Proposed new laws make few changes to failed intervention
Amnesty International has labeled the Australian Government’s claim that proposed new laws will reinstate the Racial Discrimination Act in the Northern Territory as misleading and has found evidence required to assess the success of the Emergency Response to be woefully inadequate.
The analysis is contained in a submission by Amnesty International Australia to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs regarding the inquiry into the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform and Reinstatement of Racial Discrimination Act) Bill 2009 and the Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Other Legislation Amendment (2009 Measures) Bill 2009.
To enact the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) legislation, the Australian Government suspended the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)and other anti-discrimination legislation. Amnesty International has consistently stated that racially-discriminatory measures under the NTER violate Australia’s human rights obligations and should cease.
While Amnesty International welcomes the Government’s proposed repealing of clauses in the NTER legislation that remove anti-discrimination protections for Indigenous residents of prescribed communities, the organisation believes that these moves do not sufficiently reinstate protections against discrimination.
Amnesty International is concerned that these Bills do not propose an immediate halt to race-based welfare quarantining, will not reverse racially-discriminatory actions already initiated under the NTER and offer no redress for discrimination already suffered.
“Contrary to the Government’s claims, these Bills do not guarantee protection from further racial discrimination for those living under the intervention,” said Amnesty International Australia’s Indigenous Rights Campaigner, Rodney Dillon.
The proposed laws provide for the continuation of compulsory lease acquisitions, the continuation of bans on alcohol, gambling and pornography in Indigenous communities, and fail to restore the permit system. They provide for race-based compulsory income quarantining, in its current form, until mid 2011 and propose that such quarantining be expanded to all disadvantaged groups, not just prescribed Indigenous communities.
“There is simply not enough data to assess what impact income management is having on child abuse and neglect in the Northern Territory and whether it serves to build strong, resilient and safe communities,” said Rodney Dillon.
When held up to a number of international standards, including human rights standards, as well as standards for food security and child nutrition, Amnesty International has found the evidence to be inadequate and no justification for the continuation of punitive measures that discriminate directly or indirectly on the basis of race.
Amnesty International calls on the Government to provide evidence that an extension of the compulsory income quarantining scheme will achieve clearly stated policy objectives and to show, as it is obliged to do under its treaty obligations, that it has explored alternatives and consulted with those who will be affected on the best way of assisting them.
However, Amnesty International welcomes the Bills’ provisions for community-developed plans to deal with alcohol and substance abuse as well as incentives for people to undertake financial literacy courses and to save.
In its submission, Amnesty International also calls on the Government to reformulate these Bills to ensure they prevent any further race-based discrimination under the NTER and to provide redress, including compensation, to those whose rights have been violated.
“This looks like discrimination as usual under the Northern Territory Emergency Response, despite hopelessly inadequate evidence that it’s improving the well-being of the most vulnerable. It’s time this country rejected racially-discriminatory laws affecting Indigenous peoples and respected the right to free, prior and informed consent to government policies,” said Rodney Dillon.
Comments
Michael Wild | Posted on 3 February 2010, 01:37PM | Report comment
Steady down Yuwan Yunupingu. All I said was the headline exaggerates way past the main text. That’s misleading and inaccurate and remains so whether the writer is a known saint or felon. My attitude to Australian history/present policy is irrelevant but discussing it with you seems likely to generate a lot more heat than light. This little bout is an unfortunate example how AIA is indeed at risk of becoming “political” in the negative sense of the word. Michael Wild, Convenor Bunbury Group
Yuwan Yunupingu | Posted on 3 February 2010, 12:59PM | Report comment
It would appear another ill informed individual who cannot accept Australia’s past and current racist practices. If they had research the author they would find that he is one of the most ethical and fair minded individals Australia can be proud off. Aditionally it was the author direct input that brought down one of the most corrupt state governments in Australia
Michael Wild | Posted on 2 February 2010, 10:33PM | Report comment
This seems to be another case of an over enthusiastic headline writer. It declares the intervention to be “failed” when the article says that there is not enough evidence to decide either way. I know we are a political organization and that it’s a headline writer’s job to grab attention. But there’s no need to be misleading or inaccurate. No member want’s AIA to be “political” in the negative sense of the word.