COAG Reconciliation Framework: Report on Progress in 2001
Contents
Communities and Governments in Partnership
Reporting Indigenous DataOverview
Investing in Community Leadership and Governance Initiatives
Reviewing and Re-engineering Programmes and Services
Promoting Economic IndependenceCOAG Reconciliation Framework: Report on Progress in 2001 in RTF and PDF formats
Introduction
In November 2000, COAG acknowledged the decade-long work of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation (CAR) and agreed on a framework through which governments would continue their efforts to advance reconciliation and address indigenous disadvantage. COAG agreed that continued action is needed from governments, the private sector, non-government organisations, indigenous communities and the wider community.
COAG agreed on three priority areas for governments:
- investing in community leadership and governance initiatives;
- reviewing and re-engineering programmes and services to ensure they deliver practical measures that support families, children and young people. COAG also agreed that governments should look at measures for tackling family violence, drug and alcohol dependency and other symptoms of community dysfunction; and
- forging greater links between the business sector and indigenous communities to help promote economic independence.
In addition to pursuing the priorities, all governments, in their own ways, continue to support reconciliation and promote recognition, respect and understanding between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians. COAG recognised that governments have an important role to play in supporting the efforts of community-based reconciliation and capacity building movements.
Governments have a particular responsibility for addressing social and economic disadvantage and for improving the way agencies do business with communities to get better outcomes. The COAG framework provides governments with a solid foundation for measuring any improvements and ensuring that changes are structurally based and sustainable. More recently, the framework has also provided the basis for thinking about how governments can work better together to progress change and become more responsive in addressing the needs of indigenous people at a community level. A process for moving this work forward is discussed in the section entitled "Future directions".
CAR recommended that governments develop a national system of regular and public performance reporting. COAG agreed that where they have not already done so, ministerial councils were to develop action plans, performance reporting strategies and benchmarks for addressing indigenous disadvantage. To complement this work and ensure that the reconciliation framework was underpinned by mechanisms for monitoring and accountability, COAG agreed to consider progress under the framework in twelve months and then periodically after that.
This report reviews activity under the reconciliation framework
in the first twelve months, with a focus on the response to the
three agreed priorities. The first part, "Future directions"
outlines a new focus on whole of government cooperation in partnership
with communities and suggests that COAG commission a report against
key indicators to underpin the reconciliation commitment and help
to inform potential changes in policy settings. The second section,
"COAG priorities" outlines progress in the three COAG
priority areas. The third section, "Ministerial Councils"
outlines the activities undertaken by ministerial councils, including
a table updating their progress to date.
Recommendations
1) That COAG reaffirm the commitment of all Australian governments to the important work of advancing reconciliation and addressing indigenous disadvantage;
2) That COAG:
(a) Agree to commission from the Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision (SCRCSSP) a regular report against key indicators on indigenous disadvantage.
(b) Further agree that the COAG senior officials working group on reconciliation will work with officials from the Ministerial Council for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (MCATSIA) on the development of indicators for the proposed report; and
(c) Further agree that, to assist in this work, MCATSIA will receive copies of ministerial council action plans and benchmarks and provide advice to COAG about where gaps remain and where further improvements can be made.
3) That COAG further agree that:
(a) Senior officials will oversee up to 10 trials of a whole?of?governments approach to addressing the needs of identified communities and regions, in cooperation with communities and ATSIC; and
(b) A progress report on development of the whole-of-government trials will be presented to COAG at its next meeting.
4) That COAG further agree that the next review of progress under the reconciliation framework will be provided by no later than the end of 2003, with details to be determined by the senior officials working group; and
5) That, in relation to the report on progress, COAG:
(a) Note the report on progress achieved by governments and ministerial councils in implementing the COAG reconciliation framework at Attachment 1; and
(b) Further agree to make the report publicly available, accompanied by an announcement on the development of the whole-of-governments approach.
Top 1. Future Directions
This report highlights that, despite some early successes in the implementation of the COAG priorities and continuing focus by jurisdictions on the priorities, significant barriers and gaps remain. This section highlights two areas where a particular focus could lead to real gains in addressing indigenous disadvantage and improving the capacity of all jurisdictions to measure the impact of efforts to do so.
TopCommunities and Governments in Partnership
COAG identified the need to build community governance and leadership and to re-engineer programmes to respond to local needs through effective partnerships between governments and communities.
All jurisdictions are increasing their efforts to work effectively with indigenous communities to better coordinate the design and delivery of programmes and services. While the approach to these issues differs between jurisdictions, the COAG senior officials working group is exploring ways to enable Commonwealth and state and territory governments to better integrate our efforts in service delivery to target specific communities or regions.
