Closing the Gap - ending Indigenous disadvantage

[Grapeviney 9,801]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-11/close-the-gap-initiatives-failing-in-key-areas-mundine-says/6084512

Many MPs in Canberra today were wearing Close the Gap badges; like that's really going to help.

As the latest report shows, we're not making much progress in ending the disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia in all the key social indicators such as health, education, employment etc.

Each year this report comes out, we talk about it for a few days (if that) and then it's back to business as usual.

It's just incredible that 'the gap' is still so great - never mind the fact that there even is a gap - in this day and age and in this country.

[Crompton's the man 659]

One of my children did a placement with the Royal Flying Doctor Service in remote outback Australia

Educational and pretty sad - The lack of fresh fruit and vegetables, most Aboriginal children anaemic, lack of running water ( no surprise) compromises hygiene levels.

In the major cities we expect access to fresh produce - a dream in some places

supposedly a lot of money finds its way into aboriginal health programs - I always thought that some effort should be made to supply what we enjoy as an expectation to those far far away. Naive perhaps, but I deep down expected ATSIC when it was alive to make this a goal.

Instead what is available is milk out of date and food deep-fried (talking about remote communities)

The lack of water leads to a host of other problems.

[Grapeviney 9,801]

One of my children did a placement with the Royal Flying Doctor Service in remote outback Australia

Educational and pretty sad - The lack of fresh fruit and vegetables, most Aboriginal children anaemic, lack of running water ( no surprise) compromises hygiene levels.

In the major cities we expect access to fresh produce - a dream in some places

supposedly a lot of money finds its way into aboriginal health programs - I always thought that some effort should be made to supply what we enjoy as an expectation to those far far away. Naive perhaps, but I deep down expected ATSIC when it was alive to make this a goal.

Instead what is available is milk out of date and food deep-fried (talking about remote communities)

The lack of water leads to a host of other problems.

I've done a bit of work in communities around northeast Arnhem Land over the past year Crompton and it was as you described: 1.25 litre bottle of coke from around breakfast time, fried food, burgers, pies.

And I don't mean that in a disparaging way - what fresh and healthy food there is, is expensive.

There were some really good initiatives on the go where I was but also others which were clearly not working.

As I understand it, it's like that in many communities around Australia; some programs working, others less so.

[Grapeviney 9,801]

Interesting that Abbott yesterday flagged his strongest support yet for the introduction of Twiggy Forrest's "healthy welfare card" for income management for welfare recipients.

Not sure how it really differs from the 'Basics Card' which was brought in as part of the NT Intervention, which doesn't allow you to buy booze, or gamble etc.

Nova Peris and Noel Pearson had somewhat different opinions on it when the Forrest Report came out last year.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-05/nova-peris-noel-pearson-debate-aboriginal-income-on-qanda-nt/5649010

[Crompton's the man 659]

Noel Pearson seems to make a lot more sense in this segment than in another Q&A where his ideas of the 'radical centre' were , to say the least, treated with skepticism.

I was just looking for his book (as yet unread) which I have at home and while doing that was reflecting on the seemingly insurmountable and intractable problem of righting the slow train wreck that is the divide between the Capitalist Consumer and the society of original inhabitants that prefers to take what it needs.

What I was thinking is that there is no hope for these Aboriginal communities and hope is what is needed.

In that Q&A where he was pretty much scorned, Pearson was promoting partnership with mining companies and similar to have training programs to bring his constituents into workforces - presumably his way of offering them hope.

[Grapeviney 9,801]

Noel Pearson seems to make a lot more sense in this segment than in another Q&A where his ideas of the 'radical centre' were , to say the least, treated with skepticism.

I was just looking for his book (as yet unread) which I have at home and while doing that was reflecting on the seemingly insurmountable and intractable problem of righting the slow train wreck that is the divide between the Capitalist Consumer and the society of original inhabitants that prefers to take what it needs.

