the report and forward it on to the GLSC.
6
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Scope of the Report
This report is based on presentations and report back sessions recorded at The Goldfields Conversation. It is a record of the discussion and recommendations put forward at the forum. The report is informed by the principles of; (1) Support for the Indigenous self-determination, (2) Serving and informing Indigenous aspirations, and (3) Voicing the perspectives of Indigenous people.
The structure of the report is as follows: Section 1; outlines the background to the Goldfields Conversation and the methodology of the conversation. Section 2; documents the theme group discussions and the address of General John Sanderson. Issues and recommendations are identified and key messages are extracted from the group discussions. Section 3; discusses a number of issues and implications in regards to continuing the conversation, and offers a possible case study for pursuing engagement in the Northern Goldfields. Attachment; DVD of Proceedings
7
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Executive Summary
The Goldfields Conversation held in Kalgoorlie in February 2010 provided a forum for Aboriginal community members, representatives from Aboriginal community organisations, Non Government Organisation's (NGO) and government agencies across the region to discuss how best to reform the relationship between government and Aboriginal people based on a regional approach. More than thirty community representatives from throughout the Goldfields participated in the forum. Also participating was the Chair of the WA Indigenous Implementation Board, Lt General (Rt‟d) John Sanderson.
The forum was convened by the Goldfields Land and Sea Council with sponsorship assistance from Bega Garnbirringu. The department of State Development provided funds for logistics. Marnta Media facilitated the forum discussions.
8
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Recommendations
There are a number of action items identified in this report and each needs to be considered and acted upon. The following is a short summary of some key recommendations proposed by the Conversation.
1. The IIB hold a further/follow up Goldfields Conversations to report on the response of Government and to track any progress made in the area of services delivery.
2. The delivery of health funding and health services needs to be urgently responded to, we know the issues and problems but we have an issue with health funding.
3. Establish a steering committee to drive the outcomes from the conversation and employ an advocate to take this conversation to the next level.
4. Need Action Now for recording the oral histories of our elders.
5. Aboriginal heritage processes need to be examined and reworked so that senior law men who have a responsibility as custodians to be involved in heritage management processes
6. Establish a committee within Local Government to address the concerns of the local Indigenous people – mandatory seats on local shires.
7. Engage with young people to empower and inspire them to become leaders in their own lives and for their communities.
8. Get 20 mins of time in Diggers and Dealers to get Aboriginal business opportunities / presentation.
9. IIB support the extension of the Regional Partnership Program operating in Wiluna to Goldfields communities.
9
Page The Goldfields Conversation Section 1: Background & Methodology
The Goldfields Conversation (TGC) is a joint initiative of the Goldfields Land and Sea Council (GLSC), Bega Garnbirringu Health Service (Bega), Wongutha Birni Aboriginal Corporation (WBAC) and Nooda Ngulegoo Aboriginal Corporation (Nooda). The forum was held in Kalgoorlie on the 1st-2nd February 2010. It was an opportunity for Aboriginal leaders, stakeholders and organisations to plan how we can begin to work together in a more co-ordinated and strategic manner to address the issues affecting our communities.
The Goldfields Aboriginal community has long been at the forefront of social and political developments in Western Australia. The Weebo dispute in the late 1960‟s and early 1970‟s lead to the introduction of the Aboriginal Heritage Act. This dispute lead to the Government at the time being pressured to introduce Aboriginal heritage protection legislation. A newspaper quote of the time reflected the sentiments forced by Weebo;
Premier Brand said yesterday that the State Government thought a stage had been reached where all Aboriginal sacred sites should be registered. The government was prepared to make a survey of sacred sites, but it could not be achieved in such a short time. (The West Australian, 16 April 1969)
The Aboriginal Heritage Act was introduced in 1972 and is a testament to the strength of conviction and desire of Leonora elders to fight for their law and cultural rights. The Weebo dispute and subsequent disputes point to the desire of Aboriginal people in the Goldfields to take action to protect their heritage and their rights and interests to land against a background of heavy mining impacts.
Another critical flashpoint in Western Australian history is the infamous Skull Creek incident of 1974-75. This incident involved clashes between Aboriginal people and the Western Australian police force at Laverton and Skull Creek in December 1974 and January 1975 when passing through Laverton as part of their annual ceremonial travels. A Royal Commission, The Laverton Royal Commission, was established to investigate these clashes. The Royal Commission found that police were unable to justify arrests and that some parts of the police story had been invented. It also went on to recommend that Aboriginal Police Aides be employed to assist in communication between the police and Aboriginal community. The first police aide was employed and based in Laverton. In the long history of interaction between Aboriginal people and the justice system this was a low point.
In the mid 1990‟s with the introduction of the Native Title Act 1992, the Goldfields once again played a role in influencing government policy. The effect of the Waanyi decision that lead to the National Native Title Tribunal unable to place restrictions on the right to negotiate had an immediate impact on the number of native title claims in the Goldfields. The questionable actions of new mining projects in negotiating with selected individuals who then did not share the benefits of their native title claims with their people saw many individuals lodge native title claims to ensure they were able to access the right to negotiate. The multiplicity of overlapping native title claims in the Goldfields region influenced key amendments to the Native Title Act envisaged in the Howard Government‟s ten-point plan.
In each of these cases Goldfields Aboriginal people were forced to take action on their own 10
Page The Goldfields Conversation terms to secure recognition of rights to participate as equal citizens of Australia. The responses by Government have been to either regulate or try to manage concerns but never engage on equal terms. This struggle to be recognised and engaged with on equal terms is a key theme of this conversation.
The continued building of a united regional approach that has long been recognised and articulated over the years, and is most recently exemplified by the Wongutha Declaration announced by the GLSC in 2006 (See Appendix). As a political statement the Declaration highlights the determination of the Goldfields Aboriginal community to drive a regional approach based on the principles of many different cultural peoples who share a common historical experience of dispossession and domination and who have a common goal to negotiate a just relationship with governments.
Today the political objective of the Goldfields Aboriginal leadership continues to be underpinned by the following principles:
. Recognition and respect of Cultural Leadership . Strength and unity of purpose on a regional basis . Competent and professional service organisations . Accountability to the community
Goldfields Aboriginal leaders, organisations and groups have made significant contributions and advances. These achievements include the establishment of a range of community owned organisations, reoccupation of traditional country, native title determinations and a host of agreements with parties using Aboriginal land. Yet despite the Goldfields Aboriginal leadership being recognised both nationally and internationally for these achievements, the majority of our communities remain impoverished.
Our people remain disadvantaged in a range of areas including education, health and employment. Families and communities are burdened by the overwhelming problems of family violence, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, neglect and alcohol abuse and with the over representation of young people in the criminal justice system. Whilst this situation continues our communities will languish in dysfunction with many potential leaders submerged in a sea of grief and despair.
The timing of The Goldfields Conversation is critical, occurring at a time of dramatic global changes, which the Goldfields cannot escape. Whether it is the global financial crisis or the impact of climate change in relation to energy and future use of precious water supplies it is critically important for Goldfields people to engage in a dialogue of the long term impacts on this region and how best to participate in political negotiations that will shape the Goldfield‟s economic and social future.
There will be many stakeholders, predominantly the nuclear sector, who will increase pressure on the Goldfields community. Their interests will need to be considered and negotiated. In this context Goldfields Aboriginal leaders are confronted with a two-fold challenge. One is the capacity to consider our own internal dilemmas and tensions about the meaning and importance of Aboriginal cultural and social values and the inevitability of change in the face of new forces.
The other challenge is understanding the motives and fascination that a range of non 11
Page The Goldfields Conversation Aboriginal interests have for the Goldfields and exploring the potential for strategic connections that could result in a positive basis for productive partnerships in a new political dynamic.
The Goldfields Conversation will also be the precursor in implementing the commitment to a new Australian Dialogue. This forum could provide an opportunity for a regional focus of the Australian Dialogue, a national initiative lead by Patrick Dodson and Lt General John Sanderson involving a number of Aboriginal and other Australian leaders who are committed to creating a new framework for engagement between Aboriginal people and white Australia through strategic conversation.
Insert image here
12
Page The Goldfields Conversation Background to this Goldfields Conversation
The GLSC, Bega, WBAC and Nooda consider it important that a Goldfields Aboriginal Leadership group become structured, to be able to engage with the Western Australian government‟s Indigenous Implementation Board and the WA Aboriginal Advisory Council. The Goldfields Conversation will be the platform to distinguish the Goldfields region and will be a crucial step in the process of encouraging future investment and direct engagement with Lt General John Sanderson.
The Goldfields Conversation aims to:
Engage key Goldfields Aboriginal people, organisations and groups in generating a new dialogue with the Western Australian Government, in particular Lt General John Sanderson;
Build capacity for a strong, united and co-ordinated leadership in the region;
Promote capacity for co-ordinated and strategic directions of service delivery to Aboriginal people in the region;
Promote forward thinking and planning on how to engage in political negotiations that will shape the Goldfield‟s economic and social future.
Methodology of the Conversation
The Aboriginal position(s) arising out of this Goldfields Conversation will be utilised to engage in a new Goldfields dialogue involving a broader representative cross section of community, government and industry representatives, with the aim of promoting a more inclusive approach in addressing matters relevant to the future growth and development in the Goldfields.
Fundamental Propositions
Underlying each of the six designated theme areas will be three fundamental propositions intertwined and linked to stimulating the discussion and debate. These are:
Proposition 1: Encourage the Goldfields community to lead and embrace the notion of an Australian Dialogue as a basis for an inclusive vision of what it is to be Australian in a globalised context, about the kind of society we want the Goldfields and Australia to become, and what it means for our people to develop their
capabilities and realise their potential as both Goldfields and global Australians. 13
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Proposition 2: Promote, encourage and develop a culture of aspiration, innovation and productivity that can help shape the regional and national cultural, economic, social and environmental well being of Goldfields Aboriginal people.
Proposition 3: Establish and facilitate co-operative dialogue with all tiers of governments, relevant community and industry stakeholders to develop mechanisms for effective regional Goldfields governance that has community confidence and support.
Six Core Themes
Prior to the forum a paper was written to set the context of the conversation by discussing six core themes. The Context Paper is reproduced and set out in the discussion below.
The core themes are: 1. Cultural Sustainability 2. Environmental Sustainability 3. Economic Development 4. Health 5. Education and Training 6. Regional Governance
Insert image here
14
Page The Goldfields Conversation CONTEXT DISCUSSION: FORUM THEMES
Six themes have been identified for the Goldfields Conversation. These themes are by way of background to set the scene for issues discussed in the Goldfields conversation, each theme is discussed below.
Theme 1: Cultural Sustainability
(i) Cultural Integrity In a global context, other Indigenous societies threatened with cultural destruction by external forces have utilised iconic representations, ritual practices and protocols in galvanising cultural unity and rallying political support in defence of their societies and traditional rights. The Tibetans and Inuit people of Alaska, North Canada and Arctic Russia are examples of effective Indigenous resistance using their own cultural integrity as methods of creative political action.
How are our cultural and social values demonstrated in the manner in which we live our lives? Is there a recognisable and familiar form in our behaviour in us and as displayed in our relationship with others in our community?
(ii) Welfare Reform The current policy reforms and public debate focus on Indigenous people changing behaviour under a new paternalism of so-called “hard love”. In this political environment traditional Aboriginal culture is not only devalued, it is demonised. Violence against women is said to be embedded in Aboriginal traditions: customary law is equated with child sex abuse; adherence to traditional languages is seen as a barrier to education and economic development; and small residential settlements on traditional owned lands are treated as mendicant “cultural museums”. In this context the Australian nation cherry picks what it values from Aboriginal society – traditional art and celebrated song and dance – and then participates in a rapid dismantling of the pillars that hold traditional society together.
What is the nature of reform required internally in our own families and communities that demonstrates the richness and enjoyment of our traditional culture? How should anti- social behaviour and its consequences in our community be managed? What are our responsibilities to ensure our families are protected?
(iii) Political Empowerment Cultural sustainability is meaningless if community leaders do not assert their authority guided by their customs and traditions.
The maintenance of social order as a basis for cultural sustainability should be the prime responsibility for leaders with cultural and family authority rather than external forces who seek to impose and assimilate.
How should this authority be exercised? How are traditional owners to facilitate, exercise and sustain such an authority that is derived from the laws and customs, and how is this
manifested and represented in today’s modern society while still maintaining the cultural 15
Page The Goldfields Conversation uniqueness in all its diversity. What of the discipline in the manner in which succession interests are adhered to and practised?
What protocols should be considered to establish partnerships between communities, police, child protection authorities and courts in the maintenance of social order in communities?
Theme 2: Environmental Sustainability
(i) Climate Change This is a major issue of our time, impacting on the environment, economy, international and domestic law and regulatory arrangements and developing new protocols and standard of behaviour for government, industry and community. The Goldfields region is rich with Aboriginal culture, natural environment, unique biodiversity and abundant natural resources. With the focus turning towards nuclear energy nationally, debates and negotiations will be increasingly dominated by the concept of the “national interest”.
How should traditional owners of the Goldfields respond to such negotiations and participate in the debate? As custodians of the natural estate, how should traditional owners influence the defining of the “national interest”? What are the management frameworks and the protocols to be considered in the engagement with government and third party interests seeking to influence and affect change to the natural estate?
(ii) Water Rights and Interests Climate change will have major consequences for good and other horticulture production with an inevitable focus on water and land use. The Goldfields with its underground water resources is already under pressure from the resources sector, which will inevitably increase with the search for nuclear energy. The negotiations over allocation of water rights for commercial, domestic and cultural needs, signals that conflicting interest over water used will be a major political issue in the future.
Given the fundamental cultural importance of water, how should the Goldfields traditional owners assert their interests and pursue their economic position?
(iii) Nuclear Sector The future development of nuclear mining in the Goldfields will be a major test of the environmental sustainability of the region.
What authority and capacity can be asserted by traditional owners to influence future planning and management of future projects that will redefine the future of the Goldfields?
Theme 3: Economic Development
(i) Ownership and Equity Versus Passive Participants Historically Aboriginal rights and interests have been ignored in a development paradigm where government grants titles to third party interests for economic development. Under
this paradigm Aboriginal interests have been consigned to welfare policy considerations. 16
Page The Goldfields Conversation This position can no longer be sustained. Today Aboriginal people own, control, manage or have a strong legal stake in practically the whole of the Goldfields.
What land reform measures are required to facilitate our participation in the mainstream economy? And what compromises are we prepared to consider ensuring sustainable development?
Agreement making and strategic investment has occurred in a number of cultural areas, however continuing reliance on government transfers in housing, infrastructure and welfare payments remain the dominant Aboriginal economy.
How and what value can Aboriginal interests bring to development in the Goldfields? How can we proceed beyond the grand scale dreams and plans for “what if” and participate in the real economy? Is there an alternative economy and if there is what is it and how can it be developed?
(ii) Alternative and Innovative Investment Options There has been a lack of significant public investment in community capital and social infrastructure over the last forty years or so in the Goldfields. In the past Aboriginal issues such as land access and heritage protection along with high capital and service costs are seen as considerable risk factors for private investment.
Where should traditional owners’ interest be pitched at in terms of planning, negotiations and capacity building? How can Government and the private sector assist in the development of measures that would ensure practical outcomes across all need areas? Such an area might require consideration of tax reform proposals engendering an innovative environment.
(iii) Benefit Structure and Beneficiaries Given the common and collective Aboriginal interests in reform and development in the Goldfields, there will need to be urgent structural and operation reform to “doing business in a different way”.
This is particularly pertinent to ensuring appropriateness and transparency in who represents who and under what authority in regards to benefits derived from negotiated outcome and/or from future government investment. Institutional reform to service and facilitate rights of beneficiaries is a fundamental component of any such reform.
Theme 4: Health
(i) Health as a Political Tool for Change Generally improvement in health standards in the Goldfields communities is based on relativity: relative to the level of capital and recurrent investment and relative to the level of professional standard of care available.
Goldfields Aboriginal health status remains appallingly low comparative to the broader community. Aboriginal health is a major national issue and dominates much of the current
government’s “Closing the Gap” strategy. What consideration should be given to the 17
Page The Goldfields Conversation political nature of health issues and its relationship with more comprehensive reform dealing with health and quality of life policy matters?
(ii) Alcohol, Substance Abuse and Addiction Recent trials around the country, including Norseman, limiting full strength alcohol takeaways have demonstrated a significant reversal in quality of life matters for community residents.
The devastating impact of alcohol and drug abuse on the physical and mental health of people in our communities is beyond dispute. It more than likely affects some if not many in each of our respective families. Drastic and often coercive action is required to manage the demand and supply of grog but the key question is what is the role and responsibility of community leadership in this action given the evidence that externally imposed interventions does not produce sustainable results?
Is there a growing consensus from the Goldfields community that needs to be articulated in a formal manner to government and relayed to the broader community about further alcohol reform on a regional basis?
(iii) Individual and Community responsibility Healthy minds make healthy bodies.
What is required to ensure greater responsibility by individuals for better health care outcomes in their families?
What reforms should take place in the primary health service delivery areas to ensure better outcomes?
Theme 5: Education and Training
(i) Getting a Meaningful Education in the Goldfields Many parents continue to face the dilemma about sending their children to school in faraway places like Perth to get a better education than what is available in the Goldfields.
There are two key issues for Goldfields Aboriginal people to consider with respect to education. Firstly, what should be the demands of the community and parents on the State Government to provide a decent education for our children? Secondly, given that school attendance is compulsory until aged 15, what should be the consequences for parents and families who do not ensure that their children attend school?
(ii) Getting a Meaningful Job in the Goldfields While CDEP has provided a labour force to maintain the bare functioning of many Goldfields communities there needs to be serious community consideration about reforming CDEP so that it provides a pathway to capacity development for individuals and communities with an integration of the education and training system and employment.
How can we turn this around in a relatively short space of time to allow a more comprehensive process that can produce the labour force required for the upcoming
opportunities over the next few years?
18
Page The Goldfields Conversation (iii) Productivity Current policy development is developing linking, preschool to school to training to a job under the thrust of and objective of getting greater productivity or output from individuals and the system they are in.