Options for achieving such improvement will involve building community capacity by assisting communities to improve their own governance capacity and address disadvantage. Governments will also need to examine critically the way in which services are funded and delivered. The aim will be to trial a whole of government approach in cooperation with up to ten selected communities or regions.
Under the new approach, communities that have identified their needs and priorities will be targeted. The Commonwealth and the state or territory would then collaborate with ATSIC, Aboriginal Land Councils, community representatives and other stakeholders to identify opportunities to refocus existing resources and deliver these in a more coordinated way to better address local needs. Building the capacity of communities is an important first step to enable the community to engage more effectively in decisions about the provision of services to them, whether these services are delivered by government, community controlled organisations or the private sector.
The Commonwealth and some jurisdictions have already entered into preliminary discussions about where such an approach could be trialed and a further announcement on these communities will be made following COAG. There is also an opportunity for Queensland and the Commonwealth to work collaboratively to address the issues of substance abuse and related community dysfunction in the Cape York region identified in the recently published Cape York Justice Study. Agreement has already been reached between the Commonwealth, Queensland and ATSIC for greater Commonwealth and state coordination to improve outcomes for Cape York communities.
Queensland: Cape York Justice Study
In August 2001, the Queensland government commissioned Justice Mr Tony Fitzgerald to undertake a study into law and justice issues on Cape York and to provide a report by November 2001 recommending how the Queensland government could improve outcomes for indigenous communities on Cape York. Queensland's indigenous communities have been consulted regarding the report and the outcome of these discussions will be provided to the Queensland government for its consideration in April 2002.
Breaking the nexus between alcohol and violence are at the heart of the study's recommendations and is seen as underlying the ability to achieve improved outcomes in other areas. Similarly greater integration of government effort at all levels and better use of existing resources is essential. A key mechanism proposed is to implement community developed and agreed action plans that focus on resolving issues relating to alcohol and substance abuse. The study points to government needing to develop simplified, integrated ways of assisting communities to overcome challenges and implement their action plans.
Since COAG met to consider this report, the Queensland government has tabled its response to the Cape York Justice Study. This response - 'Meeting Challenges, Making Choices' - is available at http://www.premiers.qld.gov.au/about/community/studies.htm.
The COAG senior officials working group on reconciliation will be exploring how to best use the high-level network of officials in first ministers' departments to implement the proposed approach.
As part of this process, Commonwealth, state and territory agencies will be encouraged to jointly explore models for reforming the delivery of mainstream and targeted programmes to communities through mechanisms such as funds or staff pooling and other arrangements that would build community capacity and improve programme coordination and service delivery.
One of COAG's identified priorities was to increase economic independence for indigenous people and to harness private sector involvement in this task. To that end, banking, industry and non-government interests could also be engaged in this process so that effective partnerships relevant to the needs of regions and communities can be fostered.
TopReporting Indigenous Data
Consistent with the emphasis on better outcomes and the need to improve the availability and quality of indigenous data in the November 2000 decision, we recommend that COAG commission a regular report against key indigenous indicators that would underpin the COAG commitment to reconciliation with a genuine accountability and performance measurement framework across all jurisdictions. The report could also be the impetus for greater whole-of-government cooperation on improving indigenous data collection and comparability.
It will be important to determine the right mix of indicators. They need to be indicators that are significant to indigenous people as lead indicators of indigenous wellbeing and that all governments agree are targeted at outcomes governments seek to achieve, are measurable and are sensitive to measuring change. Some indicators would need to provide time-series data to show movements over time and, where appropriate, be comparable with total population measures. The indicators will also need to provide a good balance of different jurisdictional responsibilities.
The report could cover a small set of agreed headline indicators (for example, the life expectancy gap) that would represent overarching, long-term goals for addressing indigenous disadvantage. The headline indicators would provide the broad context for a larger set of related causal indicators that are receptive to the policy and programme changes that governments have committed to as part of the reconciliation framework. One example is an indicator on year 3 and year 5 literacy results, which compared with unemployment statistics or year 12 retention rates, is more likely to drive necessary changes in junior-primary school systems that ultimately improve year 12 retention, university enrolments and employment outcomes. It is an indicator that the principal of a junior primary school might well respond to if his or her school was identified as under-performing. It is unlikely that a poor local employment statistic or a poor year 12 retention rate would drive many changes in junior-primary school policy or school and teaching practices.
MCATSIA has indicated in its action plan an intention to advise on the key indicators of social and economic disadvantage that COAG should monitor. MCATSIA officials will work with the COAG senior officials working group on reconciliation to develop indicators for this report. This partnership will build upon MCATSIA's expertise in this area and willingness to undertake this task as well as ensuring that the indicators meet COAG's needs.