What I was thinking is that there is no hope for these Aboriginal communities and hope is what is needed.

In that Q&A where he was pretty much scorned, Pearson was promoting partnership with mining companies and similar to have training programs to bring his constituents into workforces - presumably his way of offering them hope.

One of the groups I've been working with is doing exactly that, Crompton. They've signed a partnership with Rio Tinto to establish a mine training centre in northeast Arnhem Land, as they look to provide the locals with the skills to work in mines in the NT and elsewhere. They're also setting up a bauxite mining operation on their land which would, ultimately, see mining profits go directly back into their community, as well as providing a jobs / career path.

I heard a number of people - all of them non-Indigenous - have a real go at Pearson over his promotion of such ventures and partnerships, basically saying that they were forfeiting their cultural and traditional legacy and relationship with the land by chasing the almighty capitalist dollar. Such criticism riles me no end; it's hypocritical that white man is allowed to enjoy the fruits of financial wealth but Indigenous people should remain 'pure' and 'untainted' by the modern world.

I haven't read Pearson's book yet (like you it's on my shelf) but I have read several times his Quarterly Essay from last year about rights, race, reconciliation and recognition. It's a terrific essay, and he's a powerful writer with an impressive intellect. I don't always agree with what he says (although I do in the QE piece) but I find his arguments captivating nonetheless.

[nutbean 8,838]

I really despair with the issues around indigenous Australians.

There is no going back but such a struggle to move forward - caught in no mans land between a culture that is being broken down by an opposing culture that is so difficult to embrace.

[Grapeviney 9,801]

I really despair with the issues around indigenous Australians.

Your despair is justified nut - it really is one of the great intractable problems of our society.

Unfortunately, we seem content to pay lip service to the issue while, in reality, what we are doing is putting it in the too-hard basket.

I made the mistake of watching Q and A last night - plenty of discussion about the two drug traffickers facing execution, and plenty of discussion about kids in detention, and half the show devoted to a leadership spill that happened a week ago, but not a single word or question on why many indigenous Australians are still living in 3rd world conditions.

If white Australians were being incarcerated at the same rate as they are, or achieving the same literacy and numeracy scores, or killing themselves at the same rate, or had the same unemployment levels, there would be a national outcry.

Instead there is a national silence.

[hardtack 10,627]

And this last week just shows why the gap will never narrow anytime soon...

From "View From the Street" column in the Sydney Morning Herald:

Walking out on a discussion of indigenous health looks classy and not even a bit racist

Speaking of the awesomely-started good government, it evidently decided to take a little break when a bunch of Coalition MPs ostentatiously walked out during Opposition Leader Bill Shorten's reply to PM Tony Abbott's speech on the continuing failures of our nation's indigenous policies.

See, every year the government pays lip service to our First Australians by looking at how badly we're doing at - to use the name of the report - Closing the Gap.

The gap in question is between indigenous folks and all other Australians with regard to things like life expectancy, child mortality, educational attainment, incarceration rates, and other things that might look to the untrained eye like the result of two centuries of sustained discrimination and cultural genocide but is probably just a coincidence.

After Abbott revealed that yeah, we're not going to hit those targets we keep talking about - like, for example, changing the fact that the life expectancy of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is still a decade less than other Australians - he emphasised that it's nobody's fault, really, and certainly not the government's.

Then Shorten got up and suggested that since the report was so damning, how's about the government think about reversing the half a billion in cuts that had been made to things like Aboriginal housing, legal aid, education, training, addiction recovery, health services and a bunch of other things that relate directly to poverty and poor health?

"Right now, a host of vital organisations don't know whether their funding will be continued or withdrawn. When people fleeing family violence need a safe place to stay, cuts mean that shelters close. When having a lawyer can determine whether a first-time offender gets a second chance or a prison sentence, these cuts will rob Indigenous Australians of legal aid."