What are the circumstances operating here in the Goldfields that might allow us to take advantage of this shift and what should that direction be in developing on the ground infrastructure and service to support such a linkage?
Theme 6: Regional Governance
The appointment of Lt General Sanderson as special advisor to the Barnett Government and the strong support for regional governance reform by the Ministers for Indigenous Affairs and Regional Development provides a sense of urgency for Goldfields Aboriginal people to consider the broad conceptual design of a regional governance structure in preparation for negotiations with the State and Commonwealth Governments.
19
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Section 2: THE CONVERSATION
The Agenda
The agenda for the Goldfields Conversation is set out in full in the appendices as Appendix 1. The facilitation was structured to follow the Agenda, but in cases where issues were raised, often passionately, traditional processes for meeting procedures were employed to pursue the thread of conversation. One of the key features of the Goldfields conversation was that all participants felt passionate about each of the six core areas and so the workshop did not move into break-out sessions but dealt with each of the six core themes in a full open session. As is shown in the discussion below the participants expanded the six themes to include other issues they felt strongly about.
Opening Addresses
(1) Welcome by Ricky Dimer Mr Ricky Dimer, traditional owner, from the Kalgoorlie/Coolgardie area gave his opening address, which is set out at the beginning of this report. Mr Dimer acknowledges the people who travelled from across the Goldfields to his country to engage in this conversation. He is humbled by the enormity of the journey ahead and draws on the wisdom of the elders of the past both learnt and experienced teachings to guide the development of this conversation.
I n s e r t
i m a g e
o f
R
i
20 c k
Page y
D i m e The Goldfields Conversation (2) Opening of Forum by Trevor Donaldson on behalf of the GLSC
Mr Trevor Donaldson, traditional owner and Operations manager of the GLSC opened the Goldfields Conversation.
Thank you very much Ricky, I would also like to acknowledge other traditional owners in this room this morning, its an honour having elders and traditional owners from other areas in our presence and we do thank you for making the effort and endeavours to come to this forum.
Also we would like to make a good welcome to Lt Gen John Sanderson, Indigenous Implementation Board, Sue Gordon, Ricky Burgess and Dr Mark Bin Baker. Penny Lipscombe, Director Indigenous Implementation Board, Noela Taylor Executive Director Policy and Reform both of DIA.
The GLSC was involved in a similar forum in the Kimberley in Broome last February. It was an opportunity to discuss ideas and strategies for working together in a more coordinated and strategic approach and to address issues affecting Aboriginal people in the Kimberleys and I guess across the board.
I‟m also a Kalago, Ngadju custodian with fairly strong ties to Goldfields/Kalgoorlie area. I guess when people come to this country, particularly Kalgoorlie. Its always how people remember the mining industry. That‟s all well and good, but I think there is another way for traditional people to identify with is our magnificent salmon gums that we have throughout the Goldfields, what we call marlinga. It played a very integral role this magnificent tree in the development of the mining industry. I worked a few years underground and I saw the timberwork, the huge trees that were cut to support the stopes, the drives and even the shafts. This particular timber also would have been used and is probably holding up the town hall of Kalgoorlie and other prominent buildings. This marlinga tree is not only shade, it also has a water source, which holds water after a good rain and it also gives us a sense of identity, when we see these trees we feel at home.
I was out bush a couple of weeks ago, being on country on my own. There is certainly a very powerful feeling of going bush and I was looking at these beautiful big trees, the salmon gum the maligna tree. I began to reflect on how this big tree was very much like our culture. This tree, this huge tree reminded me that once upon a time it was a tiny little seed and from there it grew, and these trees live up to 200 years old. Yet this big tree grew from that little seed, into a sapling and into a big tree. It reminded me that the seeds are the beginning of it, the roots of this huge tree was our history, was our elders, the trunk represented what kept us together protected by the bark, the limbs were of course our parents and the leaves are all family members and as this tree grew it lost the older ones, very similar to what we do, but they returned back to earth back to mother earth and became part of the spiritual world.
People talk a lot about the gold in country, the other wealth that‟s within the country, but if you‟re ever out in your own country, look around your backyard and look at what is there. It will speak to you. I know it spoke to me.
The GLSC would also like to thank NNAC for its assistance in putting this forum together,
so without much further ado let me introduce Lt Gen John Sanderson. 21
Page The Goldfields Conversation (3) Introduction by Lt General John Sanderson.
OPENING REMARKS BY LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN SANDERSON, AC CHAIRMAN INDIGENOUS IMPLEMENTATION BOARD OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Firstly, let me say on behalf of my fellow members of the Indigenous Implementation Board and my colleagues from the Department of Indigenous Affairs, how very pleased we are to have been invited to your dialogue. On behalf of all of us I thank Ricky Dimer for that welcome to country from the traditional owners. I acknowledge them as the traditional custodians of this place and express my respect to everyone present here, and particularly to the elders who lead in fulfilling the obligations of you all to your ancestors and the landscape, which is the source of our nation‟s wellbeing. As you will know, realisation of the true wealth of this region we call the Eastern Goldfields lies in accepting responsibility for and sustaining the deep and ancient heritage of that landscape into the future. I think it is particularly obvious in this place that non-Aboriginal people need much help from the voice of experience in developing this understanding.
I also want to begin by thanking Goldfields Land and Sea Council for taking a leadership role in bringing us together. It is an important leap of faith on the Council‟s part and has to be based on an expectation that there is something different about what is going on to justify another attempt at engaging the people of this region in talking about their future.
In my view, and without wishing to raise any false expectations, Aboriginal people are in a position to seize considerable power over their own future, provided they can get themselves organised to take up that responsibility. I am prepared to explain what I mean by this over the next two days.
Having said that, let me also say that, despite the fact that I have been invited to give this introduction, my colleagues and I view ourselves as guests and observers here, rather than as participants. It is important that I say that because this is your conversation and the object, as I see it, is to create your vision for the future of this region and its people. I would prefer that you develop your own expectations of these two days and that I speak instead about those new opportunities that exist for the Aboriginal voice to be heard, and what is required for Aboriginal people to take control of their own destiny, in this region, in this state and in the nation at large.
It is on the basis of that information that I would expect you to make your own decisions about how you would organise yourselves and what you would demand from Government in the way of plans, structure and a fair share of resources to bring about change in the future opportunities for your families.
At some point in time those expectations will have to be discussed with other people who make their lives and their living in the Goldfields, but the critical thing from my perspective, is for the Aboriginal people to speak from a position of strength when those conversations occur. Such a position can only be developed if you can overcome or put into proper perspective the things that might have divided you in the past, and unite on the things that are truly important to you and your children.
Now, you will all know how poisonous it is for people to lose hope. Apart from becoming
depressed and losing respect for themselves and each other, another characteristic is that 22
Page The Goldfields Conversation they can become cynical about everything, including their own identity and culture. Instead of accepting responsibility for those around them, it becomes acceptable to blame everyone else and to engage in what is often called anti-social behaviour. Always, it is those closest to them who suffer the most when this occurs.
As I see it, we are all in the business of giving people – particularly young people – hope. In saying this, I am very conscious of the fact that, despite some success stories, Aboriginal people have had their hopes raised and then smashed many times in the past. We can‟t let this happen again. Somehow, we have to seize the moment and transfer sufficient power to Aboriginal people so that they can sustain their own options even when some piece of political opportunism in other places results in a reversion to the sort of racism and paternalism that created the dismal circumstances we see in many places today.
I therefore temper my following observations about opportunity for empowerment in this light. There are new opportunities to become full partners in the future of Australia, but they are only there if you are prepared to seize them. They will be offered up because Australia‟s position as a global nation demands that they be offered up, but they will not be given willingly because there is an underlying, historical, racist and self serving view in the non Indigenous community that Aboriginal people are not capable of accepting that responsibility. I am sure you will all understand this.
In my view, this contradictory and almost schizophrenic assessment is fundamentally wrong and contains the seed of destruction for this nation. We cannot let such a view prevail. We have to build a new future together in this landscape and, I believe, Aboriginal people are probably going to have to lead the way.
Now this probably sounds like high blown rhetoric if you are sitting there thinking, “How can I get a greater slice of the action in the form of jobs and equity? Doesn‟t this clown know that what we really need is better houses, better schools, better roads, better medical care and more business opportunities?”
Well, if it is any consolation, I think this conversation you are about to have is about all these things too. But I make the point to you that the COAG processes and the Northern Territory Intervention are ostensibly about all these things and have been for some time. In fact, the „Closing the Gap‟ and the „Overcoming Disadvantage‟ have been about these issues for a very long time without any transfer of power and equity to Aboriginal people. If anything, power has been taken away by the centralisation of decision making into the hands of people who know they are failing.
You could be forgiven for thinking that all that changed after the words of the Prime Minister in his Apology on behalf of Parliament to the Stolen Generation. But we still don‟t have a participatory process for Aboriginal people - even though Tom Calma‟s proposal for a national Aboriginal Advisory body is on the table, it is still just a proposal, and will be for some time until they work out how to connect to the grass roots of Aboriginal communities.
The Northern Territory Intervention goes on and the Racial Discrimination Act remains suspended for those people who are the beneficiaries of that largesse.
You will have noticed that this contradiction captured the attention of the United Nations 23
Page The Goldfields Conversation last year, where there must be some confusion over the rhetoric of the Apology, the intended acceptance of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Convention, and the ongoing commitment of the Australian Government to this racist approach. There is opportunity in this – particularly given the commitment of the Australian Government to gaining a seat in the Security Council in 2012.
The Indigenous Implementation Board that I chair, and that will also be represented here by Mark Bin Bakar, Ricky Burges and Kim Bridge has been empowered by the Western Australian Government to: “advise the State Government on how to identify and cut through the obstacles and really improve social and economic outcomes with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.”
That‟s the role and responsibility it has been given by the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Kim Hames. The Board has taken this challenge literally and seeks to change entirely the way Government relates to Aboriginal people. It had a deep strategic conversation at the beginning of last year
The fundamental guiding premise for the Board is that Aboriginal culture is vital to the future of Western Australia. That‟s its foundation position and the Board is advising Government on the causes rather than the symptoms of disadvantage. We are developing a proposal for a regionally driven reform agenda that has Aboriginal people at the centre. This is our strategy. We had a further strategic conversation last week and confirmed this approach.
We have a lot of experience within the IIB in this regard, but we recognise that we are not the Aboriginal voice in this strategy. This is very, very important. The Aboriginal voice is the voice of experience and must come out of the landscape. Even the new Western Australian Aboriginal Advisory Council, which is in the process of defining itself, is dependent on the voice from the regions, as was the case with ATSIC.
In this conversation that you are about to participate in lies the hope for the beginning of that voice in the Goldfields. Like all of these things, there can never be an expectation of one hundred percent agreement, but it is all about building momentum and consensus building. Just as we on the Board recognise that we are not the Aboriginal voice, you will also recognise that, for the Goldfields voice to have legitimacy, it must be inclusive and embrace both genders, all cultural groups and young people as well as the Elders. If you haven‟t got that this time, you should discuss how you can do this in the future.
Some people will never believe and overcome their cynicism until they see that others are fair dinkum. What you should aim to do is to create a sense of hope and aspiration where everyone wants to climb on board and be a part of a new future.
Now, this is the third of the regional conversations that the IIB has joined with. The Kimberley Conversation was powerful in its quality and its levels of participation. The Pilbara dialogue was not as inclusive but very strong in its conclusions. They have both produced great reports.
The Kimberley Report was included in first half yearly report of the IIB to Government in
order to emphasise how fundamental this process is to the future of a strong relationship. 24
Page The Goldfields Conversation The Kimberley mob recognised that there are some divisions along cultural and geographic lines and that they have a way to go to establish their grass roots legitimacy. But they made a wonderful start and their report has been read with great interest. It is having an effect.
This Pilbara Dialogue will be included in the IIB‟s second report to Government which is due at the end of this month of February. It is even more important for two reasons: Firstly, because it builds on and progresses beyond the point reached by the Kimberley mob, and Secondly, because it adds serious momentum to the whole process of taking control, and, believe me, there is serious momentum in this process.
The Noongar mob in the South West tell me that they are getting ready to take up this challenge and the Yamatji have asked for two conversations in Geraldton and Carnarvon early this year. There should be no need for me to tell you that there will be enormous interest in how you go in the Goldfields over the next two days.
Finally, let me emphasise again that my Board gets its power from Aboriginal people – not from Government. The problem is that there are many Aboriginal groups that all have their own interests and power bases. But you all know that the solution to all these problems is holistic – no single thing will give Aboriginal kids a decent go at a future worth having. It has to be the total package that makes life worth living and that includes knowing who you are, where you fit into the landscape and the larger world and taking confidence and pride from your culture instead of some half baked set of beliefs and values forced on you by someone who doesn‟t even know who they are anyway.
I am here, together with the other members of the Board and DIA representatives for the duration of this dialogue. We are looking forward to taking away from here your wisdom and vision and building those into our advice to Government. We expect that our Second report to the Minister will be tabled in Parliament, just as he did with the first. It is going to say many of the things I have just spoken about, but it will also say we are placing a lot of confidence in the Goldfields Dialogue and the capacity of Aboriginal people to come up with strategies for the future. It will also confirm our commitment to regional government with Aboriginal people at the centre. We will talk about how to do this.
Regional government with Aboriginal people at the centre is not going to be possible of course, unless Aboriginal people can come up with effective governance in the regions for themselves. We realise how difficult this will be given all the terrible things that have happened to people in this region in particular, but we know that the future of Aboriginal culture depends on it, as does the future of our nation, Australia.
25
Page The Goldfields Conversation The Goldfields Conversation: Discussion on Issues
In this Conversation the participants were asked to identify the key issues and priorities associated with their theme area. The selection and endorsement of major issues to be prioritised for action was the expected outcome.
Each theme is presented below with brief “voices” of the people comment, sometimes verbatim or paraphrasing to give an indication of the thinking behind the visions.
The participants used the six themes to frame the conversation but were keen to explore other topics, it also became apparent that the participants felt strongly about all of the topics and could not move into small groups so the conversation discussed all of the key issues and topics as an open forum.
The following table summarises the key discussion points and some of the proposed action commitments to take the results of the conversation further.
A lot of the key messages have not been edited beyond small grammatical changes to preserve the integrity of the Voices and to reflect the sincerity of the concerns expressed. This is a powerful document showing the real desires of Goldfields Aboriginal people to take the opportunity to initiate change in their lives.
A three disc DVD that is available from the Goldfields Land and Sea Council supports the record of this Goldfields Conversation.
26
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Table of Themes, Discussions and Actions
THEMES DISCUSSION OF ISSUES ACTION: WAY FORWARD 1. Lessons of the Need to learn from history Maintain your Sense of HUMOUR Past: Learning of our old people and how Go home and talk about the forum from our elders they were successful in with family and others business The future is for our children; let‟s We need to be inclusive not recycle the old. In our culture we share Protest marches (be proactive) take Need to support and help action (we as one people – each other Australia‟s First People – AFP) Need to support the role of Educated leaders who interact with elders the wider community for equality for all people Steering committee to drive the outcomes from the conversation. More interaction with the younger generations 2. Environmental Access to pastoral leases – Water resources for local, remote Sustainability and to our land – Aboriginal people and people in understand our rights general are being used/exploited by Mining owned pastoral mining industry. leases Government needs to replace assets ILC – pastoral lease and resources (water, trees, homes) purchase that have/are being taken from Mining company owned Aboriginal people. pastoral leases – reduced sale price Native Title – affects environmental sustainability Food / Water o Mining – damaging aquifers Water rights – mining agreements Carbon Trading could be an opportunity, need more information Sandalwood harvesting is an opportunity and a threat to our environment Kangaroo shooting is a concern DEC policy reform required 3. Governance Aboriginal Councillors on Unite: Come together as one Local Government VOICE FOR THE GOLDFIELDS Native title – not working REGION, regardless of groups or
o Abolishment of areas 27
Page The Goldfields Conversation Native Title Act Leadership: Educate our young Need a National dialogue leaders to become future leaders. Establishment of a regional Treaty: Among ourselves – How facility/trust fund to meet do we get one? Aboriginal needs Collect Evidence of Community Making service providers organisations and government / more accountable for their government funded agencies actions / inaction, by Performance reporting / KPIs identifying who they are Mapping / Gapping analysis and what they should be Stronger Aboriginal representation doing. on Local Government Shires Should be identified seats – available on all Shires o Lobby WALGA for this to happen o Lobby Government to force these changes 4. Education Health issues / Health, education, housing to be overcrowding – affect kids dealt with together. Also look at learning underlying problems 4.1. General We want to take control of Aboriginal people to take issues to education Education Department directly and Closing of programs that push the issues. have been successful 4.2. Administrative Need a Goldfields Education scholarships from mines Aboriginal Education for indigenous people around Committee region. Government to enforce. Funding for education Scholarships for our young needs to be increased indigenous people in sports on a Need more private sector national level support for education o Some scholarships provided by mining companies Role models / mentors in all programs o Mentors in classes for teachers and students o Programs such as football academy – working with schools Truancy officers to get kids going to school o They need reasonable funding to support workload so not burnt out Support the programs that are already running and are successful.