The Steering Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision (SCRCSSP) may be the most appropriate body to produce the proposed report. The SCRCSSP has access to the necessary skills and resources to report performance across jurisdictions. In May 1997, the Prime Minister, with the agreement of Premiers and Chief Ministers, asked the SCRCSSP to give particular attention to the performance of mainstream services in meeting the needs of indigenous Australians. Since the Prime Minister's request the Report on Government Services has featured increased coverage of services to indigenous Australians, although it remains hampered by lack of cross-jurisdictional comparability and difficulties with indigenous identifiers.
Top2. COAG Priorities
This section provides a selective, rather than comprehensive, overview of jurisdictional effort in progressing COAG's commitments. It highlights some early successes as well as some barriers and gaps that need to be addressed in future work. A rigorous and on-going review process will ensure that the COAG priorities are not narrowly focussed and remain relevant to the needs of indigenous Australians.
TopOverview
The considerable efforts of the past to address indigenous disadvantage have brought mixed results, along with some important lessons about the critical elements of a more successful approach. Among the most important of these lessons is that local needs must be identified in partnership with indigenous people and effective outcomes depend on responsiveness to local community specifics. Governments agreed that they need to better work in ways that empower indigenous people, communities and organisations to develop capacity and leadership skills, otherwise improvements will not be achieved or will be short-lived.
Significant problems still exist in the way services are designed and delivered, the failure of agencies to coordinate their services and, in some instances, the absence of services appropriately targeted to the high levels of need. Jurisdictions have undertaken a range of activities in response to these problems. Although some new initiatives have been generated in response to the priorities COAG identified, a considerable amount of the work undertaken by the Commonwealth, states and territories has been based on pre-existing and ongoing activities. In most cases, however, these approaches have been re-evaluated in light of the COAG commitment to ensure that they are consistent with the reconciliation framework.
As the report shows, many of the initiatives will not yield immediate results. The priority areas address fundamental and systemic causes of indigenous disadvantage and these are not amenable to short-term solutions. Where the causes of disadvantage are multi-faceted, activity under the COAG framework in 2001 has shown that the key task is as much about breaking down inflexibilities within jurisdictions as it is about ensuring that the three tiers of government work well together and with communities. The failure of "one size fits all" approaches in urban, regional, rural and remote localities also cautions against rigidity. Furthermore, failures in the past have emphasised the importance of policy that is evidence based and incorporates ongoing mechanisms for evaluation and review and the need to work in partnership with communities to ensure that service design, delivery and content is appropriate to the community's needs.
A major area for ongoing focus is the role of local government. Local government is both a key provider of services to indigenous communities and an important entry point into decision-making processes at the local level. Local governments have a major role in providing better services to indigenous Australians and also as an avenue for indigenous involvement in decision-making and indigenous leadership development. They will be an essential part of the proposal to trial a whole of government approach outlined under "Future Directions". Under the COAG framework, the Local Government Ministers' Council is preparing an action plan to improve indigenous outcomes. Its implementation will be an important mechanism to ensure greater involvement of local government in the COAG reconciliation framework.
While COAG did not identify improvements in data as a separate priority, a key part of the 2000 COAG framework was to establish accountability and review mechanisms to measure progress under the framework. This emphasis on accountability provides the basis for the recommendation that COAG commission a report of key indicators to underpin the reconciliation framework.
TopInvesting in Community Leadership and Governance Initiatives
COAG committed to fostering indigenous leadership and to making significant changes to the relationship between indigenous communities and governments to respond to communities' calls for greater self-reliance and to strengthen the capacity of communities to address the widespread social and economic issues that they, together with governments, face. The degree of long-term and sustainable change that will result from COAG's commitment to reconciliation will depend very much on the extent to which communities have strong leadership, good governance structures and established partnerships with governments.
Initiatives in the area of leadership have followed three different approaches, categorised below as leadership development, capacity building and governance.
Leadership development: When there is only a small pool of community leadership, the pressures on that group are immense and diversity of perspective in decision making is constrained. Jurisdictions are assisting indigenous individuals and communities to identify and encourage individual leadership capacity, through targeted programmes and increasing indigenous representation in decision-making roles as well as through innovative relationships with the non-government and business sectors. An example of this latter approach is the Australian Indigenous Leadership Centre - which will provide training for 125 indigenous leaders over the next three years in governance, ethics, communication, negotiation, conflict resolution and networking - in partnership with Citigroup, a financial services company. The Centre has been assisted by funding from New South Wales and the Commonwealth.
