Govt fails to heed lessons of the Intervention, nsw, Amnesty International Australia

nsw Resources:: Home; About; Action groups; Events; News; Volunteer

Govt fails to heed lessons of the Intervention

Published on 8/12/2011

Written by Tom McMahon

In 2008, the Labor government sought to disassociate itself from the Howard government's "Intervention". The Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) was re-labelled Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory, based upon the campaign established by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). This was meant to establish the new relationship, called for by the NTER Review Board in 2008, between the Federal government and the Aboriginal people and, in the words of Kevin Rudd, address the need to "embrace the possibility of new solutions to enduring problems where old approaches have failed."

Over 4 years on, the Labor government has introduced new legislation into Parliament under yet a different title: Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory.

As opposed to the NTER, which quickly became known as the "Intervention" due to the confronting imposition of it’s so-called ‘special measures’ and a total lack of Aboriginal consultation, the Labor government stated that it would distinguish its approach to Aboriginal disadvantage as evidence-based and participatory. After its introduction to Parliament 2 weeks ago, however, the Stronger Futures legislation is attracting a similar theme of criticism as its predecessor and is already being referred to as the “Intervention Mark 2”.

In anticipation of the “setting” of Intervention powers in August next year, community consultations were conducted across the NT over 6 weeks this year with the assurance from Jenny Macklin that "[a]t the heart of this work will be the views of Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory”.

The three key areas identified by the government were:

School attendance and educational achievement
Economic development and employment
Tackling alcohol abuse

Despite the stated intent of the consultation process to generate “new approaches and new ideas for the future beyond the NTER”, independent reviews of the consultation report highlight gaps between the demands of Aboriginal communities for greater participation and the final legislative product.

According to a joint press release endorsed by ANTaR and 20 Aboriginal peak bodies, community welfare and public health groups from around the country:

"In the Stronger Futures consultations, community members suggested introducing Aboriginal culture into the curriculum, involving elders and parents more in school activities, developing mentoring programs for parents, and doing more to attract and retain good teachers. This fits with what the research shows works. Aboriginal communities and peak organisations have also been calling for the reinstatement of bilingual learning for the same reason, because it works."

In contrast, the Stronger Futures policy proposes the mandatory implementation of the Improving School Enrolment and Attendance through Welfare Reform Measure (SEAM), a program that regulates welfare payments to parents based on their kids' school attendance.

While Ms Macklin explains the function of the program in terms of enforcing the parental responsibility to send their children to school, Amnesty International’s Campaign Co-ordinator on Indigenous Rights Sarah Marland argues that, "[t]here is no evidence to suggest that threatening to withdraw income support creates behavioural change in children’s attendance at school. Nor is there evidence to suggest that school attendance correlates with increased performance or improved levels of numeracy and literacy.”

In October this year, the Queensland Parliament extended an income management program being trialled in 4 Cape York towns since 2008 until the beginning of 2013. Under the trial, the Family Responsibilities Commission (FRC) has the power to refer people who are not meeting parental and community responsibilities - such as when a child has 3 unexplained absences from school - to support services, as well as recommend that part or all of their welfare payments be suspended.

In a media release from the Indigenous affairs minister this year, the Cape York Welfare Reform trial was celebrated as a successful demonstration of how income management measures have “improved school attendance, care and protection of children and community safety.” The media release recognised that a “key plank” in the program’s strength is the connection of the FRC to the community, with the work of discussing problems with community members and the duty of referring people to support services and income management administered by “respected local people, and a retired senior magistrate.”

Under the expanded version of SEAM to be implemented mandatorily in the schools of 21 NT communities (including 14 Territory Growth Towns), however, this work will be done by Centrelink officers. Despite this vital difference and with the effectiveness of SEAM trials in 44 schools across the NT and Queensland since 2009 yet to be evaluated, this measure represents the Australian government’s long-term commitment to Aboriginal people in the NT, proposing to set the termination date of Stronger Futures at 10 years from commencement, compared with the 5-year sunset clause for the Intervention.

In light of the continuing issues surrounding the policy approach to Aboriginal disadvantage in the NT, a key lesson from the first set of Interventionist measures surely serves as an omen for Stronger Futures: “Resistance to its imposition undercut the potential effectiveness of its substantive measures.”

Disclaimer: This blog entry does not necessarily represent the position or opinion of Amnesty International Australia.

Comments

Comments are submitted by members of the public and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or positions of Amnesty International Australia. If you find a comment objectionable please contact us.

Ruth Lipscombe
11 December 2011, 03:30PM