o Programs such as 28
Page The Goldfields Conversation breakfast club, o Homework program, o Schoolkids at risk of slipping through cracks o „Follow the dream‟ 4.3. Teachers Concerned about teachers‟ commitment to teaching everyone (including Aboriginal kids) Teachers‟ orientation, they need specific locally focused cultural awareness 4.4. Students Gifted children – what opportunities for them? „Kids with no school‟ – In remote places school too far away Recognise that Aboriginal people (Kids) are living 2 different lives 4.5. Parents Demand better education for Aboriginal kids Feeling comfortable about sending kids to school (often parents have had bad experiences in school themselves) Programs for parents to help kids Need more support for parents ASPA committees to be better supported 4.6. Community Principals to be more involved with Aboriginal communities Aboriginal social workers – liaise with school and communities paid by Education Department Access to building blocks of education LOTE – local Aboriginal language to be supported in schools across region Balance of traditional and missionary education Traditional education and language in curriculum
taught by elders
5. Training School based traineeships –
training during school 29
Page The Goldfields Conversation Not reasonable to require older people to go back into training 6. Employment No CDEP Look at livelihoods, not just a job, work There are some programs needs to support Aboriginal family life, for job readiness culture and economically empower Utilising Traditional community. Aboriginal knowledge in employment Feral animal control, option for Aboriginal employment Heritage Protection activities is a career option o Employment – Rangers/Heritage Officers 7. Cultural We first respect our Sustainability boundaries as people of the land: protocols 7.1. Heritage Senior law men have a This is an area with greatest interaction responsibility as custodians between elders and the mining industry. It to be involved in heritage needs more focus to improve support for Heritage protection – DIA protecting sacred areas and heritage values. and GLSC to have a coordinated approach Need a better model for the process Heritage Protection o Management o Employment – Rangers (Heritage Officers?) Heritage surveys o Methodology o Appropriate T/Os o Wrong system o Minority groups missing out White man‟s law o Mining Act “over- riding legislation” – affecting environmental sustainability o Aboriginal people don‟t have an established economic base o No benefits flowing Rehabilitation – monitoring Need a policy on Heritage
surveys 30
Page The Goldfields Conversation 7.2. Language Place names – joint There is currently no government support naming? for language protection and maintenance Need to learn how to initiatives in the Goldfields region. This pronounce language needs to be addressed as a matter of properly urgency. We need support for our languages Radio station needs funding and support 7.3. Culture Protect intellectual There is very low level of government copyrights of our culture support for culture initiatives in the Aboriginal cultural tourism Goldfields. – one way for cultural sustainability Need a law and culture Centre encompassing all cultures of the region Wongutha Birni is there for ALL the Aboriginal people (it‟s already there) USE IT Repatriation of cultural materials – keeping places Cultural protocols written for the community How do we sustain these initiatives o Are our kids gonna buy this? o Ranger programs and kid activities Entrance statements 7.4. History Recording oral histories of The advanced age and passing of elders our elders – Need Action makes this a very high priority. Now! 8. Media & 96.3FM Tjuma Pulka Communicating amongst ourselves as Communication o Aboriginal Aboriginal people through media (our own) community needs e.g. radio, newspaper etc to access our Participate / network with service providers services – get your and indigenous communities to talk about story told in issues – generate positive stories culturally appropriate way o Expand footprint in other communities Telling our histories and stories NITV – always asking for Indigenous stories need a media/film production unit Set up a committee to counteract these poor
representation in media
9. Justice Boulder prison, can‟t get Total review on the education and rehab
culturally appropriate food programs in the prison i.e. culturally 31
Page The Goldfields Conversation in the prison i.e. Kangaroo appropriate at a level Aboriginal prisoners (Marlu) can understand Aboriginal staff Need for Aboriginal Education officers in prison 10. Health Need to talk about Health, education, housing to be sovereignty and human dealt with together. Also look at rights underlying problems We Aboriginal people need There are a lot of initiatives in the to be involved from the Goldfields to support health inside to take control and outcomes for their people. These leadership programs need urgent support and Regional Planning Forum funding as well as direct dialogue groups between the Aboriginal community Promotion of healthy eating and service providers. We know the issues and problems but we have an issue with Canberra! Health funding Perhaps we should start charging rent and back pay for 200 years of using our land (with interest) No proper consultation for the upgrade at Kalgoorlie hospital Interpretation for health work Need Aboriginal medical services in Leonora and Northern Goldfields Not getting proper support for health at Coonanna No lead agencies to put preventative measures in place We used to have health workers out in the field and visiting people where they are Where are the health workers who graduate from Bega Why don‟t we put some of our land/royalty money on the table to get government to match the funding Good things we had, like the patrol – what happened 10.1. Kidney Kidney health – Christine /Diabetes Jefferies-Stokes Research Diabetes – treatment is not
appropriate for Aboriginal
physiology – need to
change this 32
Page The Goldfields Conversation Need to have our own Dialysis unit 10.2. Child Health More funding for Ngunytju Tjitji Pirni (NTP) to support programs Support for Otis Media ear health project 10.3. Alcohol & Alcohol abuse: need a dry Drugs out facility Our people don‟t recognise they have an alcohol problem – no voluntary rehab Need programs to help with youth sniffing, paint/petrol 10.4. Family Family violence is a Health complex issue for Aboriginal people and we need to start talking about sexual abuse, domestic violence and other hard problems in our community Address the real issues – substance abuse / sexual abuse / family breakups 10.5. Mental Don‟t mention “mental” Health health to blackfella‟s – use other words Aboriginal family support is essential to how we treat mental health generally. Support not there. 10.6. Holistic Preventable diseases – Approach to education in school on life Social and skills such as health eating Emotional Preventative action? Wellbeing Education? Holistic approach to social and emotional well being What happened to Bega with the bus that would support people – and check on people all around town Healing and deliverance – faith based healing is important People get stranded here at boulder camp 11. Housing Having problem with our Health, education, housing to be houses dealt with together. Also look at Housing is a big issue – no underlying problems
new houses Need a regional housing body that
Need some equity in acts on the ongoing needs of the 33
Page The Goldfields Conversation funding for houses tenants (Present board not overly Housing – government effective) blackmailing Aboriginal Training in home making and other corporations to get skills required in the day-to-day registered or don‟t get running/management of their funding [urban and remote] homes. i.e. budgeting, food, not culturally appropriate preventative, maintenance housing management. It‟s income tested. State / Commonwealth funding and policies causing stress for people o Government criteria need 30 houses for self funding or have to go through GIHO o They knock down houses yet don‟t build new ones. We face the prospect that our people will be evicted and end up fringe dwellers in places like Kalgoorlie. 12. Economic Mining companies make A lot of discussion occurred around the Development billions of dollars and we theme of economic development. The get nothing Aboriginal community recognise that full We need to get this money economic independence is the key to back into our communities making positive and direct changes in their Most funding has been lives. This needs to be supported by based on socialist style Government and industry. Current funding sources, ILC IBA etc impose conditions Need good clean capitalism We need our own bank We own the land, how do we get shares in mining companies. As traditional owners we should have equity We need money to create a business – i.e. Wongutha Birni When we buy land (ATSIC – ILC/IBA) puts a caveat on it so we are not full owners of the land Funding criteria hamstring our options to sell, make decisions etc. We as Aboriginal people have to help people get
going and succeed 34
Page The Goldfields Conversation Our biggest tool in dealing with mining sector is our heritage. We can stop them in full flight if we start using it Challenges in getting collateral Getting land runs into problem with T/Os Get 20mins of time Diggers and Dealers to get Aboriginal business opportunities / presentation Aboriginal lands to be given back. Lots of land and infrastructure like Maku sitting there doing nothing We should go out and do mining and exploration ourselves Caring for country enterprises Joint venture opportunities / potential Confusion in community about TO or black tape – our own worst enemies Get behind and support each other, people with initiatives Get behind people / corporations who are meeting the needs Starting a business doesn‟t always need a lot of funding Opportunity for mentoring Esperance Nyungar Aboriginal Corporation land businesses are good example 13. Regional Designated seats in all A Committee within Local Governance / levels of government Government to address the Development o Mandatory seats on concerns of the local Indigenous Local Government people – mandatory seats on Local Past models: shires. o Family/language A collective determination to share groups ONE vision o Consultative Involve young people in this committees process o NIC Establish governance structures o State Advisory based on “good faith” and trust bodies Employ an advocate to take this
o ATSIC conversation to the next level. 35
Page The Goldfields Conversation o Mainstream Compulsorily acquire seats for governance Aboriginal people on Local Existing models: Government o Family and Equal representation across the language groups region o Community Develop partnerships on a level organisations playing field with other o Regional service stakeholders organisations Leave Native Title out of this o Advisory bodies to process government Make Government agencies MORE o Mainstream responsible for service delivery – government one voice together structures Accountability / transparency Future Models? Protect our cultural integrity Governance to date has Work with other regional groups in FAILED Aboriginal designing regional governance – people! demand Aboriginal seats in Federal o Has it failed? and State parliaments and local o Why? Is it because representation in local government it‟s a bad system – – shire ideas with the other groups. or bad people in Engage with young people to the system? empower and inspire them to o Yes – it has failed. become leaders in their own lives The Government and for their communities has let us down Local Government needs to be looked at Aboriginal problems are a multi million dollar industry to Federal and State government Time for us to take control of our own destiny, educate ourselves and take a stand to build up businesses The only way we can deal with racism (inherent) is marching, praying and making noise in the street Learn from the past
36
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Section 3: Moving The Conversation Forward
In the March 2010 report of the IIB, the Board reiterated its commitment to the core values of ; Enabling the Aboriginal design and delivery of services; Ensuring the continuation of a vibrant living culture; Refocusing regional governance to build sustainable communities, economies and environments; and Engaging all sectors – government, non government and business
This report of the Goldfields Conversation was not completed in time for inclusion in the March report. However as can be seen from the key discussion points tabled and summarised above the spirit of the IIB commitment is strongly held and endorsed by Goldfields Aboriginal people.
The Issue of Representation The Goldfields Aboriginal community is very strong in their vision of where they want representation to go. Firstly the people are clear that we need to learn from the past. There are programs and initiatives that were successful, and equally there are things that failed.
The key discussion points raised during the Goldfields Conversation revolved around greater opportunities for representation in mainstream political structures, especially local government but also other tiers of government. Traditional political structures were also discussed at length with calls for Unity, Vision and Common Purpose. The concept of inter-tribal treaties was raised and I have prepared a short discussion on how that might work in the appendices.
In the IIB March 2010 report, the Board discussed what it means by „Governance‟; that is Governance is taken to mean the evolving processes, relationships, institutions and structures by which a group of people, community or society organise themselves collectively to negotiate their rights and interests, get things done, and make decisions about: How they are constituted as a group (who are members and who are not);
Who has authority within the group, and about what;
Their agreed rules to ensure authority is exercised properly and their decision- makers are held accountable;
How they enforce the decisions they make; and
What arrangements will best enable them to achieve their goals?
For the purpose of that document, three sub-types of governance in the Indigenous affairs context are used:
Aboriginal Governance – Culturally legitimate mechanisms and processes by which
decisions are made within the Aboriginal community. 37
Page The Goldfields Conversation Corporate/Organisational Governance – Mechanisms and processes that are required by law and government administration for organisations that manages and/or provides services to Aboriginal communities.
Government Governance – Those mechanisms by which governments make decisions and manage their business including engagement with Aboriginal people about services to communities.
To take this Conversation forward it is essential that appropriate forms of governance are used to engage effectively with the Aboriginal community, and to support its approach to negotiate the design and delivery of services from Government, NGO‟s and Industry into our communities.
Actions for Moving Forward The participants were clear that a new way of doing things is required. There was discussion of how one can take individual or personal responsibility to initiate change at home, in ones own family structures, then linking that back to larger scales of change, at local, regional, state and national levels.
There was discussion of direct action ranging from marching through to praying. Whatever the method used it is clear in the discussion that there is a mood for change and the community want to change the way things are done. There was discussion of bringing more young people to the table to get their ideas and input, while training those young leaders for their roles in the future.
There is clearly a need for further dialogue and conversations with the IIB in the Goldfields.
Resources for Moving Forward
There are particular initiatives identified in this report that can be supported immediately with little or no cost, while there are others that will require large scale investments. The IIB need to submit requests for funding to support outcomes from the Goldfields Conversation.
Conclusion The Goldfields conversation was well attended and had high level of participation and engagement with the Aboriginal community of the Goldfields. The role and function of the IIB was well received and supported as a mechanism to communicate the desires, wishes and/or frustrations of Aboriginal people directly back to Government. It is hoped that the IIB will be heard and can support the Goldfields Aboriginal community in coming together with a Unity of Purpose, A common Vision and a Commitment to change the lives of every Aboriginal man, woman and child living within the region. A positive change for the future.
38
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Appendices
Appendix 1. Participants, Observers and Facilitators
The Participants came from across the Goldfields. They represented various organisations, but there were also participants who were not attached to any organisations.
The following is a list of attendees and observers:
No. Name Organisation/Community
1 John Graham PO Box 36, Norseman 6443
2 Lurlene Graham PO Box 36, Norseman 6443
3 Mabel Kartinyeri CAPS
4 Gloria Obbes NTP Hannans Street
5 Dorothy Tucker NFG
6 Daniel Tucker Carey Mining
7 Normae Bennett NFG
8 Philip Tucker Kalgoorlie
9 Lillian Bonney Esperance Aboriginal Corporation
10 Tamara Rivers Esperance Aboriginal Corporation
11 Clive Holt Bega
12 John Sanderson IIB
13 Penny Lipscombe DIA
14 Cheryl Soggee Justice
15 Gina Sambo Nooda
16 Julie Kuskopf Curtin University
17 Charmaine Thomas Kalgoorlie
18 Karyn Vincent Laverton
39
Page The Goldfields Conversation
19 Dorothy Cooper Boulder
20 Cyril Barnes Boulder
21 Kado Muir Marnta Media/Ngalia
22 Phil Drayson GLSC
23 Thomasisha Skelly NTP
24 Vanessa Thomas [email protected]
25 Mark Bin Bakar Broome
26 Frank Martin Kalgoorlie
27 Joe Baker DIA
28 Adrian Beattie perthtv9
29 Ricky Dimer Coolgardie
30 Maxine Dimer Coolgardie
31 Ivan Forrest Pinjin Station
32 Annette Nykiel [email protected]
33 Steve Jansen Nooda
34 Dorothy Dimer Coolgardie
35 Allison Dimer Coolgardie
36 Anthony Meredith Kalgoorlie
37 Elise Baker GWN
38 Pierre Huembs GWN
39 Jade Macmillan ABC
40 Emma Wynne ABC
41 Sonny Graham [email protected]
42 Richard Collins Corrective services
43 Rania Spooner Kalgoorlie Miner
44 Kellie Lewis Kalgoorlie Miner
45 Audrey Sinclair Boulder 40
Page The Goldfields Conversation
46 Laurence Thomas Kalgoorlie
47 Deanne Bonney Mt Margaret Community
48 James Bonney Mt Margaret Community
49 Mark Stokes Mt Margaret Community
50 Jennifer Nettle JKACC
51 Vasliti Sambo Kurrawang Aboriginal Christian Community
52 Joselyn O‟Dwyer sbcgoldfields
53 Susan Wyatt [email protected]
54 Gary Cooper [email protected]
55 Anthony Meredith Kalgoorlie
56 Lorraine Griffiths Kalgoorlie
57 Laurel Cooper Kalgoorlie
58 Annette Stokes [email protected]
69 J Harrington Smith
60 Ron Harrington Smith [email protected]
61 Noela Taylor IIB / DIA
62 Ricky Burges IIB
63 Dicky Bedford KLC
64 Shanease Weldon [email protected]
65 Rex Weldon [email protected]
66 Yvette Trinidad Westnet
67 Nola Kelly Nooda
68 Aleisha Banner Kalgoorlie news
69 Gray Hardy [email protected]
70 Fabian Tucker Kalgoorlie
71 Lenice Forman Curtin
72 Adrian Brahim ICC Kalgoorlie 41
Page The Goldfields Conversation
73 Bianka Brannigan ICC Kalgoorlie
74 Edward Dimer PO Coolgardie
75 Harry Graham Wongutha CAPS
76 Geoffrey Stokes [email protected]
77 Priscilla Tucker [email protected]
78 Dennis Forrest CAPS Coolgardie
79 Janice Scott Blackstone Community
80 Kevin Dimer
81 Fay Sambo
82 Johnathon Sinclair Boulder Camp
83 Laurel Cooper Kalgoorlie
84 Mary Bonney Mt Margaret Community
85 Rowan Scott Kalgoorlie
86 Michael Scott Laverton
87 Debbie Carmody N/A
88 Richard Evans
89 A Tucker Kurrawang Community
90 Leo Thomas GLSC
91 Jim Champion Kalgoorlie
42
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Appendix 2 – Agenda Goldfields Conversation
THE GOLDFIELDS CONVERSATION Western Mining Conference Centre – 44 MacDonald Street, Kalgoorlie
PROGRAM
DAY ONE – TUESDAY 2ND February 2010
8:00am Registration 8:30am Welcome to Country – Traditional Owners Ricky Dimer 8:40am Conference opened – Ian Tucker on behalf of GLSC … Trevor Donaldson (others?) 8:50am Introduction by Lt General John Sanderson John Sanderson 9:30am Concurrent Session one – Objectives outlined Kado Muir Broad discussion on theme group issues 1. Environmental 4. Cultural Sustainability Group facilitators Sustainability 2. Education and Training 5. Health 3. Economic Development 6. Regional Development 10:15am Morning Tea 10:30am Continue Concurrent Session One Kado Muir Group facilitators 12:00pm Plenary Session Report back from Session One Theme Workshops 12:30pm Lunch 1:30pm Concurrent Session Two – Objectives Outlined Kado Muir Recommendations and Procedures for moving forward Theme Group Facilitator 3:15pm Plenary Session Kado Muir Report back from Session Two Theme Workshops 4:15pm Summary – Recommendations and Procedures for moving Kado Muir forward 4:30pm Day 1 Close
5:00pm Sundowner
Note: This program may be subject to minor changes 43
Page The Goldfields Conversation
THE GOLDFIELDS CONVERSATION
PROGRAM
DAY TWO – WEDNESDAY 3RD February 2010
8:30am Day Two objectives outlined Brian Wyatt Kado Muir 8:45am “Opportunities and Challenges for the Goldfields region” John Sanderson 9:15am “Questions and Answer Session with John Sanderson” John Sanderson 9:30am Concurrent Session Three Kado Muir Objectives outlined and areas for further engagement Group facilitators identified
- Indigenous Implementation Board - Goldfields Dialogue - Service Provision Involvement
10:15am Morning Tea 10:30am Continue Concurrent Session Three Kado Muir Group facilitators 11:00am Closing Plenary Session Kado Muir Summary of outcomes and comments Group facilitators 12:00pm Final Comments Brian Wyatt 12:30pm Conference Closed
Note: This program may be subject to minor changes
44
Page The Goldfields Conversation
Appendix 3 – Some Thoughts on Goldfields Political Structures Negotiating Inter-Nation Treaties among Aboriginal Peoples: Some preliminary thoughts arising from the Goldfields Conversation.