It is important to target individual leadership initiatives to specific groups, such as indigenous women and youth, which may not otherwise have equal opportunities to participate in decision-making structures. One example of this approach is in Tasmania, where an indigenous women's forum has recently been formed to provide the opportunity for indigenous women to discuss issues that are important to them and to provide an avenue for input into policy development dealing with women's issues. One strategy coming from the forum is the need for culturally appropriate training and mentoring programs to assist indigenous women aspiring to leadership roles in their community, in local government and other advisory boards and committees. In late 2001, the Australian Capital Territory government agreed to support the establishment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Youth Forum. The Forum, youth service providers, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community organisations and the government will work in partnership to develop an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth strategy to target issues identified by the community and develop local solutions to address them.
Leadership is not just about assisting individuals to develop skills and abilities. In Western Australia, the Community Action Groups initiative is an innovative approach to community leadership that brings together key elements of the COAG framework, but is focussed on families, rather than individuals or community organisations.
Western Australia: Community Action Groups
In Western Australia, Community Action Groups are designed to enable the extended family group to become the basis for leadership and participation. Extended family groups are important in indigenous culture and the concept is a response to indigenous communities' desire for family groups to have an equal say on community issues and to overcome the problem created by 'one vote one value' superseding clan-based concepts of fairness.
The CAG initiative begins with communities undertaking a 'family mapping' exercise where they identify family and clan linkages within their community. Each of the larger extended family groups then nominate a spokesperson and a back-up person to represent them on the Community Action Group (in the south west of Western Australia) or the Community Council (in the far north of Western Australia). The groups are subsequently provided with 'capacity building' support while they develop their own ways of holding meetings, keeping minutes, electing a Chairperson and planning actions. They identify issues they see as priorities for the community and then undertake negotiations with the relevant agencies in order to address their concerns.
The approach enables indigenous people to define 'community' in their terms, to align leadership with the family based authority structures of their culture and to develop forms of decision making which reinforce traditional values such as equality between families.
Capacity Building: Jurisdictions are also assisting communities to develop the necessary governance capacity to ensure that communities arrive at decisions through the exercise of legitimate authority via established structures, both community and institutional. Building community capacity targets individual and community skills in the areas of resource management, planning, advocacy, negotiation, conflict resolution and decision-making.
Jurisdictions' capacity building efforts have also targeted specific issues such as strengthening indigenous culture. New South Wales, for example, is developing an Aboriginal languages policy aimed at promoting the revival and long-term survival of Aboriginal languages. The policy will better coordinate existing language programmes and will also develop protocols about who teaches Aboriginal languages and which languages are taught in what areas.
The approach to community leadership development across jurisdictions has combined practical, programme-based efforts with more systemic changes to the relationship between governments and indigenous communities. The process for the more systemic changes differs across jurisdictions, but the broad themes of capacity building and working in partnership are common to all approaches. So too are the barriers, in the form of fragmented service delivery and inflexible programme guidelines and structures. The second COAG priority, re-engineering programmes and service delivery, is aimed at addressing these barriers.
Commonwealth: Capacity Building and Community Participation
In a new measure announced as part of Australians Working Together, the Commonwealth is assisting indigenous communities to strengthen community governance arrangements, leadership capacity and community participation and cohesion. To this end, $31 million over four years was provided through the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) to assist up to 94 communities.
Development work is under way with number of communities to implement this initiative, including Mutitjulu in the Northern Territory and the Murdi Paaki ATSIC region of New South Wales. The early experience has shown that those communities that have shown interest need to undertake comprehensive developmental work before being effectively able to address specific needs. The key ingredients for the success of this new approach will be active and sustained commitment by all parties and a willingness to embrace change.
This measure targets the development of good governance structures in the communities, including recognised legitimacy in decision making and mechanisms for conflict resolution. The measure will assist with this development process, while recognising that the entrenched nature of welfare dependency and marginalisation from the mainstream economy will not change overnight.