And that's when a group of government MPs got up and walked out, because they are very, very cool and awesome.

Those MPs included Russell Broadbent, Andrew Nikolic, John Cobb, Ken O'Dowd and Melissa Price, in a move that's definitely not at best childish and at worst offensively dismissive of one of Australia's most shameful and inexcusable problems.

Say, why not drop them a line letting them know what you think of elected members of Parliament flouncing out when they have a job to do? They'd probably really appreciate it!

[Grapeviney 9,801]

^^ The walkout was very poor form ht

The media compound it by reporting on the politics of it all, rather than the policy. The walkout got just as much as time - if not lots more - than the substance of the report.

It was the same issue with the HRC's kids in detention report - all we heard was the politics, nothing on its contents.

[Grapeviney 9,801]

So, living on country is a "lifestyle choice" for the First Australians, according to the PM for Indigenous Affairs.

Makes it sound like they've moved to Noosa for a sea-change. We're talking about people who have a connection to country stretching back tens of thousands of years.

This comes as WA continues with plans to close many remote communities, forcing Aborigines to leave their traditional homelands.

Many non-Indigenous remote communities and smaller country towns are struggling - can you imagine if the Government came out and said it was shutting down Kyabram, or Kyneton.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

So, living on country is a "lifestyle choice" for the First Australians, according to the PM for Indigenous Affairs.

Makes it sound like they've moved to Noosa for a sea-change. We're talking about people who have a connection to country stretching back tens of thousands of years.

This comes as WA continues with plans to close many remote communities, forcing Aborigines to leave their traditional homelands.

Many non-Indigenous remote communities and smaller country towns are struggling - can you imagine if the Government came out and said it was shutting down Kyabram, or Kyneton.

I think by framing it as a "lifestyle choice" he is trying to make removing funding for remote communities more palatable.

You have to remember that a fair chunk of the electorate are stupid enough to think that it IS a lifestyle choice, and then it's not a huge leap of logic to deny funding on that basis.

I'm an athiest, and to be honest I think being tied to one particular piece of land for a religious reason is silly. But people are free to make their own choices, and we can't remove an indigenous population from their land just because their reason for staying doesn't jive with our imported (and imposed) morality. Their tie to the land is clearly not a "lifestyle choice", it's the result of thousands of years of cultural and religious development. We just can't write it off.

If the current funding model isn't working, and judging by the education and health outcomes of remote communities, it isn't, then we need to find a better model. Trivialising their connection to the land isn't helping anyone.

Damnit, now I'm just angry.

[Grapeviney 9,801]

Agree with your post Choke except for the first line.

I reckon it was more likely a case of foot-in-mouth by the PM than a well-thought out comment.

[daisycutter 29,740]

well semantics and language aside...

supporting and providing good essential services to many remote communities that are not self sustaining is just not working, cost effective or realistic despite efforts by all sides of politics for decades

at the moment, for many remote communities it is a lose/lose reality

so are we mature enough to discuss the real problems and possible solutions or do we just waste time arguing about the choice of words because we don't like abbot, and what side of the ideology wall we worship at?

[Grapeviney 9,801]

well semantics and language aside...

supporting and providing good essential services to many remote communities that are not self sustaining is just not working, cost effective or realistic despite efforts by all sides of politics for decades

at the moment, for many remote communities it is a lose/lose reality

so are we mature enough to discuss the real problems and possible solutions or do we just waste time arguing about the choice of words because we don't like abbot, and what side of the ideology wall we worship at?

I don't deny these are difficult issues dc with seemingly no solutions in sight.

But governments fund plenty of essential services in non-Indigenous communities that are inefficient and costly, such as ambulance paramedics who need to be situated within call of dozens of disparate towns, the CFA etc.

I don't bring any ideological baggage to this discussion, and readily concede that Labor has failed in this area as much as the Coalition has, over many years as you rightly point out.