By Kado Muir
During the Goldfields Conversation we came head on in to one of the big struggles facing our people. How do we unite as a single voice? Lieutenant General John Sanderson Chair of the Indigenous Implementation Board shared his insight, experience and wisdom with our community. He offered many insights and some were embraced, the idea that we can share a Unity of Vision and a Unity of Purpose is perhaps one powerful way in which we achieve Unity while preserving our family and tribal responsibilities and obligations. This is a concept that does not demand we give up our position, rather it is a concept that we retain our identity and our linkages and build on it.
Another concept we "borrowed" from the recent gathering or Summit of Aboriginal Nations in Canberra. It was reported that veteran Aboriginal activist and lawyer Paul Coe called on Aboriginal Nations to negotiate Treaties with each other.
In our Goldfields Conversation we agreed that creating Unity for our people in matters affecting us is an important outcome. A Unity of Vision and a Unity of Purpose leads ultimately to a Unity of Peoples. As we sat down as a people and engaged in our conversations we agreed on and sketched a Vision. We already agreed on a Purpose all that remained is a mechanism for commitment on our part as a people and for external parties to realise we mean business. That is why we need to start negotiating Treaties between our tribes.
But first let me focus my thoughts on who is part of this treaty process.
The perennial problem is who are the right people to talk, to act and to engage in the Aboriginal political processes. The first point made strongly at the Goldfields conversation was if you are Aboriginal then you have an interest. The social disadvantage, the racist criticism and the injustice does not discriminate whether you are Koorie, Yamatji, Wongai or Noongar. We are all equally disadvantaged and oppressed.
In reply to some friendly comment and debate within the Goldfields Conversation I offer the following observations.
A term for a Human Being in a Goldfields desert language is Wongutha, Wangkatja, Wongai or Wangkayi. The first two of the above are plural and the second two singular. The spelling is a matter of personal preference. I prefer to use the spelling with the "k" in it. In my orthography I use Wangkatja and/or Wangkayi.
Now what does it mean to be Wongutha (Wangkatja). Ivan Forrest an elder and well- known identity, who prefers the Wongai spelling, put it like this during our community "conversation".
“It doesn't matter if it's Wongai or Two Guys we are all still people.” – Ivan Forrest
45
Page The Goldfields Conversation That is the true meaning of the term. Wangkatja (Wongutha) means people. To be Wangkatja (Wongutha) means you are human. Wangkatja is all the people a plural while Wangkayi is one person. (I will now stick to my preferred spelling of Wangkatja.)
In the past all Aboriginal people from the Goldfields identified as Wangkatja. This was true from Esperance to Wiluna, Coolgardie to the WA border.
In recent times places like Warburton started using the term Ngaanyatjarra a language descriptor to describe people from the Central desert area with the term "Ngaanya" in their speech, the southern Desert peoples used the term Anangu which means the same as Wangkatja and Wiluna came under the influence of Martu which is again a term similar to Wangkatja. Esperance is Noongar country, while Norseman is Malpa which again means human with Ngadju being the tribe.
When native title came on to the scene many people in the Goldfields were "forced" by the terms of the native title law to represent themselves by their tribal groups. There are many tribes in our region; these tribes use language descriptor terms or other ancient names to identify themselves. So native title claims are made up of two key ingredients, first the tribal names and second family groups.
Non Indigenous Australians do not understand Aboriginal political structures. While to us it is quite simple.
The basic building block is the Family Group. In anthropological terms this could be equated to a Clan. I feel that the term Clan is not sufficient so I prefer to use Family Group or in Aboriginal English it's the Mob. As in who is your Mob?
Family Groups have a structure with elders as the leaders and maybe if there is a suitable person, a younger person as the "arms and legs". The family group looks after each other member of the group. If you get in to a fight your family has your back. If you have no house or home your family gives you a bed, no food then they try to feed you. Unfortunately in a situation where there is extreme poverty and circumstances of social marginalization and dysfunction this brings considerable pressure and stress on those in a position to help support their Mob.
Now family groups interact with other family groups. They marry, share territory have common histories and share a language or dialect and generally interact within the complex social systems of Aboriginal society.
These collections of Family Groups are the building blocks for tribes. Tribes are often coalitions based on shared common experiences, common territory, allegiances during conflict and ancestral or spiritual responsibilities. A tribe is often territorially based. So everyone knows, for instance, that the Waljen, Ngadju or Koara tribe comes from country X and these are the families who belong to that Country. (As a matter of note, individuals within those families may have links to families from other tribes also and especially for us desert mob these links are equal links. A further note is that a link is one thing, status is another. A link is something you are born with, while you have to earn your status and by extension take on the responsibilities as a traditional owner.)
A collection of tribes may range across a region, may share a culture and speak similar 46
Page The Goldfields Conversation dialects of the same language. In the Goldfields Esperance area there are three great collections of tribes, these are the Desert peoples, the Malpa peoples and the Noongar peoples down south and west toward Southern Cross.
In my mind I see these collections of Tribes as Nations. The terms used to describe humans are also terms that can be used to describe a Nation.
Now in the case of Goldfields Aboriginal people we have Family Groups, we have tribal groups and we all agree we are human.
The challenge for us now is to engage with each other to determine a Unity of Vision and set out a Unity of Purpose. This will best be undertaken by a series of inter-tribal negotiations and treaty making within the four basic pillars of Goldfields Aboriginal political structures.
Family groups need to sit down and work out who they are, what they want and how they will cooperate with each other to bring success for their family. This exercise will involve recognising and appreciating the role of each individual within the family and setting out how each member can support each other member, based around traditional cultural values and love for each other as family.
The next phase is for family groups to commence dialogue with other family groups. These can be other family groups who are related by marriage, ancestry and or co-location in the same community. The points of discussion here are to recognise each others‟ rights to live in a community, to participate in the affairs of the community and to enjoy the fruits of ones labour or interactions within that community. Other points of discussion would include how to manage and resolve conflict and feuds.
As family groups learn to live and work together, they can then start associating on the tribal level, seeking out the Unity of Purpose and Unity of Vision that they share as a tribe within a defined territory. This level would be closely aligned within native title processes but also linked back to community development within the Goldfields subregions. There are a number of different tribes in the Goldfields, each united by family, language and shared history. It is up to the family groups to choose the level of engagement and participation at this “tribal” level. It may be that tribes will associate within particular towns within the regions and align their interests with those towns and sub-regions.
Finally the tribes can come together in the three distinct nations of the Goldfields/Esperance region. The Wangkatja Nation, the Malpa Nation and the Noongar Nation. It is at this level that the regional governance models need to operate. This level supports the continuity of culture, language and traditions and will support better engagement between Aboriginal people, industry and government.
It should be noted that none of this would work unless people have the opportunity to negotiated settlements within and between themselves at the family group level. The family group is the absolute fundamental building block for between engagement and participation of Aboriginal people in Governance discussions.
These are just a few observations of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position
of Goldfields Aboriginal people at this time. 47
Page The Goldfields Conversation
End of Document.
48
Page Attachment 2
A New Dreaming: Noongar Dialogue 24-25 February 2010
A New Dreaming
Noongar Dialogue
24‐25 February 2010
Facilitated by Gordon Cole on behalf of Kooya Consultancy
Held at Burswood on Swan
For further information about the Noongar Dialogue please
contact the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council
Phone: (08) 9358 7400 or free phone: 1800 617 617 Email: [email protected] Web: www.noongar.org.au 1490 Albany Highway, Cannington WA 6107 Postal address: PO Box 585 Cannington WA 6987
The Noongar Dialogue was funded by the Government of Western Australia Department of Indigenous Affairs
2
A New Noongar Dreaming from an Old Awakening
Walk in my country As my ancestors did To look with our eyes To taste our culture To listen to our language To smell our heritage To touch the truth in our hearts And use the power To create our destiny As Noongar people.
A Noongar Vision for the future developed by BT Bennell at the Noongar Dialogue.
3 Table of Contents
1. Introduction 5 1.1 Disclaimer 5 1.2 Welcome to Country 6 1.3 Attendance 7 1.4 Opening Remarks 8 1.5 Purpose of the Meeting 9 1.6 Ground Rules 10 2. Keynote Speeches 11 2.1 Overview 11 2.2 Indigenous Implementation Board 11 2.3 Native Title and a Comprehensive Noongar Settlement 14 2.4 Education is the Key 16 2.5 Indigenous Health in Noongar Country 17 2.6 Internalised Oppression 19 3. Opportunities and Challenges 20 3.1 Overview 20 3.2 Culture and Heritage 21 3.3 Strong Families 22 3.4 Law and Justice 23 3.5 Caring for Country (Land and Environment) 24 3.6 Education and Training 25 3.7 Housing and Home Ownership 26 3.8 Job Readiness and Regional Economic Development 27 3.9 Health and Well‐being 28 3.10 Governance 29 4. Strengths and Opportunities 31 4.1 Overview 31 4.2 Achievements 31 4.3 What is Working Well? 33 4.4. Opportunities 34 5. Noongar Vision 35 5.1 Group Work 35 5.2 Core Values and Beliefs 36 5.3 Principles 37 5.4 Noongar Aspirations 39 6. Conclusion 40 6.1 Overview 40 6.2 Focus Questions for the Future 40 6.2.1 Questions about the Noongar Dialogue process 40 6.2.2 Questions about the development of our region 40 6.2.3 Questions about our relationship with government 40 6.3 Structural Arrangements and Processes 41 6.4 Where to From Here? 42 6.5 Resolution 43 6.6 Meeting Close 44 Appendix 1: Noongar Dialogue Attendance 45 Appendix 2: Working Group Membership 48 Appendix 3: Role of the Working Group 49 Appendix 4: Role of the Secretariat 50 4
1. Introduction
1.1 Disclaimer
The term Noongar is inclusive of all the Aboriginal people of the South West region of Western Australia. This report will use the term Noongar in the same inclusive way. This is consistent with the way in which the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC) uses this spelling to refer to the Aboriginal people of the South West region. ■
5
1.2 Welcome to Country
Noongar Elders Patrick (Uncle 'Sully') Hume and Aunty Janet Hayden welcomed everyone to the meeting on ancestral Wadjuk Noongar lands by the banks of Derbarl Yerrigan, and also on behalf of the other thirteen clans: the Yued, Amangu, Ballardong, Pinjarup, Wardandi, Pibelmen, Minang, Koreng, Wudjari, Kaneang, Wilman, Njaki Njaki and Njunga.
Uncle Sully and Aunty Janet said this meeting was about bringing Noongar people together to determine and take responsibility for their own futures. They expressed their hopes for a brighter future in which Noongar people would have access to the wealth and resources of their own country, and that the children would grow up strong in their Noongar identity.
Aunty Janet spoke about the importance of Noongar people maintaining their spirituality. She placed the branch of a gum tree on the podium to symbolise this. A one minute silence was held in memory of all those who had passed away.
Finally Uncle Patrick and Aunty Janet thanked the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council for convening this Noongar Dialogue. ■
Elder, Doolan‐Leisha Eatts
6
1.3 Attendance
A full list of those who attended the Noongar Dialogue can be found at Appendix 1 (page 45).
It was noted that some Noongar people had travelled long distances to participate in this forum from places such as Albany, Wedge Island, Moora, Narrogin, Bunbury, Manjimup and Busselton. Some delegates made the point that, while they may now live in Perth, they always identify with those in their home country.
Those in attendance were asked to take core messages from this Noongar Dialogue back to their extended families and communities so that, over time, more and more Noongar people will come to understand and be engaged by the process. ■
7
1.4 Opening Remarks
Meeting facilitator Gordon Cole said he saw this meeting as an opportunity for Noongar people to take another step towards taking more control over their own destiny by sharing ideas and learning from each other. He acknowledged this as an historic moment for Noongar people because so many leaders from so many fields had chosen to gather together. He noted the inclusive nature of the process, the active participation of Elders and younger people, women and men, and those from the community, government and private sectors.
It was explained that this discussion is about identifying what Noongar people will do to improve things. It is not about making a 'wish list' nor is it an opportunity for blaming. Gordon made the observation that all Noongar people knew the current system was dysfunctional (i.e. it has not delivered). The question for Noongars now is 'What do we intend to do about it?'
Gordon concluded by emphasising this was just the first conversation in an ongoing Noongar Dialogue, not the last. Therefore it was important participants stayed focussed on long‐term goals and key principles, without getting bogged down in detail. ■
Marissa Verma and Marcia Phillips
8
1.5 Purpose of the Meeting
The facilitator explained the purpose of the meeting: To share ideas for a better Noongar future. To better understand and agree on some common goals. To consider what Noongar people need to do to work more effectively together. To identify new and better ways of doing business. To do some forward thinking and planning. ■
9
1.6 Ground Rules
The meeting adopted the following ground rules to guide the conduct of the Meeting:
• Work together to share our knowledge, experience and understandings. • Give everyone the opportunity to speak. • Make your point fully but quickly. • Only one person to speak at a time. • Respect the opinions of others even if you disagree. • Address the issue, not the person. • Be on time and stay in the meeting. • Turn off mobile phones. • 'No problems without solutions' i.e. those who identified problems should also identify ways forward. ■
(l to r) Elders, Beverley Port‐Louis, Charlie Shaw, Fay Slater, Arthur Slater, Les Eades, Elizabeth Hayden, Colin Hedland, Theresa Wally, Eric Hayward, Barbara Stammner Corbett‐Councillor, Carol Pettersen, Cheryl Taylor, May McGuire, Peter Phillips, and Murray Yarran
10
2. Keynote Speeches
2.1 Overview The following speakers were asked to address the meeting to inform discussions:
Lieutenant General John Sanderson, AC, Chairman Indigenous Implementation Board of Western Australia.
Glen Kelly, Chief Executive Officer, SWALSC: Native Title and a Comprehensive Noongar Settlement.
Professor Colleen Hayward, Head of Kurongkurl Katitjin, Centre for Indigenous Australian Education and Research at Edith Cowan University: Education is the Key.
Darryl Kickett, Health Consultant, formerly with the Aboriginal Health Council of Western Australia (AHCWA): Indigenous Health in Noongar Country ‐ A Message of Hope.
Lee 'Yellow River' Harper Penman: Internalised Oppression. ■
2.2 Indigenous Implementation Board
Lieutenant General John Sanderson was invited to address the meeting. He stressed how important it was for all Australians to learn how to connect with the landscape in the way Aboriginal people do and come to appreciate the land as the source of the nation’s well‐being.
He outlined the role of the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB) to "advise the State Government on how to identify and cut through the obstacles and really improve social and economic outcomes with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders." It is not the role or intention of the IIB to speak for Aboriginal people.
The IIB is committed to supporting the development of models of Indigenous regional governance. "Regional government with Aboriginal people at the centre is not going to be possible of course, unless Aboriginal people can come up with effective governance in the regions for themselves." It was stressed Noongar people must be seen to speak with a strong, clear and legitimate voice.
Continued on next page→
11
→ Continued from previous page
Lieutenant General John Sanderson, AC, Chairman Indigenous Implementation Board of Western Australia
Lt Sanderson said the Indigenous Implementation Board saw this meeting as about achieving consensus and building momentum. "I would expect you to make your own decisions about how you would organise yourselves and what you would demand from government in the way of plans, structure and a fair share of resources to bring about change in the future opportunities for your families." The hope was that conversations begun at this Noongar Dialogue would continue to gather strength.
It was noted the view that Aboriginal people were not capable of accepting responsibility was still too prevalent in society. Arguably some 'Closing the Gap' initiatives involve re‐centralisation. It was suggested not enough emphasis is placed on the transfer of decision‐making authority to Aboriginal people. The critical importance of both government and Noongar organisations exercising their authority well by adhering to the standards of recognised good governance was also emphasised. Continued on next page →
12
→ Continued from previous page
It was emphasised this was an opportunity for Noongar people to realise their own vision and expectations and create new opportunities for their voices to be heard. Noongar people need to negotiate their futures from a position of strength and become full partners in regional development. This means overcoming the divisions of the past, and feelings of hopelessness. Noongar people need to lead government by giving clear direction.
In closing it was stated that vision, partnership and courage would be required to fix the "dead horse" that is the current machinery of Indigenous affairs in Australia.
Barbara Stammner‐Corbett‐Councillor (left) and Professor Fiona Stanley
Professor Fiona Stanley, also an Indigenous Implementation Board member, briefly addressed the meeting. She emphasised responses to complex health issues require understandings of underlying causes and inter‐connections if they are to be effective. The Telethon Child Health Institute directed by Professor Stanley stands ready and willing to work in partnership with Noongar people if asked to do so. ■
13
2.3 Native Title and a Comprehensive Noongar Settlement
Glen Kelly, Chief Executive Officer of the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC), was invited to address the meeting on both days. He stressed the fundamental importance of the act of formal recognition of traditional owners. The nature of native title rights and interests were explained. Glen noted Noongar people already exercise some of these rights to a considerable extent in some cases. Glen advised that native title has been extinguished in national parks in Noongar country, but SWALSC will seek to negotiate joint management arrangements for the future as part of a comprehensive Noongar settlement.
The WA State Government has indicated it wishes to move from an adversarial approach to one of mediated settlement by now seeking to resolve native title issues through a process of constructive agreement, rather than ongoing litigation in the Federal Court. A framework Heads of Agreement, setting out broad principles for a negotiated settlement, was jointly entered into by the State and SWALSC in 2009.
The free and prior informed consent of the Noongar people is critical to any final agreement; so it is important Noongar people understand and support the range of measures to be negotiated. It is currently proposed to conduct a round of meetings across Noongar country to:
• identify critically important places and places of heritage value; • hear local views on the possible content of the final settlement packages; • identify what Noongar people want to see happen over next twenty years.