Governance: In addition to supporting individual leaders, governments also need to implement the structural arrangements to enable these leaders to engage as partners with government. Better governance is not just about improvements at the community level. Better governance also means that the Commonwealth, states and territories need to change the way they interact with communities, to achieve genuine partnerships. Examples include agreements such as that being negotiated in New South Wales, between ATSIC, the NSW Aboriginal Land Council and the New South Wales government. This partnership will help all parties undertake more effective planning of services, better coordination of existing services and help mainstream government agencies provide services to Aboriginal communities. Western Australia has also successfully negotiated an agreement with ATSIC based on a partnership framework and the establishment of high level consultative structures such as the Indigenous Affairs Advisory Committee. The new government in the Northern Territory is also giving priority to the development of a Framework Agreement and Regional Agreements designed to achieve specific regional outcomes. In Victoria, the Premier's Aboriginal Advisory Council was established in May 2000 to provide high level advice to the Victorian Government on priorities and strategic directions in Aboriginal affairs. The Council's membership includes the Victorian Premier, the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, the ATSIC State Commissioner and the two ATSIC Regional Council Chairpersons. In the Australian Capital Territory, all seventeen members of the Legislative Assembly met with ATSIC Commissioners on 20 February 2002, to demonstrate a commitment to reconciliation and to discuss issues of significance to indigenous people in Canberra.
In response to concerns about continuing poverty and poor health in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands, a group of Commonwealth and state government Chief Executives have joined with the community in developing an action plan to improve Anangu capacity to manage emerging issues; to ensure that the Anangu have access to services needed to sustain their health and well-being; and to design and deliver services in a manner that respects Anangu hopes and aspirations. The Anangu Pitjantjatjara hold inalienable rights to some 103 000 square kilometres in the north west of SA, home to 3000 Pitjantjatjara, Yankunytjatjara and Ngaanyatjara Anangu, who are the traditional owners of the lands.
Other agreements specifically relate to better service delivery. A memorandum of understanding has also been signed between South Australia's Department of Human Services, the Ceduna Council, Aboriginal communities and service providers to work together to develop the infrastructure for the Town Camp for Anangu visitors to Ceduna and for permanently homeless Ceduna visitors. The Indigenous Housing Authority of the Northern Territory (IHANT) was created through a tri-lateral agreement between ATSIC, the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory in 1995 for joint planning and management of pooled funds in the Northern Territory so that better housing outcomes are achieved for indigenous people. The two ATSIC Commissioners and the seven chairmen of the ATSIC Regional Councils in the Territory form the majority representation on the IHANT Board who decide the distribution of funds between regions. The ATSIC Regional Councils subsequently decide the allocation of funds within each region for housing construction, housing maintenance and management and housing upgrades and skills development. IHANT continues to develop good practice in the generation of community capacity and leadership initiatives. Most recently, it has provided support to the Papunya Regional Council to develop a new regional model for housing construction that will provide savings through economies of scale and deliver significant training and employment outcomes.
Another example of government restructuring its own approach to doing business with indigenous communities is in Queensland, under the Cape York Partnerships approach.
Queensland: Cape York Partnerships Approach
In partnership with Cape York communities, the Queensland government formed Cape York Partnerships in 1999 as an ongoing strategy to facilitate improved outcomes. In 2001 as part of Cape York Partnerships, an Economic Development Strategy was developed, that aims to:
- Provide a framework for Government action and input into the CYP Negotiation Table process, on economic and employment matters;
- Support the development and maintenance of social, cultural, capital capacity and infrastructure within the region;
- Establish specific economic development and employment projects within each indigenous Community on the Cape;
- Increase total employment within the region;
- Increase the proportion of indigenous people within the labour force in the region;
- Increase the volume of cash circulating within the regional economy;
- Increase the Gross Regional Product (GRP) of the region; and
- Facilitate the growth of indigenous owned enterprise on Cape York.
The use of negotiation tables is being trialed and developed to provide a mechanism to enable communities to have direct input into how and what type of government programmes and services are provided to their community and to reach agreement on priorities. Negotiation tables bring together representatives from relevant government agencies and community representatives to sit down together and discuss community priorities. In August 2001 a negotiation table was held at Mossman Gorge where a community action plan agreed on the provision of infrastructure, education, economic development priorities, along with the resolution of outstanding land transfer issues. In October 2001 a negotiation table was held at Lockhart River and in November at Aurukun. Agreement was reached on the need for an overall community development plan for Lockhart River and this is now underway. The Aurukun process focussed on land and sea management issues and resulted in a partnership to implement a Training/Employment Programme between the communities of Aurukun, Napranum and will possibly include Mapoon with the Queensland Departments of Primary Industries, Employment and Training, Education Queensland and TAFE. Further negotiation tables are planned for 2002 in Torres Strait and in St George and Sarina.
TopReviewing and Re-Engineering Programmes and Services
To ensure services respond to the local needs of families, children and young people, COAG agreed that programmes should emphasise prevention and early intervention, with a particular focus on family violence, drug and alcohol dependency, and symptoms of community dysfunction. Jurisdictions have, in consultation with indigenous stakeholders, reviewed their service delivery arrangements and where necessary, re-engineered programmes to improve flexibility and appropriate responses. More work needs to be done to maximise programme flexibility and to ensure that all three levels of government work better with each other as well as within jurisdictions.
