|
 |
Minister for Indigenous Affairs Jenny Macklin. The Rudd Government has released its findings from a series of consultations on the NT intervention with affected communities. |
Flaws undermine NT consultations: report
ISSUE 191 - 26 Nov 2009
By Amy McQuire
ISSUE 191, November 26, 2009: An independent report has slammed the Rudd government's controversial community consultations, stating that it has failed in properly harnessing Aboriginal views on the NT intervention and does not provide evidence of consent for the special measures under the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA).
The Will They Be Heard? report, released on Monday, is based on independent footage of three consultations in Bagot, Utopia and Ampilatwatja.
Its launch coincided with the Rudd government's own report into the consultations, but they are in stark contrast to one another.
The federal government found that while there was a "persuasive feeling" that the NT intervention had "accentuated racial differences", there had been support for income management and views on whether the welfare quarantines would continue had not been expressed.
There was more support for continuing the five-year township leases, and an overall view that community store licensing had delivered benefits.
The government found that communities wanted to continue with the porn restrictions but there was a mixed reaction to the alcohol bans and whether it should continue.
But the Will They Be Heard? report finds that there were several "deficiencies" in the process which meant the consultations would be "insufficient to qualify as indicating consent by Aboriginal people" for the intervention's special measures under the RDA.
The Rudd government is planning to class the more discriminatory aspects of the intervention, such as income management, as a "special measure".
The Will They Be Heard? report found that the consultations were often pre-determined and had overstated the impact of the NT intervention on the lives of Aboriginal Territorians.
It states that rather than consultation, Aboriginal people were instead given the opportunity to comment on the government's discussion paper outlining the revised measures under the intervention.
"Such an approach continues the long standing practice of 'consulting' Aboriginal people on plans and decisions already made. It does not progress the resetting of the relationship," the report says.
Other concerns included the lack of independence from government from those undertaking the consultations, as well as a lack of Aboriginal input in design and implementation, which the report says meant the consultations were often not culturally appropriate.
"The consultations were framed within a prescriptive context of asserted benefit, providing no more than a forum for comment on the government's proposed changes," the report says.
"Such a framework falls a long way short of the requirement that consultations be undertaken in good faith, with the objective of achieving agreement or consent, and providing a genuine opportunity to influence decision making."
There was also concerns that the consultations did not provide qualified Aboriginal interpreters and that people were left in the dark over complex legal terms and concepts, such as those relating to the special measures under the RDA.
Co-author of the report Alastair Nicholson, a former Chief Justice for the Family Court, said that the whole process was "fundamentally flawed".
"The only real solution is to go back to the beginning and negotiate a fresh approach in partnership with the Aboriginal people," Mr Nicholson says.
"Instead the Government is not offering any choice. It is simply telling the people what it proposes to do. The consultation is nothing more than going through the motions in order to achieve a predetermined end."
The report lends weight to revelations in a suite of government documents obtained by NIT earlier this year, which revealed the Minister for Indigenous Affairs Jenny Macklin had been warned by her own department against formally consulting with Aboriginal people over the compulsory acquisition of their land because it would be expensive and would tie up resources.
The documents, which were signed and agreed to by the minister, also stated that the current round of consultations were designed in part to strengthen a legal case if a court challenge against the government were to arise over the five year township leases and the Alice Springs town camp takeover once the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA) was reinstated. The federal government was expected to introduce laws into parliament to reinstate the RDA this week, but by the time of press, this had not yet been done.
Ms Macklin said this week that the consultations had been very "extensive" and slammed the independent report for only monitoring three of the meetings.
"There was a huge program of consultation involving thousands of people, and one of the most important messages to me has been how pleased people were that the government was prepared to come out and listen," Ms Macklin told ABC Radio.
"And we certainly have listened to all of the things that people have had to say to us through this very comprehensive consultation process."
But Greens Senator Rachel Siewert said on Monday that the consultations "seriously undermined the [Aboriginal] relationship with government".
"Quite simply these consultations were not undertaken in good faith, participants were merely asked to choose between a narrow range of options already formulated by the government and not given a chance to put forward their own ideas for reform," Senator Siewert said.
 
|
|