9

Agreement-Making in the Local Context: Case Studies from Regional

Kathryn Shain, William Genat and Ed Wensing

Modern agreement making between Indigenous peoples and others in Australia offers powerful possibilities for the recognition and protection of Indigenous rights and interests, and for the expansion of the Indi- genous domain in social, political and economic terms. Colonial histories, continuing inequalities of power and the legacy of underdevelopment makes this task both urgent and problematic (Palmer 2004, p 253).

Introduction An intriguing dichotomy exists between two possible futures for the Australian nation in terms of its foundational relationship – that between settler and indigenous Australians. On the one hand are powerful possi- bilities of reconciliation, partnership and new opportunities; on the other hand, continuing and persistent racism, discrimination and exclusion. Within the Australian landscape, nowhere are the possibilities of these dichotomous futures more evident, both historically and in a contem- porary sense, than in the sphere of local government, particularly so in rural and remote Australia. Here, where indigenous people form a relatively high and fast growing percentage of the population (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP) 2005b p 2.17, pp A3.2–A3.3), interactions with local government officials are face-to-face, often between actors known to each other. At this third level of government, the effects of State and federal policy and programs merge with the generally conservative and parochial bent of local interests to impact directly on relationships between indigenous and settler Aust- ralians. Interests of local governments and their indigenous constituents intersect around a range of activities. A key area of local authority gover- nance is town planning, land use and development. Local governments adjudicate and regulate competing public and private interests over land use, its sub-division and development, often directly impacting not only on Aboriginal land title, but also on social interaction and access to

182

SETTLING WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

The memorandum … has not produced wonders that we thought it would initially. It can help as a political lever. It has allowed us the freedom to dream of what could be like. It [the Steering Committee] is a visionary committee … we can be part of that … we want to sit and talk with the Alice Springs Town Council about the Aboriginal vision (2003, pers comm, 10 July). Local partnership agreements and associated institutional forums constitute a paradigmatic step away from the colonial relationship of the past, a potent space for healing, celebrating difference and creating new joint futures, in particular those concerning culture, environment and social and economic well-being.

Notes 1 There is evidence to suggest that Aboriginal population and growth rates may have been, in some parts of remote Australia, considerably underestimated (see Taylor 2004). 2 ‘For example, the Mackay City Council and State of Queensland developed an Indigenous Land Use Agreement with local Indigenous groups that allowed foreshore improvements while recognising that native title rights could exist’ (Margerum et al 2003, p 50). 3 This Guide remains the only layperson’s guide to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). It was complemented in 2002 by a short brochure and several fact sheets for various positions and occupations in local government (ALGA et al 2002). The Guides were practical resources to assist local councils when considering their responsibilities under the NTA. From 1999 to 2002, the ALGA in conjunction with the National Native Title Tribunal (NNTT) and ATSIC conducted a comprehensive program of information sessions for elected members and training workshops for officers and other interested parties (see ALGA nd at ). 4 While the history of invasion and settlement differs somewhat in the to Western Australia, the radical departure that local agreement-making represents in historical terms is only detailed in the Alice Springs study. Suffice it to say that the historical u-turn is set in a similar fraught context and is equally significant in Western Australia (see Chapter 10 this volume). 5 Town camps often have high numbers of visitors (for many social and health related reasons) and there is high mobility between remote areas and town camps which at times ‘can cause social instability for the “core residents” of the “Town Camps”‘ (Tangentyere 2000, p 9). This high mobility has been misunderstood and has led to inaction by policy makers. 6 The Community Development Employment Project (CDEP) is the Commonwealth Government’s largest indigenous program. It began in 1977 at the request of several remote indigenous communities as an alternative to receiving unemployment benefits. Participation in CDEP is voluntary. CDEP accounts for around one quarter of indigenous employment across Australia in urban, rural and remote areas (see CDEP nd at ). 7 For details of the Memorandum of Understanding between Tangentyere Council and Alice Springs Town Council (3 November 2000), see ATNS database at . 8 Before his appointment as CEO, Scarvelis had worked as a senior policy manager with the South Australian Local Government Association where he had been intimately involved in building better relationships between local government and indigenous people in . 9 In the 1970s there had been a number of Aboriginal people employed by the Town Council. 10 The previous Mayor of Alice Springs had been keen to improve relations between the two councils but other contextual factors at the time were not supportive of change (R Preece 2006, pers comm, 11 January).