Jurisdictions have interpreted this priority quite broadly. The Commonwealth, for example, has undertaken a review process in key portfolios to ensure that service delivery is well targeted at the local level, offers integrated responses and that programme guidelines are sufficiently flexible to allow for community-driven responses. Other jurisdictions have addressed specific issues through targeted family violence initiatives, substance abuse programmes and state-wide justice agreements underpinned by local crime prevention strategies to address the high rate of indigenous contact with the criminal justice system. A mix of early intervention and prevention measures combined with programmes that target the acute symptoms of disadvantage is essential.
Aboriginal Justice Initiatives
South Australia's efforts to reduce indigenous contact with the criminal justice system have involved the establishment of a Community Constable scheme in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands; a specialist court for adult Aboriginal defendants that sits at Port Adelaide one day per fortnight; Aboriginal justice officers employed in an educative capacity; alternatives to detention; Aboriginal language interpreters and a Family Conference team established to divert young offenders from the criminal justice system and assist them and their communities to cope with the consequences of their offences.
The Victorian Aboriginal Justice Agreement (VAJA) is a partnership between four Government Ministers, ATSIC and the Victorian Aboriginal Justice Advisory Committee. The agreement was entered during Reconciliation Week 2000 and has the overall aim of minimising indigenous over-representation in the criminal justice system by improving accessibility, utilisation, and effectiveness of justice-related programs and services. The associated state wide action plan includes initiatives to build capacity within the indigenous community to advise government on implementation of the agreement. In 2001-02 nine Local Aboriginal Justice Advisory Committees have been established and resourced, and programme and service reviews commenced within Victoria Police and corrections.
The New South Wales Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council Circle Sentencing pilot commenced in Nowra in November 2001. The two-year trial will be administered from Nowra Local Court House and will involve local Aboriginal communities directly in the sentencing process. The trial will be evaluated after two years. Circle sentencing is an alternative sentencing process and involves taking the sentencing court to a community setting where Aboriginal community members and the Magistrate sit in a circle to discuss the offence and the offender. Circle sentencing complements existing diversionary schemes and provides a further sentencing format for New South Wales Magistrates. It also allows for greater Aboriginal involvement in the criminal justice process, particularly at the community level and aims to increase Aboriginal satisfaction with the operations of the criminal justice system.
The Queensland Government Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Justice Agreement signed in December 2000 specifies a target to reduce by 50% the rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people incarcerated in the Queensland criminal justice system by 2011. Monitoring and evaluating programs which maximise the use of cautions, community conferences, summonses, court attendance notices and referrals to community justice groups as alternative to arrest charging and incarceration are among the key strategies being implemented as a result of the Agreement.
Better coordination is essential but not the only answer. Improvements will come not just from better coordination within and between governments but also from systemic change in the relationship between communities and agencies. Better coordination will not help unless programmes are targeted towards the right outcomes and respond to community identified needs. For example, the Commonwealth Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS) is trialing a weekly rather than fortnightly payment structure to aid income management in Alice Springs, in response to requests from the Tangentyere community and in partnership between FaCS, Centrelink, ATSIC, Westpac and the Tangentyere Community Council.
Most jurisdictions have focussed on indigenous-specific measures that target the causes and symptoms of community dysfunction. While indigenous-targeted measures are essential to address the specific problems of indigenous communities, greater attention should be also given to the responsiveness of mainstream programmes to indigenous needs. This message has been reinforced by the release of the Commonwealth Grants Commission Inquiry into Indigenous Funding 2001, which has highlighted the need to improve the performance of mainstream, as well as indigenous-specific programmes.
Mainstream programmes need to work harder to meet the needs of indigenous people rather than assume that indigenous-specific programmes will supplement services. While it is important to have targeted programmes that meet indigenous-specific needs, if mainstream services do not do their part, this places an unreasonable burden on indigenous-specific services.
Families First in New South Wales
NSW's approached to reviewing services and emphasising prevention has focussed on support to children and their families during their early years of life, through their Families First initiative.
Under Families First, government and non-government agencies are working in partnership to provide a better network of support to families with young children. For Aboriginal families, this has meant agencies working together to bring mainstream health, education and family support services directly to Aboriginal communities.
Under Families First, the Communities 4 Aboriginal Kids project is funding experienced and skilled Aboriginal Community Development Officers to work with Aboriginal communities to find out what they want for their children and how Families First can support them in achieving their vision. This is being done by engaging Aboriginal families, communities and services in the planning, service development and implementation of the services that are provided to Aboriginal families.