But Abbott is fair game on this front. He said he'd be the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs, but all he has done in 18 months is spend one week in an Indigenous community, and a fair chunk of that was spent dealing with national security issues (not his fault).

There have also been funding cuts, which have impacted on legal aid services, for example. Given that we're not getting the right outcomes, there's definitely a case for better directed funding, or even funding reductions if particular programs are not working.

But the current Government hasn't come up with an alternative strategy - all they've got is a slogan about "getting kids to school, getting parents to work, and keeping communities safe".

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

well semantics and language aside...

supporting and providing good essential services to many remote communities that are not self sustaining is just not working, cost effective or realistic despite efforts by all sides of politics for decades

at the moment, for many remote communities it is a lose/lose reality

so are we mature enough to discuss the real problems and possible solutions or do we just waste time arguing about the choice of words because we don't like abbot, and what side of the ideology wall we worship at?

Fair enough DC, so let's deal with the reality.

The way I see it, we can't force them to move, nor should we try.

Current models aren't working, so we should try new ones. The solution IS NOT to take away the money.

Eventually, hopefully, we will find a method that works.

To say that the current model, or even future models, are not cost-effective and should therefore be cut discounts the human element. We should continue to take the financial hit as a country until we find a method that works.

In the spirit of mature debate, I propose the following solution:

- Increase taxation on superannuation accumulation earnings over $100,000 as proposed by the previous government.

- Increase taxation on superannuation guarantee for those in the top tax bracket to 20% instead of current 15%.

- Introduce taxation on account based pensions for balances over $2 million to 15% to bring them in line with accumulation super. The fact that these accounts PAY ZERO TAX is heinous.

- Introduce a modest (maybe 5%) tax on non-concessional contributions for high income earners (those earning over $300,000 p/a).

- Limit negative gearing to new property constructions only. No negative gearing on currently built properties.

- Require 5% of all superannuation balances be placed in an "Australian Infrastructure Fund", run by the government. Well diversified super portfolios often have a small exposure to infrastructure anyway. I don't think most people would object to 5% of their retirement pool being used to help the entire country get out of debt and build for the future. An infrastructure fund can provide a modest return and provide a conservative element to diversify portfolios. Have part of this fund used to set up local services in remote communities, with an aim to eventually employ people in those communities. Speak to them and ask what solutions would actually work (I have no idea what these communities need, but I'm sure THEY do).

- Rest of the fund can be used to build infrastructure in outer suburbs.

- I wouldn't be surprised if those tax changes not only paid for regional and outer suburban infrastructure, but also for a fair chunk of our national debt. Hell, the change in negative gearing alone would reduce pressure on housing prices.

[daisycutter 29,740]

I don't deny these are difficult issues dc with seemingly no solutions in sight.

But governments fund plenty of essential services in non-Indigenous communities that are inefficient and costly, such as ambulance paramedics who need to be situated within call of dozens of disparate towns, the CFA etc.

I don't bring any ideological baggage to this discussion, and readily concede that Labor has failed in this area as much as the Coalition has, over many years as you rightly point out.

But Abbott is fair game on this front. He said he'd be the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs, but all he has done in 18 months is spend one week in an Indigenous community, and a fair chunk of that was spent dealing with national security issues (not his fault).

There have also been funding cuts, which have impacted on legal aid services, for example. Given that we're not getting the right outcomes, there's definitely a case for better directed funding, or even funding reductions if particular programs are not working.

But the current Government hasn't come up with an alternative strategy - all they've got is a slogan about "getting kids to school, getting parents to work, and keeping communities safe".

well we all agree that abbott is fair game and i'll be happy to see the end of him (sooner the better)

but i am uncomfortable with the level of demonisation of political leaders by the conventional media

we saw it with rudd and gillard and now abbott. no doubt it will continue with shorten if he ascends

i'm not saying they haven't brought some of it on themselves but this excessive manipulation by the media is paralysing and polarising

any chance of reform is hijacked and trivialised into isolated sound-bites and sensationalised headlines

i think the media feeds on turmoil and too often even prepared to create it

meanwhile the lucky country goes down the gurgler

[daisycutter 29,740]

Fair enough DC, so let's deal with the reality.