The content of the full settlement is yet to be decided in discussions with Noongar people. It was stressed a comprehensive settlement is not just about native title. A negotiated settlement would mean a fundamental ground shift in the way Noongar business is done. The form of negotiated settlement with the State Government is yet to be agreed. It is envisaged the final Noongar settlement will include provision for:
• substantial land base; • economic development package (e.g. major investments, entry into the carbon economy, superannuation contributions); • community development package; • social justice package (e.g. scholarships); • provision for language and cultural maintenance.
Continued on next page→
14
→ Continued from previous page
Glen Kelly, Chief Executive Officer of the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council In considering what structural arrangements would best take Noongar people forward, Glen stressed the importance of adhering to tried and proven ways of doing business around the world, highlighting some lessons to be learnt from the Alaskan and New Zealand experience. This was especially pertinent to commercial businesses expected to generate a commercial rate of return on investment. The need for structural separation of commercial operations from charitable cultural institutions was emphasised. It was suggested the risk of a 'blow out' could be minimised and benefits flowing to the grass‐roots maximised if Noongar people followed recognised best practice and put robust systems of accountability in place. It is envisaged that up to seven prescribed bodies corporate will ultimately hold and manage native title in Noongar country.
The value of the concept of ‘Noongar Nation’ was briefly discussed. Nationhood means putting the interests of nation before family and self‐interest in the conduct of business. It was noted that a vision of shared nationhood can be a useful tool for Indigenous people to use to build unity and carve out their own space. A common country, culture, identity, rights, law, history, institutions and self‐image are all characteristic of a nation of people. But recognising 'nationhood' can also sometimes have negative consequences where it is used as a basis to exclude and discriminate against people.
SWALSC recognises there is a strong “It's about time!” sentiment in the Noongar community in relation to the finalisation of native title issues. Nevertheless, it is important to get it right, and negotiations towards full settlement of Noongar native title and other issues are still expected to take up to two years. In addition, SWALSC will also ultimately seek some form of statement of recognition of the special status of Noongar people in Noongar country grounded in standards put forward by international law.
In closing, Glen expressed the hope that this Noongar Dialogue would spark the re‐emergence of a cohesive, healthy and educated people who are rightfully recognised as traditional owners and treated justly. He stressed native title can be an important mechanism to achieve these things. ■
15
2.4 Education is the Key
Professor Colleen Hayward was asked to address the meeting. She outlined COAG and Productivity Commission ('Overcoming Disadvantage') targets for closing the gap in education. She presented comparative data indicating the performance of Noongar children was slightly better than that of other Aboriginal students in some respects (e.g. school attendance). However, overall the data confirmed poor educational outcomes.
Professor Colleen Hayward
Attention was drawn to some of the effective strategies in Aboriginal education:
• long‐term holistic interventions (as distinct from program 'quick fix' strategies); • adoption of multi‐sensory teaching‐learning strategies which provide direct educational experiences; • certain attitudinal and behavioural modification strategies; • culturally sanctioned community support necessary to ensure utilisation and take‐up of initiatives; • investment in the early years as a generally cost‐effective means of addressing cognitive learning difficulties.
Concern was expressed about the trend increase in the number of children in state care and the risks associated with placing children into care. This was seen as reminiscent of certain policies of the past that didn't work the first time around. It was suggested the appropriate approach was to work to strengthen families by equipping parents with the skills, confidence and capacity to support their own children. The educational importance of Noongar children feeling secure in their place, country and identity was emphasised. ■
16
2.5 Indigenous Health in Noongar Country
Darryl Kickett was asked to address the meeting. He drew attention to the 18 year life expectancy gap between Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal Australians and the higher rate of infant mortality. Many of these are avoidable deaths. Darryl reflected that many Noongar people no longer believe they will live long.
Leading causes of death and hospitalisation include:
• diseases of the circulatory system/ heart conditions; • injury and poisoning; • Cancer; • nutritional conditions; • respiratory conditions.
Major contributing factors to ill health include smoking, alcoholism, low birth weight and low medication compliance. One reason for the high rate of hospitalisation is people not following their medication regime or not seeking follow‐up treatment after surgery. Men in particular tend not to use health services. Darryl referred to evidence that Aboriginal health organisations can be effective in reducing rates of hospitalisation in those areas where they operate.
Darryl Kickett
Continued on next page →
17
→ Continued from previous page Darryl made the point that just establishing clearly identifiable health outcomes will not close the health gap. Only effective practical measures, such as regular health checks, 'best practice' chronic disease management, initiatives that keep families active (i.e. physically, spiritually and culturally), and immunisation will bring about the necessary improvements. He noted that the recommendations of various evidence‐based reports and research are often not implemented. Darryl also expressed concern that, under current arrangements, too much funding is expended on administration rather than service delivery. It was suggested that the Division of General Practice currently provides very few health checks for Noongar people. Darryl sees a need for sub‐regional monitoring to gauge progress zone‐by‐ zone across Noongar country.
Darryl believes Noongar people need to play a lead role in closing the health gap. He noted the absence of any regional health governance structure in Noongar country, in what is a very crowded policy and program space. He advocates the establishment of a Noongar Health Council to drive the health reform process and coordinate service delivery at a regional level. He observed that Victoria already has a regional structure in place. Darryl also supports the establishment of a network of Maternal and Child Health 'Centres of Excellence' across Noongar country. In closing, Darryl stressed 'closing the gap' in Aboriginal health necessarily means engaging everyone. ■
Eddie Brown and Kim Scott
18
2.6 Internalised Oppression
Lee 'Yellow River' Harper‐Penman was introduced to Noongar Elders before being invited to address the meeting. He is a member of the Charakawa/Apache First Nation in Arizona. Lee has worked internationally on issues of internalised oppression impacting on First Nation and Black people. Currently he is working with Kooya Consultancy on a youth diversionary program at Banksia Detention Centre.
Lee shared the analogy of a circle (representing First Nation Indigenous societies) and a square (representing Western societies) to symbolise fundamental differences in thought, philosophy and social organisation. The core message was "A square peg can't fit in a round hole."
Lee described the phenomenon of internalised oppression where colonised and oppressed people can turn their pain and anger inwards and begin to live out the oppressor's negative stereotypes of them. He explained how the politics of control are often sustained by ‘divide and conquer’ tactics that perpetuate internal distrust and conflict to the point where the work of the coloniser is effectively done for them as people turn on each other. "People are left to fight over the crumbs when they could just as easily own the whole restaurant."
Common symptoms of internalised oppression may include: • a lack of confidence to speak out; • tearing own leaders down; • disunity and disrespect; • substance abuse; • all forms of violence (inter‐personal, family, self‐harm and suicide); • inter‐generational transfer of destructive forms of behaviour.
As a result people never get past the politics of conflict to establish shared goals.
It was explained how the insidious and destructive consequences of internalised oppression can be overcome through processes of personal empowerment, which enable people to look inwards to re‐examine their own entrenched habits, beliefs, attitudes, values, expectations and the environment within which they were raised. Lee made specific reference to the RAW Program run by Kooya Consultancy and the progress made towards building a strong base of trained Noongar mentors equipped to understand and address issues such as internalised oppression.
Lee described some of the achievements of Native American communities. One of the lessons is that Indigenous relationships with government can be disempowering and that it is often more effective to strategically partner beyond government.
Finally, Lee suggested that Noongar people need to start thinking of themselves as a powerful people with the means to achieve their own goals. But to display this strength Noongar people will need to move beyond the rhetoric of unity and show it in all that they do. ■
19
3. Opportunities and Challenges
3.1 Overview
Participants split into groups to consider the following nine topics:
• Culture and Heritage • Strong Families • Law and Justice. • Caring for Country (Land and Environment) • Education and Training • Housing and Home Ownership • Job Readiness and Regional Economic Development • Health and Well‐being • Governance
Each group was asked to consider the following focus questions:
• What has been achieved? • Which programs and services are most effective? • What works well in other places? • What are the main challenges? • What can we do about them? • What are our priorities?
The written outcomes of this activity were recorded on butcher's paper and are available on request. ■
20
3.2 Culture and Heritage
Participants took the view that a strong sense of Noongar identity is essential for a better future. Noongar people need to feel culturally secure in who they are and their place in the world. The sentiment was that 'you can't know where you are going if you don't know where you come from'. Heritage, history and the protection of places of spiritual enrichment were identified as being important to all Noongar people.
People keenly feel the lack of a Noongar presence in much of the media and in publications about their country. They want to ensure Noongar culture gets 'out there' in public places such as airports, brochures and websites so everyone knows they are in Noongar country. They want to see Noongar designed items being promoted to tourists.
People want to identify as 'Noongar' first and foremost, not as generic 'Aboriginal' or 'Indigenous' people. The main challenge identified is that of finding new and innovative ways to engage young Noongar people in cultural activities. In particular, participants emphasised the importance of creating opportunities to take young people back to country, particularly those who have grown up in the city.
Noongar cultural achievements noted by the group included cross‐cultural awareness training, cultural tourism, and the survival of the Noongar language.
To build on these achievements participants want to see the development of a set of Noongar cultural protocols, a comprehensive regional cultural mapping exercise undertaken, a Noongar Cultural Centre operating, greater opportunities for people to learn their family history and genealogy, the establishment of a Noongar Language Centre, and the training of more Noongar linguists. The current native title negotiations are seen as presenting new opportunities for heritage places to come back under Noongar control. ■
21
3.3 Strong Families
Participants identified families as the Noongar people's greatest asset. Strengths highlighted in the course of discussion were the resilience and capacity of Noongar families to recover from past destructive policies and practices, and the enduring strength of extended family networks. Participants especially recognised the contribution of grandparents in caring for children and holding families together.
There was considerable discussion around identifying what it is that characterises a strong Noongar family: • love; • mutual respect and reciprocity; • Listening; • forgiving; • safety; • non‐judgmental behavior; • presence of positive role models; • strong values and ethics; • knowing your family history and kinship; • presence of good storytellers who teach the young their culture and heritage; • 'walking the talk'.
A particular challenge highlighted was the need to find empowerment strategies to address issues of internalised oppression, particularly Noongar‐on‐Noongar conflict. Participants acknowledged many Noongar families face grief, trauma, substance abuse, suicide and self‐harm as daily realities. They also noted that many Noongar families are already strong. The importance of not automatically adopting a deficit approach focused purely on what families may be lacking was emphasised.
The meeting emphasised the importance of adopting policy responses that build family capacity, rather than taking family responsibility away. This means programs that support the family unit instead of breaking it up. Building the capacity of parents was seen as the key. The values and ways of working of some non‐ Aboriginal people working with Noongar families was seen as an issue. Participants felt the most effective family strengthening programs are those that are culturally safe and designed and implemented by Noongar people for Noongar people. There was concern about serious under‐resourcing of some programs.
The tendency to recycle tried and failed policy approaches of the past needs to be resisted in the area of family strength and child protection. The general view is 'If it didn't work last time around, why would it work now?' Some specific areas identified as requiring priority attention in the future included the accommodation needs of single mothers, ensuring hostels and refuges are sensitive to the needs of Noongar mothers and children, and increasing the number of youth hostel places available.
22
Strong families were seen as the Noongar people’s greatest asset. (l to r) Shaneen Winmar, Elizabeth Winmar and Elizabeth Hayden ■
3.4 Law and Justice
Noongar people aspire to have their rights formally recognised in law. Participants expressed the view that achieving justice for Noongar people must inevitably be a long‐term journey if it is to fix the wrongs of almost two centuries of injustice. It was stressed issues of law and justice ought to be at the core of any negotiated settlement with government.
The overwhelming concern of participants was the 'lock em up' mentality of a law and justice system, which still fails to deal with the underlying issues that bring Noongar people into contact with the justice system, and which result in high rates of incarceration in the first place. Participants expressed their frustration at the 'revolving door' of Noongar people being fined and subsequently imprisoned for non‐payment. They see a particular need for more community‐based diversionary programs. One of the challenges is to ensure Noongar health and education issues do get addressed within the prison system. An important strategy for doing this is to ensure more Noongar people are employed throughout the law and justice
23
3.5 Caring for Country (Land and Environment)
Participants noted successful models of caring for country operating both in Noongar country and in other regions. These include joint management of national parks and nature reserves, 'Green Jobs' and ranger training initiatives. Participants foresee increasing opportunities for Noongar people to obtain formal qualifications and employment in 'bush based industries' such as land rehabilitation, cultural heritage management and eco‐tourism, that build on their cultural knowledge.
Recognition of native title rights and the negotiation of Indigenous Land Use Agreements are seen as important mechanisms for increasing such opportunities, as more land is brought under Noongar control. Current challenges identified include environmental legislation that fails to recognise Noongar rights and interests in land, population pressures contributing to widespread degradation of country, and a lack of ongoing funding necessary to ensure continuity of employment after training.
Participants would like those Elders who hold cultural knowledge of practices, such as burning regimes, and bush medicine, to have greater opportunities to become involved in caring for country and to act as mentors to those Noongar people undertaking ranger training. There is some urgency about the transfer of cultural knowledge because the Noongar Elders who are the custodians of this knowledge are becoming scarcer.
There was support for the concept of what participants termed a 'Bush University'. Essentially this would be a repository of Noongar cultural knowledge, skills and understandings. Participants saw this as an opportunity to integrate Noongar traditional knowledge and Western scientific understandings to serve the interests of protecting and preserving the environment. ■
24
3.6 Education and Training
Notable achievements of the education system include a dramatic increase in the number of Noongar people graduating from university, due in part to the quality of support provided to students in the tertiary education system. The use of sport as an effective tool for engaging students in school was also noted. Examples of the latter include the Clontarf Football Academy and the Swan Nyungar Sports Education Program (SNSEP) run at Balga Senior High School. Private college scholarships were seen as an effective initiative that can work well. There was a view that opportunities to establish international exchange programs should be explored.
Participants stressed the importance of all Noongar students having greater opportunities to learn about their culture and heritage at school. Manjimup was identified as a school doing well in this respect. Increasing opportunities for early childhood learning by Noongar children learning with Noongar staff was seen as a priority area for action.
One of the challenges is finding ways to effectively support parents so they can in‐ turn support their children's education. Other priorities identified included increased support for Noongar language education programs and the training of more Noongar people as school teachers and school counsellors. It is felt schools need to improve performance in the area of school‐to‐work transition. The general feeling was that more vocational training needs to occur in schools to create career pathways for students.
Successes in the training area identified included the widespread cultural awareness offered to mainstream workers in the mining industry, and work readiness and apprenticeship programs run by resource companies. Participants would especially like to see programs that make driver license training more accessible to Noongar people. Marr Mooditj was also seen as a success story in relation to the training of Noongar health workers. ■
25
3.7 Housing and Home Ownership
Several historic achievements in the housing field were noted:
• the end of discriminatory segregation of Noongar people on reserves; • better access to tenant advocacy support services; • the growing stock of Noongar owned rental accommodation managed by community housing organisations; and, • the effectiveness of shared equity loans in making home ownership more accessible.
Increasing home ownership is a priority. It was suggested the Keystart program be further strengthened by increasing funding, and that the Right to Buy Scheme, which enabled some Department of Housing tenants to purchase the public rental property in which they were living, might be reintroduced.
The main challenge identified in the housing field was the sheer number of Noongar families currently on the public housing waiting list. There are also some disincentives to work operating in the public housing system. In particular, it was noted Homeswest tenants who find employment can be faced with the prospect of being forced out of their Homeswest homes because their income might climb too high to meet public housing eligibility criteria. Other longer‐term challenges are the design of a more sustainable housing management model, and issues of anti‐social behaviour and damage. It was suggested that one response might be the re‐introduction of aspects of the former Homemaker Program.
Exciting new opportunities related to residential land and housing development may emerge as part of negotiations around a comprehensive Noongar Native Title settlement. It was suggested a portion of land owned by the State should be allocated to Noongar organisations to develop at the time of each residential sub‐division. Recent developments in this regard in Yawuru country in Broome were noted.
There was some discussion about the possible advantages of establishing a Noongar Housing Authority. Participants called for a Noongar Housing Forum so that this and other housing issues might be more fully discussed. ■
26
3.8 Job Readiness and Regional Economic Development
Discussion identified numerous barriers to Noongar employment. Practical difficulties associated with getting Noongar people job ready can include a lack of confidence and self‐belief, internalised oppression, literacy and numeracy standards, lack of transport, and unstable home environments. Creating more traineeship opportunities is seen as a priority.
One effective employment strategy is the use of skilled peer mentors positioned between the employer and the employee with the capacity to broker issues.
The establishment of youth work hostels along the lines of those being constructed in other regions was also identified as a possible future strategy for keeping people in work that needs to be explored.
Joint venture investments in association with a consortium of mainstream business and industry were supported in principle as a potentially effective model for Noongar owned and operated businesses.
The need to increase knowledge of sound corporate governance best practice was identified.
It was also noted that care is required in relation to enterprise development because not all people want to, or are capable of, running a business.
There was also a concern to ensure the current asset base (reserve land, housing, community assets and infrastructure) of Noongar people not be eroded over time. ■
27
3.9 Health and Well-being
Participants noted improvements to health services and infrastructure in Noongar country and the depth of research undertaken in the area of child health, particularly the work of the Kulunga Child Health Research Institute. Such research is seen as providing the evidence‐base to underpin informed actions. Improved access to a range of accredited health and aged care training opportunities was also noted.
The importance of structural arrangements and processes to ensure Noongar health priorities are driven by Noongar people through a regional authority, such as a Noongar Health Council, was stressed. Participants felt that a Noongar Health Council must have authority over the implementation and management of Noongar health priorities.
It was suggested that, where there is Noongar control of health and well‐being services, these generally far out‐perform mainstream services. The group identified a need for Noongar leadership at both the management and service delivery levels. It was noted there were only two Aboriginal Medical Services currently operating in Noongar country i.e. the absence of full regional coverage. Improving access to mobile, home‐health services was seen as one effective means of improving Noongar access to health services.