204 AGREEMENT-MAKING IN THE LOCAL CONTEXT

11 Fran Kilgariff comes from a well-respected Territory family. Her father, Bernie Kilgariff, was a Senator for the Northern Territory from 1975 to 1987. Kilgariff was born and raised in Alice Springs and is well known and trusted by members of the Aboriginal community. 12 For further details of the Memorandum of Understanding between Tangentyere Council and Alice Springs Town Council (3 November 2000), see ATNS database at . 13 Initially, a one-off grant from the National Aboriginal Health Strategy was used to bring the roads up to standard. Tangentyere CDEP won a contract to carry out much of the work. Federal Assistance Grants to the Town Council now ensure that town camp roads are incorporated in the Council’s general road maintenance program. 14 An issue which for years has been a source of contention for Aboriginal people is that the Aboriginal flag is not flown alongside the Australian, Northern Territory and the Town Council flags on Anzac Hill, an Aboriginal sacred site and now a tourist lookout point, neither is it flown at the Town Council chambers. When, in 2000, the Olympic torch was brought to Anzac Hill, the Mayor arranged for the temporary flying of the Aboriginal flag, although it was not spotlighted along with the other flags and it was removed after the occasion. This was an important symbolic gesture on the part of the Mayor (R Preece 2006, pers comm, 11 January). With the signing of the MoU, this issue has partly been resolved. The matter was raised at a Steering Committee meeting and, according to the Mayor, the issue was harder to get through Council than the MoU itself. This was a hugely symbolic issue that Council members found very confronting (F Kil- gariff 2003, pers comm, 5 June). Now the Aboriginal flag flies not alongside the Austra- lian and NT flags in front of the Chambers, but every day with the Council flag beside the Administration building. The Steering Committee recognised the importance of Tangentyere reciprocating the gesture and they now fly the three flags at their premises. 15 Since writing this chapter, in May 2006 the federal and Northern Territory governments have announced fundamental changes in relation to service provision to the town camps. See Wilson A, 2006 ‘Aboriginal group loses camps’, The Australian, 6 May, viewed 6 May 2006, ; see also Brough, M, The Hon, 2006, ‘$30 million plan to improve living conditions in Alice Springs town camps’, media release by the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indi- genous Affairs, 5 May, viewed 28 September 2006, . 16 For details of the City of Albany Aboriginal Accord, see ATNS Database at . 17 For details of the City of Albany Aboriginal Accord Action Plan, see ATNS Database at . 18 For details of the City of Albany Statement of Understanding and Commitment, see ATNS Database at . 19 On a regional level, a number of native title claims are being amalgamated into one single Noongar claim which, along with the negotiation of a comprehensive regional agreement (CRA) between the State Government and the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC) (an Aboriginal representative body under the NTA representing the Noongar traditional owners of the South West) could settle native title claims across the region for the Noongar people (see Chapter 10 this volume). In mid 2003, SWALSC entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the West Australian Local Government Association representing 105 of the State’s 144 local governments (see ATNS Database ; NNTT 2003b). The MoU sets out how the two bodies will work together to develop template agreements that will enable local governments to progress land management and land use objectives. Arguably to date the Accord has had a far greater impact on the lives of Aboriginal people living in Albany than either the CRA or the MoU. 20 In the Northern Territory, there are only six conventional local government councils (Darwin, Palmerston, Litchfield, Katherine, Tenant Creek and Alice Springs). Most other settlements have Community Government Councils that provide a range of local services. Similarly, in other jurisdictions, State governments have provided moral, financial, material or other in-kind support to facilitate the development of agreements between local councils and indigenous communities.

205