The objectives are to:
- Promote in Aboriginal communities and with service providers, the importance of children's early years and the value of supporting families.
- Identify in what ways Aboriginal families and communities want to receive more support in raising their children
- Assist current and potential service providers (Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal) to develop and deliver family projects and services that are culturally appropriate and accessible to Aboriginal families.
- Facilitate improved communication between key Aboriginal and other community stakeholders.
The partnership between Maari Ma Aboriginal Medical Service and the local Area Health Service is a good example of mainstream services working together with indigenous-specific services to improve outcomes for Aboriginal people. In addition to delivering primary health care services to Aboriginal people in New South Wales, Maari Ma provides management services to the public health system to ensure that the public health system better meets the needs of Aboriginal people. Maari Ma has been given management responsibility for six mainstream health services. It also manages a coordinated care trial in Wilcannia, whereby agencies pool money from the state and the Commonwealth to buy health related services.
Another important area where mainstream services require improvement is in the area of child protection and the question of why child protection systems are failing indigenous communities.
Western Australia: Response by Government Agencies to Complaints of Family Violence and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities.
The Premier of Western Australia announced a state government inquiry into the physical and sexual abuse of children in Aboriginal communities on 28 December 2001, appointing a three person panel to investigate issues arising from the inquest into the death of a 15 year old girl at the Swan Valley Nyoongar Community Camp in 1999. A key component of the inquiry will be the way government agencies respond to evidence of family violence and child sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities generally.
Specifically, the inquiry will:
- Examine the activities of state government departments in addressing complaints and the reporting of sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities.
- Identify the barriers and capacity of government agencies to address the issue of family violence and in particular child sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities.
- Comment and make recommendations on the mandatory reporting of sexually transmitted diseases occurring among children and juveniles.
- Comment on any limitations of DNA testing in the Aboriginal community.
- Propose support measures for children reporting abuse.
The Inquiry includes two Aboriginal members - Perth Children's Court Magistrate Sue Gordon (Chair) and psychologist and Yorgum Aboriginal Counselling Service manager Darryl Henry. The third member of the Inquiry is former Community Services Minister Kay Hallahan, also current chairperson of the national board of the Save the Children Fund.
The inquiry commenced at the end of January 2002 with a budget of $1 million, and will report back to the government by 31 July 2002 with practical solutions for addressing incidents of sexual abuse in Aboriginal communities, including any necessary legislative and administrative measures.
A key part of improving services lies in better data, particularly in mainstream services, to ensure that they understand the needs of indigenous clients better. The Commonwealth is working to include an indigenous identifier in the Medical Benefits Scheme data set and in the Public Housing data set in order to access detailed information on the circumstances of indigenous communities in the key areas of health and housing. Under Tasmania Together - the overarching social, environmental and economic plan for Tasmania - there are 24 goals supported by 212 agreed benchmarks. One of these goals (Goal 10) is specifically targeted at improved outcomes for the state's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community. This goal includes 14 benchmarks, a number of which directly relate to the objectives of the COAG Framework. An independent progress board reporting to the Tasmanian parliament will chart achievements against these benchmarks.
TopPromoting Economic Independence
COAG identified economic independence as a necessary element of a long-term, sustainable strategy to address disadvantage and combat welfare dependency. Indigenous Australians' lower access to paid employment has led to higher levels of welfare reliance and higher dependency on government to provide services. As Noel Pearson has argued, this has resulted in indigenous people being locked into what he calls a "gammon" (or token) economy rather than a real economy. Without adequate participation in mainstream paid employment, indigenous people remain engaged in passive relationships with the government, where they are the recipients of income, goods and services, without control over their production or allocation. The lack of skilled workers in some communities also means that many goods and services must be purchased externally, at considerable expense. Furthermore, where services are provided by non-indigenous people, this is sometimes to the detriment of culturally sensitive service delivery.
By and large, jurisdictions' responses to the task of promoting economic independence have been situated within the context of existing commitments and approaches, although some new activity has been undertaken. Some jurisdictions (for example, Queensland and New South Wales) have hosted business summits and a number have also focussed on the brokerage role that governments can play in facilitating connections between indigenous communities and business.
Assisting the business sector to work with indigenous communities
The Western Australian government released in November 2001 a booklet aimed at enhancing relationships between business and the Aboriginal community called 'Working with Aboriginal Communities - A Practical Approach'. It was prepared to improve direct communication and understanding between Aboriginal people and businesses, especially in remote and rural areas, and to help promote mutually beneficial relationships and avoid unnecessary conflict. It covers subject matter including the recognition of different types of Aboriginal sites, respectful practices when meeting Aboriginal people, Aboriginal kinship, consultation and discussion of proposals.