Participants identified mental health, chronic disease management, health prevention and promotion, and child and maternal health as critical priorities. The need for more accredited training for Noongar nurses and other health professionals was identified, whilst also acknowledging great improvements already made in this area, and the important role played by organisations such as Marr Mooditj and South West Aboriginal Medical Service (SWAMS). In particular, increased Noongar staffing levels in hospitals, and the establishment of a Noongar hospice facility, were seen as a priorities. Participants would also like to see the establishment of a network of women's and men's health centres across Noongar country. Participants emphasised the importance of healing projects in addressing issues of social and emotional well being based on spiritual and cultural enrichment. They called for the establishment of Noongar healing centres, in some cases utilising old reserve sites and missions.
Rigorous health impact assessment was also seen as important in order to systematically measure progress and improvements in the health status of Noongar people. ■
28
3.10 Governance
A recurring theme of the meeting was the need for both government and Noongar community organisations to further improve standards of governance, and as a result, service delivery outcomes. Governance capacity and leadership were seen as inseparably linked. The importance of better recognising, supporting and nurturing community leaders was stressed. The opportunity to learn governance lessons from the international experience of other Indigenous nations and communities was noted.
In the course of the meeting there was, at various times, brief discussion about aspects of what 'good governance' might mean in a Noongar context:
• accountability to Noongar people; • fulfilling duty of care obligations; • open and inclusive ways of doing business • decisions and actions based on research and the best available evidence; • measurable objectives and timeframes; • structures and processes that allow the voice of every major Noongar family and community to be heard; • opportunities to negotiate regional funding priorities and service delivery arrangements alongside government; • the negotiation of new and flexible pooled funding arrangements; • nurturing and support for the next generation of emergent leadership; • decision‐making processes seen to be fair and equitable; • processes that promote unity by regularly bringing people together; • structures and processes that engage youth; and • building the informed decision‐making capacity of Noongar people.
Overwhelmingly, the major challenge identified was the achievement of unity and bringing people together. The design of new regional decision‐making structures and processes 'by, with and for' Noongars was seen as part of the solution.
Presently, there is a lack of regional governance structures in place to represent Noongar people on Noongar country. The view was expressed that organisations need to strive for a 'cultural match' in their structure and processes that reflect an effective blend of contemporary and traditional elements. Continued on next page →
29
→ Continued from previous page
One participant shared the following story with its message about showing unity and supporting leaders. "A man had a bucket full to overflowing with crabs. When he was asked how come the crabs never crawled out and escaped he simply explained that every time one tried the others would grab it and drag it back down." Several other challenges were identified:
• there is a general lack of community awareness of what 'governance' means; • leadership is a scarce resource; • there is a high level of dependence on government funding; • there is a need to ensure fair representation across genders, age groups and places of residence; • resources are often inadequate relative to the need.
Participants want to see less talk and more action from both government and Noongar organisations. Their priorities for action were:
• the development of a Noongar Regional Alliance between peak Noongar bodies; • structured opportunities to workshop, define and learn more about the concept of 'governance'; • linking emerging young leaders to leadership development opportunities, including engaging youth in the Noongar Dialogue. ■
30
4. Strengths and Opportunities
4.1 Overview
This section highlights strengths of Noongar society and identifies initiatives that work well, or have the potential to work well, in Noongar society. The meeting noted that there are a great many identifiable achievements and opportunities to be celebrated and built upon.
4.2 Achievements
It was suggested there is an opportunity to do more to recognise and celebrate Noongar achievements, including those of past leaders. In the course of discussions over the two days participants identified many strengths of Noongar society:
• survival and resilience as a distinct people after having borne the brunt of colonisation; • retention of knowledge and expertise about our own people and culture; • language maintenance; • repatriation of cultural materials and human remains from international museums; • the Noongar population is now estimated to be 27,000, the largest Indigenous language group in Australia;
Continued on next page →
31
→ Continued from previous page
• extended family bonds remain the central pillar of Noongar society despite the impact of the stolen generation, incarceration and other forms of institutionalisation that have split and undermined family strength; • the commitment and dedication of grandmothers in holding Noongar families together through difficult times; • Noongar leaders have long demonstrated strong and courageous advocacy on many issues; • vast Noongar social networks retain their enduring power and reach; • Noongar people have distinguished themselves as leaders in many fields including academia, the arts, writing, the public sector, community service, rights advocacy and sport; • many Noongar people have served Australia with distinction and honour, in times of peace and in times of war; • there is a more aware and informed Noongar community than ever before due to Indigenous broadcasting and other communication initiatives; • established Noongar driven community organisations with a strong
membership base such as:
Derbarl Yerrigan Health Service (DYHS) South West Aboriginal Medical Service (SWAMS) Aboriginal Alcohol and Drug Service (AADS) Southern Aboriginal Corporation (SAC) Kaata‐Koorling Employment and Enterprise Development Aboriginal Corporation (KEEDAC) Noongar Mia Mia Noongar Sport Association
South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC).
• Noongar people have accumulated a large asset base and organisational infrastructure including a stock of community owned housing; • there is an increased range of services accessible to Noongar people; • substantial progress towards recognition of Noongar native title rights and interests, including the historic 2009 Heads of Agreement with the State Government. ■
32
4.3 What is Working Well?
John Scougall of Kooya Consultancy was asked to provide a brief overview of group discussions to date. It was noted unity was the predominant theme of this meeting.
John shared the following anecdote about two people who argued over who would get the orange. They argued for so long the orange eventually went bad and nobody got it. When the two people stopped arguing and sat down to talk they discovered one wanted the fruit to eat and the other wanted the skin for cooking. They realised too late they both could have had what they wanted if only they had listened to each other.
The primary focus of this meeting was on identifying what works well because often more can be learnt from studying success than what's not working. Initiatives identified as working well in the course of discussion included:
• job Readiness programs; • cross‐cultural awareness training; • regional governance structures; • sport as an effective mechanism for engagement in schooling; • boarding school scholarships; • Aboriginal medical services; • partnerships with mainstream NGOs; • joint ventures; • research and evaluation which informs action; • the Western Australian Aboriginal Child Health Survey; • innovative healing initiatives providing new hope in relation to the really hard issues such as family violence and substance abuse; • shared equity home ownership; • holistic long‐term intervention as a response to complex social problems; • joint management of National Parks; • ranger training; • peer mentoring for and with Noongar by Noongar; • experiential 'hands on' approaches to education and training; • early intervention and prevention initiatives. ■
33
4.4. Opportunities
John Scougall provided a brief summary of some of the future opportunities identified in the course of the discussions:
• establishment of a joined‐up regional alliance between Noongar organisations; • more initiatives that build family strength and capacity; • re‐introduction of the Right to Buy Scheme and the Homemakers Program; • strategic partnerships beyond government with the private sector, NGOs and philanthropic bodies; • alternatives to prison in cases of fine default; • youth re‐engagement in Noongar culture; • systemic reforms to government service delivery involving place‐based, flexible and pooled funding arrangements; • a strategic and targeted response to Noongar health issues; • ensuring agreed, clearly identifiable outcome measures are in place; • initiatives that strategically address specific identifiable inhibitors to development, such as insufficient licensed drivers and inadequate driver training; • native title settlement and subsequent Indigenous Land Use Agreements. ■
34
5. Noongar Vision
5.1 Group Work
Participants split into groups to consider their vision for a better Noongar future. The outcomes of this activity were recorded on butcher's paper and are available on request from SWALSC.
One vision ('New Dreaming') that appears at the front of this report uses poetic form to express how the heartfelt emotional connection to an ancient culture and heritage provides a firm foundation upon which contemporary Noongar people can begin to fulfil future aspirations to shape their own destiny. These words were formulated by one of the working groups at the Noongar Dialogue.
Across all working groups there were five main themes evident in the vision statements that were developed:
• the power of a united Noongar people to determine their own destiny; • a desire for cultural security which comes from living in a place where Noongar culture is appreciated and valued; • an emphasis on family strength; • the importance of displaying trust and mutual respect; • opportunities to become economically independent and break free of government dependency.
Several of these themes are evident in the following example of a vision statement drafted by one of the working groups:
"We are a nation of united people that is flourishing with strong beliefs of a prosperous future. Respect and recognition within our whole community is alive and thriving. We are a nation of people with life choices, strong economic bases, strong belief systems flourishing families and communities united through respect and recognition built on trust."
Another recurring theme was a desire to once again be able travel freely in our own country:
"To be able to go anywhere in Nyoongah country in peace and with pride in who we are".
Participants felt that all of these ideas ought to be captured in a single Noongar vision or in the principles that underpin it. ■
35
5.2 Core Values and Beliefs
Lee 'Yellow River' Harper‐Penman led the meeting through a process that identified core values and beliefs encapsulated within the Noongar visions for a better future that each group had developed. Key words and phrases included:
• Access • Action • Celebrate • Control • Destiny • Develop • Dreaming • Equality • Free • Happy • Healing • Independence • Leadership • Listen • Love • Ownership • Peace • Protected • Recognition • Respected • Responsibility • Retention of culture, history and identity • Self‐governance • Spirit • Sustainable • Trust • Unity • Well‐being
A cultural bonding activity was then undertaken which placed emphasis on the strength of Noongar society and the empowerment of its people. ■
36
5.3 Principles
Throughout the Noongar Dialogue participants had opportunities to reflect on what it is that Noongar people collectively value and believe in.
The future of Noongar people is seen as essentially grounded in the ancient concepts of Noongar Budjar (land), Katitjin (cultural knowledge) and Moort (law and spirituality) as set out in Figure 1 (see next page).
The meeting acknowledges the work of Len Collard on the 'Nyungar Trilogy of Being' for representing this insight.
Continued on next page →
37
→ Continued from previous page
Figure 1: Nyungar Kurkdaam Koorndaam
BUDJAR Reconnection, authority, control
NYUNGAR WEIRN
MOORT KATADJIN Our Law/our spirit/our blood Our ways of knowing, doing weirn, ngup and being
‘Nyungar Trilogy of Being’ adapted from the work of Len Collard, Murdoch University.
Other fundamental principles to emerge are as follows:
• respect Elders as living treasures; • a right to be recognised as Noongar people, to practice our culture, and live in a society where our cultural beliefs are valued and respected; • protection of culturally significant places and heritage sites of historical and social importance; • acknowledgement of the rightful place of Noongar people in contemporary society; • all Noongar people and families have a right to safety and protection; • the right to live in a just society; • Noongar people are entitled to social justice and have the same citizenship entitlements and opportunities as non‐Aboriginal people; • Noongar people have a responsibility to honour their own families; • Noongar people have a responsibility to share stories and pass on their cultural heritage within their own families. ■
38
5.4 Noongar Aspirations
Throughout the meeting participants expressed their hopes for the future:
• unity and cohesion of Noongar people; • effective structures and processes for self‐governance; • growing capacity to shape our own destiny; • revitalisation of language and culture; • respect for each other; • growing levels of trust, self‐confidence and esteem; • reduced destructive levels of alcohol and other substance abuse; • improved health and social and emotional well‐being; • strong, functional and thriving families and communities; • a sense of hope, confidence and belief in a better future; • Noongar children engaged with and learning our culture possessing the capacity to walk in two worlds at the highest levels; • enhanced life choices and greater economic participation; • career pathways, wealth and prosperity for our children; • a sustainable future, not one based on welfare dependence. ■
39
6. Conclusion
6.1 Overview
The facilitator posed some focus questions that might be usefully considered as part of future conversations to extend this Noongar Dialogue.
Discussion then focussed on structural arrangements and processes for carrying the Noongar Dialogue forward beyond this meeting.
6.2 Focus Questions for the Future
6.2.1 Questions about the Noongar Dialogue process • What can we do to improve the well‐being of our own people? • How do we work in ways inclusive of organisations, Elders and young people, women and men, professionals and the unemployed, and the housed and the un‐housed? • What is the personal responsibility of every Noongar person? • What can we do to make the Noongar voice stronger? • How can Noongar people work better together? • How do we re‐build broken spirits and heal? • How do we re‐build trust?
6.2.2 Questions about the development of our region • Do Noongar people have a shared vision for development? • What role can and should Noongar people play in the future development of their region? • How do Noongar people become partners in development? • How do we achieve a joined up regional approach to future development? • How do we re‐align existing policies and relationships so they work better? • How do we strengthen our capacity and leadership? • How do we promote accountability to Noongar people? • What are the half dozen strategic things we simply must get right if Noongar people are to prosper and thrive? i.e. What is most important?
6.2.3 Questions about our relationship with government • How do we open a new dialogue with government? • How can we engage more effectively with government? • What needs to be negotiated with government? i.e. What's our agenda? • Who else needs to be included in our dialogue? ■
40
6.3 Structural Arrangements and Processes
This initial Noongar Dialogue did not have an opportunity to consider in detail options and models for future regional governance. Nevertheless, there were several suggestions about possible future regional structural arrangements and processes for Noongar country:
• form a Noongar Alliance of peak bodies; • finalise the Comprehensive Agreement between SWALSC and the State of Western Australia in full settlement of unresolved issues; • negotiate Indigenous Land Use Agreements on Noongar country; • draft a Noongar Charter (accord or declaration) setting out the vision, broad desired outcomes and key principles of the people; • formulate a 'Future Directions' document setting out specific and measurable objectives and strategies; • hold a Noongar Summit; • consider establishment of a Noongar Dialogue Steering Committee; • explore how the' Noongar Nation' concept might be operationalised; • institute a Regional Noongar Health Council.
These options are not mutually exclusive.
There was some discussion about the possible role of a new regional governance structure:
• provide a forum where every family and community can be represented and heard; • keep Noongar people informed about regional development opportunities; • negotiate service delivery arrangements with government on behalf of Noongar people; • ensure co‐ordinated service delivery to Noongar people; • negotiate new economic, social and cultural opportunities for Noongar people; • participate alongside government in determining regional funding priorities; • establish new flexible pooled funding arrangements. ■
41
6.4 Where to From Here?
The meeting considered: What now needs to happen next to progress the work of the Noongar Dialogue? Who should accept responsibility for doing this? How this should be done? When the work of the Dialogue would be progressed?
The meeting agreed on the importance of striving to remain accountable to Noongar people. Several speakers suggested extending the Noongar Dialogue to include other places in Noongar country over time so more people would have the opportunity to contribute to the conversation.
There was a brief discussion about what might ultimately be the most appropriate way to choose or elect people charged with responsibility for taking the Noongar Dialogue process forward in the medium to longer term. While this meeting agreed to establish a working group to take immediate steps to progress the dialogue, there is a view that a different structure with a different form of appointment may possibly be required in the medium to longer term. The meeting was informed that a first draft of the report would be prepared for the consideration of the working group in approximately two weeks.
After discussion Glen Kelly volunteered the services of SWALSC to assist the establishment of a Noongar Dialogue Working Group in accordance with the wishes of the meeting. This offer of support was gratefully accepted by the meeting. ■
42
6.5 Resolution
The meeting resolved to:
1. Establish a Noongar Dialogue Working Group comprised of volunteers to take initial action to progress the conversation.
2. Develop a shared Noongar vision for the future based on the views expressed at this meeting.
3. Establish a Noongar Dialogue Secretariat under the auspice of the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council to support the Working Group.
4. Draft a report on this Noongar Dialogue within two weeks and circulate within two months.
5. Take this Noongar Dialogue conversation 'to the bush' so more Noongar people have the opportunity to contribute to the discussion.
6. Have the Noongar Dialogue Working Group consider what might be appropriate structures to progress the Noongar Dialogue beyond the initial work of the Working Group.
7. Hold a Noongar Summit to progress the Noongar Dialogue conversation.
8. Have the Working Group plan the implementation of actions agreed to in the Noongar Dialogue.
Moved: Liz Hayden Seconded: Eric Hayward
Passed unanimously ■
43
6.6 Meeting Close
The meeting reflected on the importance of this gathering for the future of all 'little ones'. Elizabeh Winmar, the youngest person in attendance aged 9 years, was asked to formally close the Noongar Dialogue. ■
"I would like to say I have enjoyed today. When I grow up I will look back and say thank you to my people for developing a positive future which I now enjoy."
Elizabeth Hayden and Elizabeth Winmar
44
Appendix 1: Noongar Dialogue Attendance
The full list of those attending (in alphabetical order of surname) is as follows.
