- Life expectancy at birth – 76% of other Australians.
- Imprisonment – 16 times higher than other Australians.
- Unemployment – almost four times higher.
- Hospital admissions for women following violent acts – 24 times higher.
- Median family income – 68% of other Australians.
And of the many things Australia hasn’t been good at in Indigenous affairs, one is the proper evaluation of policies and programs designed to improve the lives of Indigenous people.
We have tried this and tried that, each successive government asserting that its approach represents a better use of taxpayers’ dollars and is more likely to get results. But honest analysis of what works and what doesn’t has been virtually non-existent.
Advertisement
Which is why a recent paper on the success of practical reconciliation in improving the socio economic status of Indigenous Australians should be taken very seriously.
By analysing Australian Bureau of Statistics data over a 10-year period from 1991, Professor Jon Altman and Dr Boyd Hunter from the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research at the Australian National University compared the impact of policies in the Hawke/Keating years with those introduced by the current government.
They maintain there is no statistical basis to suggest that practical reconciliation is delivering better outcomes in the employment, housing, education, health or income status of Indigenous Australians.
In fact, in four out of five indicators, their labour force status relative to the rest of the population appears to have declined<./p>
Their median income has fallen and there has been a significant decline in the ratio of Indigenous to non-Indigenous participation in tertiary education.
Life expectancy at birth remains much lower for Indigenous Australians – about 20 years less than the wider population.
Advertisement
In looking at the reason why more money and greater flexibility have not made any significant impact under this era of practical reconciliation, Altman and Hunter note:
Obviously, reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians is not conditional on the achievement of equality of living standards across the two populations.
True reconciliation requires a dialogue between equals whereby each party comes to accept the diverse aspiration and beliefs of the others.
One of the major problems with the practical reconciliation agenda is that it fails to recognise that many of the practical outcomes highlighted are driven, directly and indirectly, by social, cultural and spiritual needs.
The reality is that progress on reconciliation must be judged against all measures. The practical and the symbolic sides are impossible to separate because a sense of who you are and how you feel about yourself is intrinsic to how you behave and how you address your own problems.
This is an edited version of a speech to the Mensa Annual Gathering in Brisbane on 15 November.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.