THE 18414 mUfWd THE UNiviiRsiiT OF QUFENSL/^D Accepted for the sward cf The Indigenous Living Conditions Problem: 'Need', Policy Construction, and Potential for Change. By Lester Thompson BSc, BSocWk., MRegSc. Submitted in fulfilment of the Requirements of the Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Engineering, Physical Sciences & Architecture University of Queensland November 2004 Acknowledgements I wish to thank Paul Memmott and David Wadley for their assistance in drafting this dissertation, my family for their support over the years and those who assisted with information for the case study, with special thanks to Mick Pierce, Steve Hatton and Ray Hemple. I would also like to thank Ruth Matchett, Clive Bean and QUT for supporting me in the research and writing process. ^^^^%i:.::.y -U- Abstract The living conditions of Australia's remote dwelling Indigenous people are broadly acknowledged as so problematic that they require government intervention. The intervention itself however, is periodically recognised as problematic and attention is drawn to thepolicys chronic ineffectiveness in solving the Indigenous living conditions problem, the public liability for the policy is scrutinised and the press and hidigenous activists hold the policy up for public criticism. The apparent finstration precipitated by the government approach is also manifest in periodic Ministerial statements and outbreaks of irrational contrary policy, as is evidenced in 1997 by Indigenous camp clearances in the town of Katherine. This Doctoral study examines the' Indigenous living conditions problem' and Commonwealth Government intervention as a strategic approach to solving this problem. It analyses official perceptions of this problem and the appropriateness of the ofiBcial poUcy construction as a logical strategy for achieving the strategic outcomes that are expected of the policy. In doing this is builds upon the work of such theorists as Will Sanders and Ian Hughes who have previously criticised the impact of such policy on Indigenous autonomy and the right to self-determine. The problem in Indigenous Uving conditions policy is demonstrated in Chapter 1 by a case study and supplementary analysis. This analysis is progressed in Chapter 2 by an inquiry into the nature ofthe perceived problem in Indigenous living conditions. This introductory policy-analysis presents an uncritical, picture ofthe diachronic development ofboth the contemporary policy problem and the strategy for its solution. It examines a mainstream ontology ofthe problem so -iii- that Government intervention strategy can be considered as a field for epistemological investigation. Thus the discussion highlights recurring perceptions that the poUcy has failed, and asks, what is wrong with Commonwealth Indigenous living conditions policy. The material presented in Chapter 3 provides a logical examination of Indigenous living conditions policy as a methodology for intervening in the specific environmental conditions which are perceived causative ofthe officially constructed problem. The analysis finds that there is a disappointing lack of clarity about the specific problem, the causative variables that affect the problem, and the logical consequences ofthe intervention process. Rather than exposing conceptual clarity the examination suggests that the policy is focussed upon an ill-defined concept of 'housing need'. An explanatory investigation of this conceptual phenomenon indicates insufficient recognition of its existence. It is found that, though the policy has been subject to considerable evaluation, its review has adjusted the operational effectiveness ofthe intervention process but not its conceptualisation and logic. Because the problem has beai ill-defined, the experimental intervention into the subject environment has been registered as effective, irrespective of demonstrable outcomes for the subject population. Indigenous clients. Chapter 4 examines the economic underpinnings ofthe policy to determine what historical expectations allowed policy to develop so that its outcomes mismatched with its intentions. Historical documentation indicates that formative policy intervention into remote Indigenous living conditions focussed on creating training facilities which encouraged residents to rapidly disperse -iv- and integrate into the mainstream economy. The coercive nature of tiiis formative policy was submerged beneath an ostensibly just welfare model because it appeared to assist poor Indigenous people to meet their 'needs'. This construction of a just policy regime persisted as a result of a perceived 'need' for housing assistance. In Chapter 5 historical material is analysed to ascertain whether humanitarian policy developments, reformed the coercive objectives which directed Indigenous