Attendees Mervyn Abraham Noongar Delegate Metro Dot Bagshaw Noongar Delegate Metro Gail Beck Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Bill Bennell Noongar Delegate Regional Eddie Brown Noongar Delegate Metro Wayne Bynder Noongar Delegate Metro Gordon Facilitator/ Cole Noongar Consultant Metro Kooya Consultancy Kerri Colgate Noongar Delegate Metro David Collard Noongar Delegate Metro Dean Collard Noongar Delegate Metro Josh Collard Noongar Delegate Metro Dorinda Cox Noongar Delegate Metro Harley Coyne Noongar Delegate Regional Stuart Crowe Observer Delegate Metro Dulcie Donaldson Noongar Delegate Metro Wayne Donaldson Noongar Delegate Metro Tania Donovan Noongar Delegate Metro Les Eades Noongar Delegate Regional Doolan‐Leisha Eatts Noongar Delegate Metro Walter Eatts Noongar Delegate Metro Patrick Egan Noongar Delegate Metro Malcolm Firth Observer Metro SWALSC Staff Kevin Fitzgerald Jnr Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Kevin Fitzgerald Snr Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Jon Ford Noongar Delegate Metro Danny Ford Noongar Delegate Metro Gregory Garlett Noongar Delegate Metro Carol Garlett Noongar Delegate Metro Clinton Garlett Noongar Delegate Metro Greg Garlett Noongar Delegate Metro Daniel Garlett Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Kevin Giles Noongar Delegate Metro
Continued on next page →
45
Yvonne Green Noongar Delegate Regional Paul Halfpenny Observer Metro SWALSC Staff Anthony Hansen Noongar Delegate Metro Josey Hansen Noongar Delegate Metro Lee Speaker/ Harper‐Penman Observer Consultant Metro Ted Hart Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Board Janet Hayden Noongar Delegate Metro Elizabeth Hayden Noongar Delegate Metro Michael Hayden Noongar Delegate Metro Geraldine Hayden Noongar Delegate Metro Eric Hayward Noongar Delegate Metro Colleen Hayward Noongar Speaker Metro Ken Hayward Noongar Delegate Metro Colin Headland Noongar Delegate Regional Patrick Hume Noongar Elder Metro Delegate/ Carol Innes Noongar Organiser Metro SWALSC Staff Vivienne Karahoutis Noongar Delegate Regional Glen Kelly Kelly Noongar Speaker Regional SWALSC Staff James Khan Noongar Delegate Regional SWALSC Board Charles Kickett Noongar Delegate Metro Darryl Kickett Noongar Speaker Metro Donna Kickett Noongar Delegate Metro Helen Kickett Noongar Delegate Metro Vanessa Kickett Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Board Barry Lawrence Noongar Delegate Regional Penny Lipscombe Observer Delegate Metro IIB May McGuire Noongar Delegate Metro Erica McGuire Noongar Delegate Regional Oral McGuire Noongar Delegate Metro John McGuire Noongar Delegate Metro Barry McGuire Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Board Ian Michael Noongar Delegate Regional Graeme Miniter Noongar Delegate Regional SWALSC Board Michelle Munns Noongar Delegate Regional Lesley Nelson Noongar Delegate Metro Continued on next page →
46
SWALSC Doreen Nelson Noongar Delegate Metro Board Joe Northover Noongar Delegate Regional Glenn Pearson Noongar Delegate Metro Carol Pettersen Noongar Delegate Regional Peter Phillips Noongar Delegate Metro Marcia Phillips Noongar Delegate Metro Beverley Port‐Louis Noongar Delegate Metro Beverley Rebbeck Noongar Delegate Metro Clem Rodney Noongar Delegate Metro Lt Gen John Sanderson Speaker Metro IIB Kim Scott Noongar Delegate Metro John Scougall Scribe/Consultant Metro Kooya Laurel Sellers Noongar Delegate Metro Charlie Shaw Noongar Delegate Regional Marge Shaw Observer Regional Arthur Slater Noongar Delegate Regional Fay Slater Noongar Delegate Regional Barbara Stammner‐Corbett‐ Noongar Delegate Regional Councillor Dr Fiona Stanley Observer Metro IIB Cheryl Taylor Noongar Delegate Metro Noela Taylor Observer Metro Shirley Thorne Noongar Delegate Metro Lynley Tucker Noongar Delegate Metro Sherma Ugle Noongar Delegate Metro Greg Ugle Noongar Delegate Metro Marissa Verma Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Patrick Walker Observer DG DIA Joseph Wallam Noongar Delegate Metro Dawn Wallam Noongar Delegate Metro IIB Theresa Walley Noongar Delegate Metro Richard Walley Noongar Delegate Metro Gary Wilkes Noongar Delegate Metro Elizabeth Winmar Noongar Delegate Metro Michelle Winmar Noongar Delegate Metro Sheneen Winmar Noongar Delegate Metro Olive Woods Noongar Delegate Metro Veronica Yappo Noongar Delegate Regional Sue Yappo Noongar Delegate Metro Murray Yarran Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Glenys Yarran Noongar Delegate Metro Board
47
Appendix 2: Working Group Membership
Volunteers for Working Party Gail Beck Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Bill Bennell Noongar Delegate Regional Gordon Facilitator/ Kooya Cole Noongar Metro Consultant Consultancy Harley Coyne Noongar Delegate Regional Dulcie Donaldson Noongar Delegate Metro Tania Donovan Noongar Delegate Metro Kevin Giles Noongar Delegate Metro Elizabeth Hayden Noongar Delegate Metro Geraldine Hayden Noongar Delegate Metro Michael Hayden Noongar Delegate Metro Eric Hayward Noongar Delegate Metro Ken Hayward Noongar Delegate Metro Colin Headland Noongar Delegate Regional Carol Innes Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Vivienne Karahoutis Noongar Delegate Regional Glen Kelly Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Charles Kickett Noongar Delegate Metro Darryl Kickett Noongar Speaker Metro May McGuire Noongar Delegate Metro Ian Michael Noongar Delegate Regional Michelle Munns Noongar Delegate Regional Glenn Pearson Noongar Delegate Metro Carol Pettersen Noongar Delegate Regional Marcia Phillips Noongar Delegate Metro Peter Phillips Noongar Delegate Metro Beverley Port‐Louis Noongar Delegate Metro Laurel Sellers Noongar Delegate Metro Barbara Stammner‐ Corbett‐ Noongar Delegate Regional Councillor Sherma Ugle Noongar Delegate Metro Marissa Verma Noongar Delegate Metro SWALSC Staff Dawn Wallam Noongar Delegate Metro IIB Joseph Wallam Noongar Delegate Metro Sheneen Winmar Noongar Delegate Metro Sue Yappo Noongar Delegate Metro
48
Appendix 3: Role of the Working Group
Kooya Consultancy developed this suggested draft role statement for the Noongar Dialogue Working Group following the meeting. It is proposed that it be considered and endorsed by the Working Group.
1. Plan to hold a Noongar Dialogue Summit. 2. Overview the process of finalising the 'New Dreaming' document. 3. Identify the most critical issues for Noongar people to address at this time. 4. Draft Noongar vision statement for consideration by the broader Noongar community. 5. Have preliminary discussions about regional governance options that may be appropriate for Noongar country e.g. Noongar Alliance, Noongar Nation, Noongar Charter, Indigenous Land Use Agreements, Prescribed Bodies Corporate, Regional Partnership Agreements, and a Future Directions planning document. 6. Set realistic timeframes for completing all initial tasks to progress the work of the Noongar Dialogue. 7. Consider the most appropriate structures and processes for progressing the work of the Noongar Dialogue after the Working Group has completed all of its specific tasks. 8. Develop a list of written goals, objectives and strategies to guide future actions drawing on information collected during the Noongar Dialogue. 10. Oversee the work of the Secretariat. ■
Laurel Sellers and Patrick Walker, DIA Director General
49
Appendix 4: Role of the Secretariat
After discussion, the meeting agreed that the work of the Noongar Dialogue Working Group would require secretariat support. At the request of the meeting SWALSC committed itself to resourcing the work of the Working Group through the establishment of a Secretariat.
Following the meeting, Kooya Consultancy developed this suggested draft role statement for the Noongar Dialogue Secretariat.
It is proposed that the Working Group consider and endorse it.
1. Support the work of the Noongar Dialogue Working Group. 2. Convene regular meetings of the Noongar Dialogue Working Group. 3. Keep records of Noongar Dialogue discussions. 4. Disseminate the draft ' New Dreaming' report to as many Noongar people as possible and obtain feedback and comment. 5. Seek funding to progress the work of the Noongar Dialogue in areas such as structural arrangements, taking the dialogue 'to the bush', and costs associated with the proposed Summit. 6. Schedule and conduct visits that take the Noongar Dialogue to other places in Noongar country. 7. Organise and manage the proposed Noongar Summit to hear a range of Noongar perspectives on possible future directions. ■
50
51
For further information about the Noongar Dialogue please
contact the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council
Phone: (08) 9358 7400 or free phone: 1800 617 617 Email: [email protected] Web: www.noongar.org.au 1490 Albany Highway, Cannington WA 6107 Postal address: PO Box 585 Cannington WA 6987
The Noongar Dialogue was funded by the Government of Western Australia Department of Indigenous Affairs
52 Attachment 3
Mid West Conversations: Geraldton 10-11 May 2010; and
Gascoyne Conversation: Carnarvon 13 May 2010
Mid West & Gascoyne Conversations
Report from Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation (YMAC) on behalf of the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB)
CONTENTS
Background and Introduction…………………………………………………………………2
Mid West Conversation: Day 1……………………………………………………………...…4
Mid West Conversation: Day 2……………………………………………………………….11
Gascoyne Conversation………………………………………………………………………15
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………...19
Appendix
Mid West Conversation Invitation……….…………………………………………………………….…………………………...20
Mid West Conversation: Day One Program……….…………………………………………………………….……………………………21
Mid West Conversation: Day Two Program……….…………………………………………………………….……………………………22
Mid West Conversation: Attendees…...…………………………………………………………….……………………………..23
Gascoyne Conversation: Invitation and Advertisement…………………………………………………………….……………………………..24
Gascoyne Conversation: Day One Program…………………………………………………………….…………………………………….25
Gascoyne Conversation: Attendees…………………………………………………………….…………………………………..26
1
BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB)
In 2009, the WA Department of Indigenous Affairs formed the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB). The IIB consists of a 9 member board of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people, including; Chairman: Lt General John Sanderson; Dr Mark Bin Bakar; Mr Kim Bridge; Ms Dawn Wallam; Dr Sue Gordon; Dr Helen Milroy; Mr Brendan Hammond; Professor Fiona Stanley; and Ms Ricky Burges.
The role of the IIB is to build stakeholder involvement, ensure that recommendations from earlier reports have been implemented where appropriate, consider the structural underpinnings of Indigenous disadvantage and recommend ways in which service delivery can be enhanced.
In 2009 the IIB, in conjunction with regional native title representative bodies and Aboriginal Corporations, held open ‘conversations’ with Aboriginal people in regional Western Australia, including the Kimberley, Pilbara, South-West and Goldfields.
Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation
YMAC is run by a Board of Directors made up of 12 Aboriginal people who have been chosen by our members. We also have two Regional Committees who advise on issues that are specific to Yamatji or Pilbara country. YMAC represents 24 different native title groups and each group has their own distinctive country, culture and identity. These living cultures are maintained through languages, ceremonies, beliefs, music, art, laws and creation stories.
In December 2009, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation (YMAC) approached the IIB to assist them in having conversation events in the Mid West and Gascoyne regions. A subsequent event proposal was sent to the IIB, where it was then agreed that YMAC would host the conversations on behalf of the IIB.
Conversation Events
In May 2010, YMAC hosted the Mid West Conversation (10 & 11 May in Geraldton) and Gascoyne Conversation (13 May in Carnarvon) events, on behalf of the governments Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB). The conversations were an open discussion for Aboriginal people, aimed at opening up a new way of working together in the region.
Approximately 35 Aboriginal leaders, community members and service providers attended each event to discuss key issues and priorities in the region including; health, education, employment, justice and regional governance. Jenny Kniveton and Liza Radcliffe facilitated the Mid West Conversation and Kathleen Musulin and Gail Bellotti facilitated the Gascoyne Conversation.
2
Event Communication
The Mid West and Gascoyne Conversation events were promoted throughout the regions by means of the following methods;
¾ 800+ personal invitations to YMAC Yamatji members ¾ 50+ emails to community groups, organisations and government departments ¾ 4 x full colour advertisements in the Geraldton Guardian and Northern Guardian ¾ 2 x full colour advertisements in Yamaji News ¾ Announcements on local radio station, Radio MAMA ¾ Local on-ground communication to community members in Geraldton and Carnarvon through members of YMAC’s Board of Directors
Attendance
¾ The Mid West Conversation event attracted 32 participants, mainly from local Aboriginal services, organisations and government departments. ¾ The Gascoyne Conversation event attracted 30 participants, mainly from local community and government departments. ¾ In total 62 Aboriginal community members attended the conversation events.
Meeting Discussions
Key points of the conversation discussions in Geraldton and Carnarvon were:
¾ Community members were asked to ‘vision’ what they’d like to see for their region. ¾ Topics of concern and issues were discussed including; health, housing, employment/training, justice and youth. ¾ Possible regional governance models and future government service delivery was also discussed.
3
MID WEST CONVERSATION
Day One
Date: Monday, 10 May 2010
Facilitator: Jenny Kniveton
Venue: Geraldton Yacht Club, Geraldton
Welcome to Country: Roberta McKinnon on behalf of her mother Ruby and the Amangu people
Introduction to Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB): Lt General John Sanderson
Lt General Sanderson introduces himself and speaks about the Indigenous Implementation Board, the IIB’s board members and their role in WA Indigenous affairs.
Outcomes from the Mid West Conversation
Facilitator, Jenny Kniveton, asks attendees what they want from today’s conversation. Discussion then begins amongst the attendees about the IIB and what the board could do for their region. Jenny explained to attendees a current regional governance model she and several Aboriginal organisations have set up in Geraldton to provide a supportive, united voice for not- for-profit Aboriginal agencies; the Geraldton Aboriginal Organisation Alliance (GAOA).
Discussion Topics:
¾ Indigenous political party ¾ GAOA – building on this current concept ¾ National Indigenous Representative Body ¾ Connecting representative structures ¾ Maori congress model concept ¾ Indigenous treaty concept ¾ Building community capacity
Attendees then broke into groups to brainstorm the following;
1. Why are we here today? 2. How could we build on a concept like GAOA and what sort of principals should it have? 3. Who should be involved? 4. What are your community concerns? 5. Future recommendations for a possible regional governance model.
Why are we here?
¾ To make real change. 4
¾ To find out about the portfolios and principles of GAOA and how this concept could be utilized across the whole Mid West and Gascoyne region. ¾ To discuss the possibility of future regional forums. ¾ Where are all the issues being addressed in government? ¾ What is the Carnarvon Aboriginal Congress and what are the concepts of their regional governance approach? ¾ Where is the youth representation in forums and on GAOA? ¾ The Midwest Football Academy and its impact for youth in the region. ¾ Education is a key area of concern for attendees. ¾ No support for Aboriginal organisations in regional WA. ¾ Need Aboriginal leadership in the region. ¾ To form linkages to all representative forum bodies (community to the top).
Portfolios and principles of GAOA
¾ Someone to hear our issues in housing, health and education. ¾ To create effective ongoing conversations in the region. ¾ To create community involvement in meetings. ¾ Position itself for government to take notice. ¾ Address aged pensioner issues. ¾ What kind of community membership will GAOA have ¾ Need the Department of Indigenous Affairs to map the gaps for future Indigenous implementation in policy and services delivered to the region ¾ Develop and maintain partnerships throughout the state
Who should be involved?
¾ Elect Aboriginal people to the council. ¾ Open day for community representatives. ¾ Appropriate public representation. ¾ Issues based community meetings. ¾ Need a newsletter and networking opportunities to promote the concept of GAOA. ¾ Discussion began surrounding a possible Aboriginal social club and meeting venue in Geraldton.
Community Concerns
¾ Housing ¾ Education ¾ Employment ¾ Health ¾ Feedback of governance meetings to community ¾ Transparency of regional governance models, organizations and alliances ¾ Aboriginal land and culture heritage issues
5
Recommendations: Geraldton Aboriginal Organisation Alliance (GAOA)
1. Do you think this body will be appropriate? We, the group, think it will be. 2. How do we build on this? Strong leadership, a strong vision and a unified body. 3. What sort of principles should it have?
Facilitator, Jenny Kniveton, asks conversation attendees to brainstorm their main areas of concern and what types of issues impact Aboriginal people in the Mid West region.
Key Areas of concern
¾ Health ¾ Mental Health ¾ Youth Services ¾ Employment and Training ¾ Education ¾ Housing
Health ¾ Dialysis availability in Meekatharra. ¾ Accommodation support for Aboriginal people who need to be transported to Perth for medical needs. ¾ Diabetes and its impact on Aboriginal people and their health. ¾ Cancer and other diseases and their prevalence in the Aboriginal population. ¾ Obesity shame and the impact of bad food choices and availability of fresh foods in remote and regional communities. ¾ Education on Aboriginal health issues. ¾ P.A.T.S. ¾ Complaints about services and how these are handled.
Mental Health
¾ Lack of appropriate family support for mental health careers. ¾ Lack and restriction of health services in regional areas. ¾ Lack of appropriate Aboriginal cultural awareness training for health workers. ¾ Misconception of mental health. ¾ Lack of promotion for mental health. ¾ Miss diagnosis. ¾ Lack of post natal and ante natal care in remote and regional WA. ¾ The lack of education on healthy lifestyle choices for school children and prevention programs for youth.
Youth Services
¾ Lack of youth programs and funding for the region. 6
¾ Ned a petition of Aboriginal organisations to the City of Geraldton/Greenough regarding the lack of youth programs and services. ¾ Radio Mama needs a talk back program to begin discussions about youth issues from the areas younger population.
Employment and Training
¾ Geraldton Iron Ore Alliance and the Midwest Mining and Aboriginal Economic Development Partnership – what programs and training do these organisations have for Aboriginal employment policy. ¾ Lack of programs in regional WA. ¾ Need a review of employment streams for Aboriginal people in the Mid West. ¾ Need a review of Centrelink forms to make them culturally appropriate and for different levels of understanding and education. ¾ Discussion regarding Aboriginal representation and employment, or the lack of, in the armed forces and police force. ¾ Aboriginal art industry is a positive in the Mid West region, but there is little employment opportunities, this needs addressing and a strategy devised. ¾ Transport issues and the need for training for truck and mining appropriate licenses.
Education
¾ Are our children getting the right education? ¾ Lack of supportive parents. ¾ Violence and bullying issues at school and how this affects children’s education. ¾ When do schools begin early childhood intervention and is it appropriately done? ¾ Review of education – Mid West Aboriginal Education Committee. ¾ Aboriginal School Precinct Concept – Aboriginal culture taught in schools and brought into the mainstream curriculum.
Housing
¾ Lack of housing for Aboriginal people in the region. ¾ Building policy and its impact on the region. ¾ Allocations of housing for Aboriginal people and the tendency to cluster families together, this can then cause ‘ghetto’ like suburbs. ¾ Education of people’s rights in regards to tenancy and renting. ¾ Lack of economic opportunities to purchases your own home. ¾ Disruptive Strikes Policy needs explaining by the appropriate housing department.
The Future of the Mid West – 2009 Sustainable Future City
Dr Fiona Nichols, from the City of Geraldton-Greenough, introduces herself to the conversation attendees and explains a study she is conducting on behalf of the local council into the future of
7
the Geraldton region. The group then agrees to split into small groups to brainstorm their ideas about their region, now and in the future, paying particular attention to their perspectives as Aboriginal people.
Key Outcomes from Discussions
CONVERSATION 1
1. Why the region is a great place to live now?
¾ Great weather. ¾ Clean ocean and good fishing. ¾ Education and training options and good relationships between TAFE/universities. ¾ Lifestyle: free, easy, close to beach, everything close by/accessible, including bush. ¾ Caring, friendly people, regional Aboriginal family connections, sense of belonging. ¾ Family areas: parks, beaches, foreshore. ¾ Sporting culture: every sport represented. ¾ City but still a country feel. ¾ Strong connections to culture and language.
