'Closing the Gap' Gillard style

"Closing the Gap" Gillard style

Gillard’s characterisation of the problem is grossly unfair to Aboriginal people and demonstrably inaccurate

by Michele Harris OAM

One must wonder who is responsible for the briefing provided to our Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, before she gave her "Closing the Gap" speech last week.

Surely targeting a group of our population in a national address in such a prejudiced way is an extraordinary act by any leader.

And Indigenous people know that when the child starts attending school ... when the drinker stops abusing alcohol ... when the adult takes the job that is there ... then change begins.

The implication of this statement being that it is broadly applicable to Aboriginal people - children don’t attend school, alcohol is abused, and opportunities for work ignored.

Surely such a statement is in itself grossly discriminatory.

What chance is there that such crude stereotyping could lead to the resetting of a relationship based in respect? I wonder if other ethnic groups in this country would tolerate such a disrespectful public attack – Chinese? Scottish? – I doubt it. Such a statement would become a diplomatic outrage.

Beyond this, the statement invites us to believe in a characterisation of the problem that is grossly unfair to Aboriginal people and, also, demonstrably inaccurate. Of course we can accept that individuals have to take some responsibility for improving their situation, and making the best of the opportunities they have. However, the Prime Minister’s statement suggests that Aboriginal people are somehow responsible for the absence of jobs in remote parts of Australia, that Aboriginal people are responsible for inadequate and poor levels of schooling in many remote places, and that Aboriginal people are responsible for solving alcoholism in a way that white Australians cannot.

Did anyone brief our Prime Minister on Northern Territory Aboriginal people and their current precarious situation with their land having been compulsorily removed from their control by her Government? These are people who now live without equity in their own land. The legislation that treats Northern Territory Aboriginal families differently to all other Australians, and which has been roundly condemned by the United Nations (see Concluding Observations of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination), was passed in June 2010.

The Prime Minister suggests that her Government’s job is to support good decisions. I support this notion too. Who wouldn’t? These things are easy to say, but what do they really mean on the ground? And who decides what a good decision is?

The Prime Minister said:

So when the child goes to school, there is a great teacher ... when the drinker stops, they find a great counsellor ... when the adult takes the job, they have great skills.

That is what we are doing across Australia.

But in looking more closely at the Homeland Learning Centres of the Northern Territory, we find that children attending school do not have full-time qualified teachers and they never have had. And yet for years the parents have been crying out for teachers to come and educate their children - some have waited more than 25 years as more than an entire generation’s education has gone begging. The government is there to support good decisions, so how about listening to the parents and the communities who know what their children need?

Two years ago the decision was made by government to make changes to the Community Development Employment Project (CDEP). This has resulted in many formerly employed Aboriginal people in remote areas being forced to join unemployment queues. The program which, admittedly, may have benefitted from a review, provided employment to many people where there were no alternative sources of employment. The activities not only provided valuable support to communities but also formed the basis of much of the municipal work in these areas (see page 45 in this report.)

Some Aboriginal people had held their jobs for most of their working lives and were proud of them. Many of these workers are now for the first time sitting on unemployment benefits. The loss of earnings is tragic but the impact of this pales in comparison with the loss of pride and loss of skills.

So whose "good decision" was this? Some communities talk of having lost a hundred, even two hundred, jobs and very few have been replaced by "real" jobs. Surely we need better insight before launching such dramatic decisions, especially as they are now wreaking so much havoc in Northern Territory communities.

How can the decision-making improve? If the government’s aim is to support good decisions then it is critical in the Northern Territory that the government directly engage with local leaders and elders for their advice. Planning the future of the Northern Territory from Canberra will never be successful. Good decision-making will grow out of local knowledge, respect, and cooperation with local communities.

Good decision-making will only be possible when we are able as a nation to value our differences, to rejoice in the cultures and languages of our land, and to recognise that it is the role of good government to restore the rights over, and control of, their land to Aboriginal people and communities. This would be good decision-making ... but who is briefing our Prime Minister?

Those who are doing the briefing, those who are directing the strategies, can change - but it is our Prime Minister who must have the courage to change the government’s overall direction.

The message should not be one of simply encouraging Aboriginal people to "want what we want!", and to "catch up with us!". These are shallow, trite responses that do nothing to address the depth of the problem. We would do well to return to the Paul Keating Redfern speech to remind ourselves of the role we have played in the gross violation and dispossession of Australia’s Aboriginal peoples. We need to ask ourselves why we have managed so poorly to engage appropriately and fairly with Aboriginal people. We need to think afresh. We can do far better. It may well be time to turn back the clock and rectify the mistakes of the past.

Does our Prime Minister have the courage to move in the direction that very many Aboriginal people, and very many non-Aboriginal people, wish her to? Are we ready, after 223 years, to enter into a treaty that acknowledges the sovereign nations of this land? Are we ready to build a legally binding and respectful relationship that will carry us all into the future?

Now that would be a building block! And it would be a "good decision" worth supporting.