policy and estabUshed Indigenous 'self-determination' as an official agenda. The historical critique indicates that Government humanitarian efforts have, since the inception of Indigenous pohcy, focussed on assisting Indigenous people through interventions which policy-makers perceived were needed. Chapter 6 examines the social construction ofthe concept 'need' in social policy and its application in Indigenous living conditions policy. Community perceptions ofhuman needs are considered against psychological theory ofthe concept. This chapter seeks to reconstruct housing 'need' as a policy concept that accords with theory and mainstream intentions for social policy. This theoretically robust concept is then applied as an analytical tool for considering the construction ofthe need for intervention into Indigenous living conditions. The dissertation concludes that a problem in Indigenous living conditions cannot be solved without dealing with the following assumptions: 1) if a 'problem' is not significant to those who are perceived to experience it then it will be difficult to coerce their participation in solving it, 2) if a sfrategic intervention is not focussed on solving a problem then it will not solve it, and 3) if a -V- problem is not conceptualised clearly enough for its causes to be isolated then intervention is unfocussed and not likely to cause a solution. The reconstruction ofthe concept 'need' in policy permits a reconceptualisation of Indigenous H ving conditions problems, a reconsideration ofthe sfrategic conceptualisation of policy processes, and a reexamination ofthe causes of Indigenous dissatisfaction (unmet need). These outcomes are achieved because theoretical conceptualisation ofhuman need permits cUent conceptualisations of their problems to be understood as deficits which might be incorporated into policy. The discussion concludes that Indigenous self-determination is an important but forgotten need which requires satisfaction after any living conditions intrusion. To solve the problem in Indigenous living conditions policy, any housing or othej- intervention must permit Indigenous environmental confrol and those consequent perceptions of self-efficacy which facilitate the psychological and environmental health required for a non-problematic post-policy environment. -VI- Certificate of Thesis The work presented in this dissertation is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, original and my own work, except as acknowledged in the text. The following material has not been submitted, either in whole or in part, for a degree a this or another university. Lester James Thompson -vu- List of Abbreviations AAAC Aboriginal Affairs Advisory Council AACC Aboriginal Affairs Consultative Committee AAP Ausfralian Assistance Plan ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics ACOSS Australian Council of Social Services ADC Aboriginal Development Commission AERC Aboriginal Environments Research Cenfre, University of Queensland AHP Aboriginal Housing Panel AIHW Ausfralian Institute of Health and Welfare ARHP Aboriginal Rental Housing Program ARLC Aboriginal Land Rights Commissioner ATSIC Aboriginal and Torres Sfrait Islander Commission CCN Cultiirally Constiiicted Need Model CHIP Community Housing and Infi-astructure Program CRCATH Cooperative Research Center for Aboriginal and Tropical Health CSHA Commonwealth State Housing Agreement CSTHMWG Commonwealth, States & Territories Housing Ministers Working Group DAA Department of Aboriginal Affairs DI Department ofthe Interior FaCS Commonwealth Department of Families and Community Services GNTCA Governments of the Northern Territory and Commonwealth of Australia HMAC Housing Ministers Advisory Committee -viii- HREOC Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission IH ANT hidigenous Housing Authority of the Northern Territory KALA Katherine Aboriginal Living Areas Working Party KCAO Katherine Combined Aboriginal Organizations NACC National Aboriginal Consultative Committee NAHS National Aboriginal Health Strategy NATSIHC National Aboriginal and Torres Sfrait Islander Health Commission NSHS National Social Housing Survey NT Northern Territory OAA Officeof Aboriginal Affairs OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development POE Post Occupancy Evaluation RAIA Royal Ausfralian Institute of Architects SCRCSSP Senate Committee of Review of Commonwealth State Service Provision SSCATSl Senate Select Committee on Aborigines and Torres Sfrait Islanders SWC Social Welfare Commission TH Territory Housing (Department of Housing NT) WELSTAT Welfare Statistics (Commonwealth Workshop) -IX- Table of Contents 1 Indigenous Living Conditions: Infroducing a Problem Conceptualisation 7 1.0 Infroduction 7 1.1 Aim ofthe Infroductory Discussion 12 1.2 A Case Study of