Commonwealth Indigenous Policy Changes
Central Land Council, 17 August 2007
The Central Land Council says that while it agrees with the Federal Government's declaration of a national emergency in Aboriginal affairs, it is concerned that some of the proposals are hasty and ill-conceived reactions to complex issues.
The proposals seem to be a grab-bag of unrelated strategies aimed at a quick fix in a pre-election period.
CLC Director David Ross said he is concerned that the Government has used the recent Report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse to force through land-based changes which have nothing to do with sexual abuse.
"Furthermore, under the smokescreen of helping children, the Federal Government is taking the opportunity to impose its ideological agenda in relation to Aboriginal land.
"There is no doubt that we have a national crisis which requires urgent attention," Mr Ross said, "but, the response needs to be considered and inclusive, which was a key finding of the Sexual Abuse Report. The Howard Government thinks it can go it alone on indigenous affairs but international examples clearly show that to achieve lasting change efforts must be made to build indigenous capacity to solve their own problems.
"Some direct intervention is clearly needed but Aboriginal leaders could have provided valuable advice about how to best target such a hard hitting package of reforms.
"This type of response, despite the lack of detail, is a frightening example of centralised control.
"None of these measures in relation to Aboriginal communities, town camps or permits are in line with the recommendations of either the Report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse or the Government's own Senate Committee on Aboriginal art. In fact, they seem to be contradictory."
Mr Ross says many of the other measures are complex and will take some time to implement. One immediate issue will be the capacity of schools in the Northern Territory to meet a sudden increase in school attendance.
"Nonetheless, we do welcome tougher alcohol and pornography restrictions, although alcohol is already prohibited on most Aboriginal land," he said.
Central Land Council, 22nd June, 2007
Permit changes to make problems worse
The Central Land Council says it is disappointed with the Federal Government's decision to abolish some aspects of the permit system for Aboriginal lands because it may exacerbate existing problems rather than alleviate the enormous pressures communities find themselves under.
CLC Director David Ross said the move goes against the wishes of Aboriginal people.
"Removing permits from major communities could provide a free-for-all peddling of alcohol and marijuana and pornography or the inflicting of further sexual or physical abuse on children," Mr Ross said.
"At least with the permit system it was possible to ask somebody if they had a permit and what they were doing in the community," Mr Ross said. "If they suspected somebody of trafficking alcohol or whatever they could ask them to leave instead of waiting days for police to obtain evidence which is often extremely hard to do.
"In addition, the CLC's constituents told the Minister's advisers in no uncertain terms what their views were about the permit system: that they wanted to retain it in its entirety, but their views were dismissed once again. So I think that this sort of top-down approach just increases the gap between Aboriginal people and the wider community and ultimately leads to further dysfunction and alienation. That is not healthy for anybody," he said.
For 30 years the CLC has operated a permit system to allow visitors, travellers, workers, contractors, researchers and Government officials a system of regulated access to all Aboriginal land. Permits are rarely refused but access is often negotiated. The system is free.
"To imply that the permit system is responsible for disadvantage is simplistic and wrong," Mr Ross said.
"The only economies scrapping the permit system is likely to foster is the dealing of petrol, drugs and porn as well as to assist the carpetbaggers and unscrupulous art dealers that hope to operate in Aboriginal communities.
"There is just no evidence that 'open' communities are better off than communities on Aboriginal land whose access has been regulated by permits," he said.
"We're particularly concerned about the removal of the permit system from Mutitjulu at Uluru because the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park currently has half a million people visit it each year and that number of curious tourists is likely to lead to an extreme lack of privacy for people living in the community."
Mr Ross said removing the permit system from remote communities like Kintore, Mount Liebig and Nyirripi, which are renowned for their fine art, will leave them vulnerable to unscrupulous operators.
He said neither the Northern Territory inquiry into the protection of Aboriginal children from sexual abuse nor the federal inquiry into the Aboriginal arts sector recommended the removal of the permit system.
It's not clear how the Federal Government will legally define the "common areas" in major communities and many access roads to communities are already open to the public.
Where the permit system starts and stops will be confusing and unclear.
Central Land Council, 22nd June, 2007
Contact: Jane Hodson 0417877579 0889516217
|
|