2. What you most want to keep.
¾ PCYC. ¾ Affordable housing. ¾ Kangaroo meat available retail. ¾ Easy going lifestyle. ¾ Beaches: limited vehicle access. ¾ Enforced water safety rules. ¾ Strong Aboriginal culture: NAIDOC, Language Centre, young people involved. ¾ Service provision: GRAMS, two hospitals, education options, employment options, local justice forums, strong Aboriginal organizations. ¾ Bootenal Tavern.
CONVERSATION 2
1. The Geraldton region is a great place in 2030: your 2-3 most important visions of this place?
¾ Community services; youth, health, education, justice, aged care are adequately funded ¾ Aboriginal voices are heard; Aboriginal people are actively nominated and represented on CGG Council; and information is shared within the Aboriginal community via newspaper, email, flyers/letterdrops, and Radio Mama Talkback sessions. ¾ Culture is evident as a result of research into the culture of the Geraldton area, languages taught in schools. ¾ There are more family-friendly aspects: parks, swings, toilets, shade, seats, BBQs.
8
¾ Southgate sand hills are untouched, public transport is cheap and easily accessible, and the community education precinct is in operation. ¾ Racism is at a minimum or is non-existent. ¾ Geraldton is known for its Aboriginal cultural experiences: tourists come here for that, and culturally significant land has been left untouched and respected. ¾ Aboriginal people are heard and seen, there are more opportunities to be involved in local government ideas and plans, including Aboriginal representation in local government. ¾ Reserved Aboriginal land has been reclaimed, Bundiyarra land has been developed, and as a result Aboriginal culture is more strongly in evidence via: Yamatji trails: Geraldton to Meekatharra and Wiluna walking trails: stories of Aboriginal history; streets are named after Aboriginal people; Aboriginal history of Geraldton area is in evidence; cultural festivals are held; and an Aboriginal Cultural Knowledge and Community Centre has been built. ¾ Education: a Community Aboriginal Education precinct has been built and includes: ¾ A Leadership Academy: ‘Changing Your Life’. This builds capacity in young people to: Be more receptive of other cultures; teach stronger culture, pride, respect for and valuing culture; be responsible for their choices; change their attitudes with moral obligations, and attitudinal shift.
2. The Geraldton region is a great place in 2030: what are the 2-3 most important changes needed to make your great visions happen?
¾ Need to come together as an Aboriginal community, will be stronger as a result; including youth and elders engaging with each other, and the community being kept informed and involved in issues/ and decisions via flyers and letter drops, emails, newspapers, websites, Radio Mama talkback sessions. ¾ Need to find out what our community wants by doing an Aboriginal-run audit of what Aboriginal people want. ¾ Need adequate funding of community services; youth, health, education, justice. ¾ Racism needs to be addressed. ¾ More Indigenous people need to be in decision-making roles in Geraldton, including on the local council, with one goal being an Indigenous Mayor. ¾ Need to develop first class Indigenous health, education, employment and housing opportunities. ¾ Need huge shift in attitudes towards one another: Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people, with local government dealing with this. ¾ More opportunities to be involved in local government ideas and plans, including Aboriginal representation in government and local government so can influence decisions. ¾ Lack of housing for Aboriginal people.
9
CONVERSATION 3
1. Geraldton region is a great place in 2030: what are the most important things to do now to make your great visions happen?
¾ Improve acceptance of Indigenous culture, including the establishment of an Aboriginal school, Aboriginal Culture Centre, Aboriginal cultural tourism, Indigenous sites. ¾ Improve community services; mental health, aged care, housing, justice, corrective services, youth services, housing, better service in public hospital. ¾ Improve employment prospects for Indigenous people and prospective Indigenous business owners, including acceptance and awareness of equal opportunity. ¾ Improve community consultation and avenues for objection and feedback regarding community concerns. Use talkback radio on Radio Mama to do this. ¾ Lobby now for more Indigenous councillors and encourage and support people we feel could represent us in local council and as Mayor. This improves reconciliation through ‘bridging the gap’ by ensuring everyone has equal representation, individually and combined. ¾ Empower people by encouraging all community members to be proactive in dealing with issues affecting them. ¾ Establish an Aboriginal Studies Centre for Excellence which includes: A one-stop shop providing holistic education for all community members.
Meeting Closes
Facilitator, Jenny Kniveton, thanks everyone for their input into day one of the Mid West Conversation and asks everyone present to come along to day two to finish discussions on regional governance recommendations.
10
MID WEST CONVERSATION
Day Two
Date: Tuesday, 11 May 2010
Facilitator: Liza Randall
Venue: Geraldton Yacht Club, Geraldton
Introduction to Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB): Lt General John Sanderson
Lt General John Sanderson addresses attendees and asks what their ‘vision’ is for their region and to begin to address their recommendations to the WA government on service delivery and governance to Indigenous people in the Mid West and Gascoyne region.
Outcomes from the Mid West Conversation
Facilitator, Liza Randall, introduces herself to the group and discussion begins amongst attendees as to how to involve the whole region in this type of forum, as attendees did not feel that they could speak for other areas outside of Geraldton.
Recommendation:
Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation (YMAC) to explore if they could access funding to hold a Regional Community Meeting.
Outcome:
YMAC’s Yamatji Regional Manager, Donna Murdock, stated that she could not answer this request at present as it would have to go before YMAC’s Board of Directors at the next board meeting in August 2010. Donna Murdock stated that YMAC’s core business relates to native title matters, not areas of current concern, such as health, education, employment, youth, justice and housing. The group’s request and recommendation would be presented at the next YMAC Board of Directors meeting for consideration.
Discussion continues on key areas of concern and future recommendations.
Key Areas
¾ Youth Services ¾ Housing ¾ Education ¾ Violence 11
¾ Aged Care ¾ Health – Alcohol & Drugs ¾ Mental Health ¾ Culture ¾ Employment & Training ¾ Justice Issues
Youth Services
1. Geraldton Streetworks funding was recently cut by $180,000 although an internal review of the organisation did not consult the Streetworks Board. Discussion on why funding was cut and how to obtain additional funding, suggestion on starting a petition to government for funding for Geraldton Streetworks Corporation to be supported by all Aboriginal Corporations in Geraldton. 2. Radio Mama to consider a youth talkback program to discuss current issues affecting the youth in the area. 3. Violence in the community affecting our youth.
Recommendations:
1. Start a petition regarding Geraldton Streetworks funding. To be organized by GAOA. 2. Meet with Radio mama to discuss the possibility of a talkback program to discuss youth issues. To be organized by GAOA.
Housing
1. Lack of housing. 2. Sub standard housing offered to Indigenous clients, if refused, clients are being told they will go to the bottom of the list. 3. Need a comprehensive housing allocation policy to reduce clustering issues. 4. Education of community rights in regards to Homeswest policies. 5. Homeswest complaints process, Disruptive Behavior Policy – Three strikes policy needs to be explained to clients.
Recommendation:
1. Homeswest needs to educate clients on policies re: Disruptive Behavior and No Clustering Policy and rights to refuse housing in unsuitable areas. GAOA to approach Homeswest regarding the above issues.
Education
1. Are our children getting the right education? 2. Lack of supportive parents. 3. Increasing violence in schools.
12
4. Children starting school too late, some children are not going to kindergarten and pre- school and this is causing a disadvantage when they start in grade one; they are already behind the other children. 5. Review of education programs, such as the Midwest Football Academy as students are graduating from year 12, but not at the same level as mainstream students. 6. Aboriginal School Precinct needs to revisited, strong framework incorporating Aboriginal culture.
Recommendations:
1. Midwest Council of Education needs to review education programs ie: Midwest Football Academy. GAOA to approach Midwest Council of Education to discuss concerns. 2. Aboriginal School Precinct concept needs to be revisited. GAOA to follow up and discuss at a future committee meeting.
Employment and Training
1. Lack of appropriate programs. 2. Review of employment streams. 3. Review of Centrelink forms. 4. Aboriginal representatives and employees in the armed forces and police force. 5. Art industry; Aboriginal arts and culture not supported, needs more resources.
Recommendations:
1. Wayne Mc Donald to present to the next GAOA meeting regarding Mid West Mining opportunities. 2. Approach Wila Gutharra to see if it’s possible for clients to utilise an office with access to computers and with assistance to complete Centrelink forms and job applications. GAOA to follow up with Wila Gutharra.
Mental Health
1. Misconception of mental health. 2. Lack of appropriate Aboriginal promotional work on mental health. 3. Lack of mental health services in the Mid West region. 4. Services currently restricted in regions, people have to relocate to major towns and cities to receive adequate services. 5. Lack of adequate post natal and ante natal services in the Mid West region. 6. Need more education, awareness and support programs on teen pregnancies and births. 7. School curriculum needs to address education on life skills and healthy lifestyle choices. 8. Governments Aboriginal funeral fund – is this still funded?
13
Health
1. Dialysis unit in Meekatharra so that people do not have to relocate, funding needed to run unit. 2. Diabetes and the issues of chronic disease from diabetes. 3. Appropriate support and accommodation in Perth for patients and families from the regions. 4. Issues such as smoking, cancer and obesity and their affects on the mortality rate of Aboriginal people. 5. PATS. 6. The Geraldton Hospital and the complaints process.
Recommendation:
1. Sandy Davies to compile complaints given to him through GRAMS and send them onto the Geraldton Regional Hospital Board.
Meeting Closes
Facilitator, Liza Randall and YMAC staff thank all attendees to the Mid West Conversation event. Attendees are informed that their concerns, recommendations and ideas on regional governance will be complied into a report for the IIB. The report will then inform the IIB and the WA government of the issues facing Aboriginal people and the recommendations for Aboriginal governance in the Mid West and Gascoyne regions.
14
GASCOYNE CONVERSATION
Outcomes from the Gascoyne Conversation
Date: Thursday, 13 May 2010
Location: Fascine Lodge, Carnarvon
Facilitators: Susan Oakley and Kathleen Musulin
Welcome to Country: Carmen Bellotti, Malgana country
Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB): Lt General John Sanderson
Lt General John Sanderson welcomes attendees to the Gascoyne Conversation event and introduces himself and Dr Sue Gordon from the Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB). Mr Sanderson then explains the purpose of the IIB and asks attendees what their vision is for their region, and what the key areas of priority are for Aboriginal people living in the area.
Facilitator, Gail Bellotti, asks attendees what they want from today’s conversation. Discussion then begins amongst the attendees about the IIB and what the board could do for their region. Gail then begins conducting a visioning exercise with conversation attendees.
Vision Exercise
Key points
• Unity of Aboriginal people across the region and in Carnarvon. • For Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people to unite towards a common goal. • What do we want Carnarvon to look like in 2020 - one united community?
Key Words for Vision
• Unity • Harmony • Equity • Power – a voice • Empowerment
Vision discussion between attendees continues. Gail Bellotti then writes a suggested vision from Lt General John Sanderson on the white board;
“Knowing who you are in a safe and secure environment that creates opportunities and fosters happy and healthy families that nurture both this landscape in which they live, and creativity of future generations.”
15
Attendees discuss the vision, and then Raymond Edney suggests another vision;
“In years of suffering we’ve experienced racism genocide and oppression. Every journey must come to an end. Every journey can create future wealth and nurture those qualities and values. Our future is our next generations. Unity is strength make that journey towards peace strength in unity.”
Further discussion and suggestions continue until attendees agree on the following united vision;
“Recognising, appreciating and acknowledging our differences. Uniting together to create opportunities to foster happy, healthy families that nurture both the landscape in which we live and creativity of future generations. Our future is our next generation; unity is strength make that journey towards peace.”
Facilitators, Kathleen Musulin and Gail Bellotti, then ask the group to list their key areas of concern in the region and to brainstorm issues and ideas relating to these.
Key Areas of Concern
¾ Education ¾ Employment and training ¾ Housing ¾ Health ¾ Justice
Education
¾ Better education for our children, for them to be excited about going to school and to break the cycle of our children disliking school. ¾ More Indigenous staff in the schools. ¾ Brighter future “we want our children to make a successful future beginning with education.” ¾ Quality retention, being able to compete on an equal level. ¾ More Aboriginal employment in schools. ¾ Content of current curriculum needs reviewing to include appropriate Aboriginal inclusion. ¾ Cultural awareness for teachers. ¾ Bulling, a need for teacher and student behavior management. ¾ Sport and recreation need to include culturally appropriate activities. ¾ Homework classes being available for students who are falling behind. ¾ Traditional law and culture is taught to school children to create an appreciation of Aboriginal culture. ¾ Overcrowding of classrooms. ¾ Supporting families with children’s attendance.
16
¾ Individual student education plans.
Employment and Training
¾ The creation of genuine employment opportunities in the Carnarvon area. ¾ Key senior positions being available and accessible for Aboriginal people. ¾ Equity in workplaces. ¾ Mapping exercise to highlight employment opportunities in the Gascoyne region. ¾ The need for registered training organisations in the Carnarvon area. ¾ Aboriginal ownership of training and employment programs. ¾ Community development employment programs. ¾ Aboriginal rangers, environmental officers and caring for country programs to be further developed and promoted to hire appropriate Aboriginal employees. ¾ Shire of Carnarvon to develop Indigenous recruitment programs ¾ The Department of Environment (DEC) to develop Indigenous recruitment programs.
Housing
¾ Increase quality access, ownership and integration for local Aboriginal people in the Gascoyne region.
Health
¾ Lack of appropriate access to health services. ¾ Lack of funding to regional health services. ¾ Lack of transport to health services. ¾ More health promotion and education for Aboriginal communities. ¾ Alcohol supplies and their affects on Aboriginal communities. ¾ Lack of fresh fruit and vegetables available in remote and regional Aboriginal communities. ¾ Limited access to traditional foods and medicines. ¾ Food co-op needed in Carnarvon. ¾ More Aboriginal people to be employed in the health services. ¾ Lack of disability, mental health and aged care services and facilities in the region. ¾ Lack of culturally appropriate health services. ¾ More Aboriginal representation on hospital boards and committees.
Justice
¾ Guidelines for prisoners attending funerals in handcuffs and leg chains. ¾ Corrective services need more Aboriginal positions and liaison officers. ¾ Sobering up shelter needed in Carnarvon. ¾ Drug and alcohol awareness education and assistance for prisoners. ¾ Partnerships between Aboriginal communities and the Justice Department. ¾ Over representation of Aboriginal people in prisons, needs serious addressing by government.
17
Meeting Closes
Facilitators, Gail Bellotti, Kathleen Musulin and YMAC staff, thank all the community members and organisational representatives who attended the Gascoyne Conversation event. Attendees are then informed that their concerns, recommendations and ideas on regional governance will be complied into a report for the IIB. The report will then inform the IIB and the WA government of the issues facing Aboriginal people and the recommendations for Aboriginal governance in the Gascoyne and Mid West regions.
Closing Statements from Indigenous Implementation Board (IIB)
Lt General John Sanderson and Dr Sue Gordon thank attendees of the Gascoyne Conversation event for their participation and feedback over the day. Lt General John Sanderson then addresses attendees with some closing statements regarding the IIB and regional governance and asks the group to consider the below questions for moving forward;
1. Where are you now? 2. What do we have to do to achieve the vision? 3. How do we organise to do it?
18
19
20
21
Mid West Conversation Attendees:
1. Sandy Davies, GRAMS 2. Elvie Dann, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation, Regional Committee 3. Fred Taylor, Yamatji Mining and Civil 4. Jamie Strickland, Department of Indigenous Affairs 5. Ruby McKinnon, community member 6. Roberta McKinnon, community member 7. Robin Boddington, CSIRO 8. James Brockman, Community Drug and Alcohol Service Team 9. Colin Jones, community member 10. Peter Tolbert, community member 11. Wayne McDonald, Mid West Development Commission 12. Ronnie Forrest, Bundiyarra 13. Pauline Gregory, Indigenous Women’s Cancer Support Group 14. Debbie Woods, GRAMS 15. Jenny Kniveton, Bundiyarra 16. Chris Dann, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation 17. Donna Murdock, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation 18. Russell Gregory, Department of Corrective Services 19. Marion Dingo, Sinosteel 20. Rob Ronan, Mid West Indigenous Media 21. Donna Ronan, community member 22. Chantelle Rosenthal, Bundiyarra 23. Kathy Marianne, community member 24. Makeesha Valgety, Mid West District Education Office 25. Marion Baumgarten, Mid West District Education Office 26. Margaret Dauschausky, community member 27. Tarmalie Kickett, Wila Gutharra 28. Roy Dann, Geraldton Regional Prison 29. Loretta Green, community member 30. Heather Corbett, community member 31. Fallon Gregory, community member 32. Charmaine Green, community member
22
23
24
Gascoyne Conversation Attendees:
1. Carmel Bellotti, community member 2. Kelly Capewell, community member 3. Maria Poland, community member 4. Shirley McMahon, community member 5. Kaylene Oakley, community member 6. Melanie Bellotti, community member 7. Naomi McMahon, community member 8. Chris Hall, community member 9. Raymond Edney, community member 10. Anita Winder, community member 11. Gail Bellotti, Department of Justice 12. Margaret Stewart, community member 13. Roddesa Mitchell, Family Violence Prevention Legal Service 14. Shirley Balby, community member 15. Joan Sedwick, community member 16. Roy Bellotti, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation, Director 17. Susan Oakley, community member 18. Cheryl Moncrieff, community member 19. Jalba Dann, community member 20. Vicki Chudziale, Community Drug Service 21. Merle Dann, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation, Director 22. Roy Roberts, community member 23. Kathleen Musulin, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation, Director 24. Patchy Councillor, community member 25. Devina Wainwright, community member 26. Ben Roberts, community member 27. Chris Dann, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation 28. Donna Murdock, Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation 29. Saeed Amin, Carnarvon Senior High School 30. Theakervon Ziarino, Country Arts WA
25