The way I see it, we can't force them to move, nor should we try.

Current models aren't working, so we should try new ones. The solution IS NOT to take away the money.

Eventually, hopefully, we will find a method that works.

To say that the current model, or even future models, are not cost-effective and should therefore be cut discounts the human element. We should continue to take the financial hit as a country until we find a method that works.

In the spirit of mature debate, I propose the following solution:

- Increase taxation on superannuation accumulation earnings over $100,000 as proposed by the previous government.

- Increase taxation on superannuation guarantee for those in the top tax bracket to 20% instead of current 15%.

- Introduce taxation on account based pensions for balances over $2 million to 15% to bring them in line with accumulation super. The fact that these accounts PAY ZERO TAX is heinous.

- Introduce a modest (maybe 5%) tax on non-concessional contributions for high income earners (those earning over $300,000 p/a).

- Limit negative gearing to new property constructions only. No negative gearing on currently built properties.

- Require 5% of all superannuation balances be placed in an "Australian Infrastructure Fund", run by the government. Well diversified super portfolios often have a small exposure to infrastructure anyway. I don't think most people would object to 5% of their retirement pool being used to help the entire country get out of debt and build for the future. An infrastructure fund can provide a modest return and provide a conservative element to diversify portfolios. Have part of this fund used to set up local services in remote communities, with an aim to eventually employ people in those communities. Speak to them and ask what solutions would actually work (I have no idea what these communities need, but I'm sure THEY do).

- Rest of the fund can be used to build infrastructure in outer suburbs.

- I wouldn't be surprised if those tax changes not only paid for regional and outer suburban infrastructure, but also for a fair chunk of our national debt. Hell, the change in negative gearing alone would reduce pressure on housing prices.

choke, your ideas for increasing revenue (and more equitably) have definite merit

but i don't think the problem of providing good services and opportunities to all remote indigenous settlements is just a matter of spending money

i don't know the solution, but i can see so many dead ends for the current efforts and directions, no matter how well intentioned

i do think that any solution will inevitably mean change and pain for some

there needs to be a genuine multi-partisan approach and some acceptance that that a solution involves compromise (probably big compromise)

sorry, that's not much of an answer

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

choke, your ideas for increasing revenue (and more equitably) have definite merit

but i don't think the problem of providing good services and opportunities to all remote indigenous settlements is just a matter of spending money

i don't know the solution, but i can see so many dead ends for the current efforts and directions, no matter how well intentioned

i do think that any solution will inevitably mean change and pain for some

there needs to be a genuine multi-partisan approach and some acceptance that that a solution involves compromise (probably big compromise)

sorry, that's not much of an answer

I think that's more of an answer than you think.

Our political parties seem more concerned with bs point scoring than with actual reform. Although as you say this isn't helped by the media.

I guess my contention is that if we can find a funding model, we can keep these remote communities afloat while we come up with a real solid solution. A band-aid I guess until real reform can be made. Finding the funding outside the current budget as I have contended removes the impetus to simply cut these programs because they are expensive.

TBH, I'd love to see a real leader advocate a vision for Australia with actual solutions to issues such as these.

[daisycutter 29,740]

I think that's more of an answer than you think.

Our political parties seem more concerned with bs point scoring than with actual reform. Although as you say this isn't helped by the media.

I guess my contention is that if we can find a funding model, we can keep these remote communities afloat while we come up with a real solid solution. A band-aid I guess until real reform can be made. Finding the funding outside the current budget as I have contended removes the impetus to simply cut these programs because they are expensive.

TBH, I'd love to see a real leader advocate a vision for Australia with actual solutions to issues such as these.

choke, i don't honestly think there is a lack of political will and in the main not a lack of money (the wastage has been horrendous)

it seems to me (ignorant maybe) a problem of coming up with solutions that everyone can agree with

a comprehensive solution needs to include both the short requirements and the long term objectives (and everything in-between)

and importantly, implementing the short term in a way that leads towards the longer term objective

i think they fail to address the longer term because they can't get all parties to agree what the longer term outcome should be

hence the shorter term solutions continually just become band-aids

hope this makes some sense, not very well articulated i know

i guess i'm saying what is needed is a comprehensive (but realistic) blueprint with all parties buying in. obviously easier to say than do

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

You're probably right DC, but I doubt we'll get any kind of real action from either political party as they currently stand.

And indigenous aussies in rural communities will suffer because Canberra can't get their [censored] together.

[daisycutter 29,740]

You're probably right DC, but I doubt we'll get any kind of real action from either political party as they currently stand.

And indigenous aussies in rural communities will suffer because Canberra can't get their [censored] together.

maybe the politicians bipartisanly could agree to setup a commission of sorts including prominent australians (but not current pollies) to spend the next 12 months developing a 25 year blueprint for the future and a roadmap to get there. That commission would then continue (for the 25 years) to monitor and advise and act as a sort of ombudsman separate from the politican side.

?

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Sounds like a good idea.

But what happens when the commission builds a roadmap that the government of the day doesn't like?

For mine there'd need to be some sort of bipartisan agreement to actually implement the commission's plan. I reckon that might be a sticking point.

[Grapeviney 9,801]

I think the long-term targets and some of the blueprint exists already through the Closing the Gap framework, and there is bipartisanship around that (in spite of the little dust-up discussed further up in the thread).

I reckon one of the main problems is that we are probably looking for one-size-fits-all solutions when the evidence probably shows that different programs and strategies don't always have the same outcomes in different communities.

Part of the answer must lie in empowering indigenous communities to be involved in the discussion, development and implementation of solutions. The fact that more than 70 per cent of the funding grants announced last week under the Indigenous Advancement Strategy went to non-Indigenous organisations suggests that this isn't really happening at the moment.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I think by framing it as a "lifestyle choice" he is trying to make removing funding for remote communities more palatable.

You have to remember that a fair chunk of the electorate are stupid enough to think that it IS a lifestyle choice, and then it's not a huge leap of logic to deny funding on that basis.

I'm an athiest, and to be honest I think being tied to one particular piece of land for a religious reason is silly. But people are free to make their own choices, and we can't remove an indigenous population from their land just because their reason for staying doesn't jive with our imported (and imposed) morality. Their tie to the land is clearly not a "lifestyle choice", it's the result of thousands of years of cultural and religious development. We just can't write it off.

If the current funding model isn't working, and judging by the education and health outcomes of remote communities, it isn't, then we need to find a better model. Trivialising their connection to the land isn't helping anyone.

Damnit, now I'm just angry.

he's throwing Lib smoke bombs as they retreat back to their trenches, to regroup.

IMO, this is all about smoke & mirrors. the Rabbot chooses a topic to attack with his dumb wit, but this time his 'gaff' is, IMO, on purpose. Attacking the Aboriginal peoples funding, is a popular Lib target, pleasing them,,, & isn't going to hurt their polling numbers much at all, sadly.

..... But the distraction from their Lousy budget mistakes they made, attacking just about all the working class & their cultures.... was hurting them deeply.

Retreat quickly, dropping smoke grenades on retreat, as they squirm back to their trenches to plan the next Foray.

our Journalists, & all the media have swallowed these distractions beautifully... u.n.c.l.e. Tony is grinning from one side of,,,, radar dish, to his other radar dish.

He retreats from a battle, better than most.

He should have been a soldier, then we could have gotten some use from him. we could have sent him to command 'I S'... then we would all be safe.

Edited March 12, 2015 by dee-luded