The Northern Territory government held an Economic Development Summit in November 2001, which brought together industry, business and community representatives to obtain views and help set strategies for the economic development of the Territory. An important outcome was a productive dialogue between indigenous and non-indigenous representatives that promoted a new understanding of each other's perspective.
In Victoria the Koori Business Network (KBN) supports new and existing indigenous businesses by facilitating the development of networks between Koori businesses and between Koori and mainstream business groups. Regionally based Aboriginal Business Support Officers provide businesses with an information and referral service linked to a wide network of government and private sector agencies. KBN also fosters and promotes partnerships for indigenous economic development. Initiatives in 2001 included indigenous business showcases, statewide forums, and the development of Australia's first indigenous business incubator.
In New South Wales, the Premier hosted in July 2001 the Budyari Ngalaya: First Peoples' Business Partnership Breakfast. Initiatives to assist companies and Aboriginal people form business alliances include a business development task force, a partnership broker, an Expo to showcase Aboriginal enterprises and a website and casebook of good practice. NSW is also developing an Aboriginal Communities Economic Development Strategy.
The Australian Capital Territory government provides ongoing support to the Indigenous Business Chamber and is currently working with the Chamber to develop a strategy to facilitate economic opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the ACT.
The priority identifies the need to forge better links between the business sector and indigenous communities. Where there is a reasonably strong labour market, labour market programmes are also an important road to economic independence for indigenous people, rather than relying on the establishment of small businesses alone. Increasing the number of indigenous people in mainstream employment is being made possible through new initiatives that encourage a transition from CDEP into mainstream work, the assistance of other intermediaries such as Job Network, and the establishment of strategic alliances with large private sector employers such as mining companies who in many cases already have established relationships with indigenous communities. Whole of community strategies, such as the one that exists in Moree through the Gwydir Valley Cotton Growers Association (funded in part through the Commonwealth Indigenous Employment Policy) also provide employment opportunities in rural areas while at the same time advancing reconciliation and understanding between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians.
Indigenous Business Australia
In April 2001, Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) took responsibility for the operation of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commercial Development Corporation (CDC) with the aim of forging partnerships between indigenous people and corporate Australia. While IBA receives no recurrent funding, its initial asset base was provided by the Commonwealth to the CDC. IBA develops commercially viable joint ventures to enable indigenous Australians to acquire equity in a number of large businesses and provide opportunities for employment.
Indigenous Business Australia has current investments of $48 million in twenty-nine Australian businesses. One example is the Gagudju Crocodile Holiday Inn and the Gagudju Lodge Cooinda in the Northern Territory's Kakadu National Park. These businesses are jointly owned by IBA and the area's traditional owners, the Gagudju Association. Commonwealth funding assists indigenous trainees to complete hospitality certificates and gain employment in both the lodge and the hotel.
The recruitment and retention of indigenous staff within the public sector is also used as a significant way to expand the skills and managerial capacity of future indigenous leaders as well as contributing to economic independence. In Tasmania, for example, a range of initiatives is under way. The state government has created identified positions for indigenous people, established an Aboriginal employment register to fill casual vacancies and traineeships with indigenous people and a dedicated Aboriginal Employment Policy Officer works to assist indigenous people and state agencies with employment issues. In Queensland an Indigenous Employment Policy has been introduced requiring state government building and construction contracts in Deed-of-Grant-in-Trust communities and three other shires to include 20% of the labour hours from the local community and that half of those employed to be in structured training.
Nevertheless, the capacity of public sector employment to deliver economic independence for indigenous Australians is limited and the commitment of the private sector to this process also needs to be strengthened. One example is the Corporate Leaders for Indigenous Employment Project (under the Commonwealth's Indigenous Employment Policy). As at the end of January 2002, 57 major Australian companies have signed up to the Project. Under this Project, these companies have committed to providing over 2000 job opportunities for indigenous Australians.
Another key element of indigenous economic independence lies in gaining benefits from land. This includes statutory indigenous land rights schemes that pre-date the recognition of native title and benefits that can be gained from native title. The amendments to the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993 introduced Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs). ILUAs registered by the National Native Title Tribunal are legally binding agreements made between native title parties and those wishing to use the land or access the land's resources, such as governments and miners. They offer a flexible and cooperative way of dealing with land management issues. ILUAs can help the economic independence of native title parties where in exchange for the consent of the native title parties, the other parties to the ILUA agree to provide them with employment opportunities, educational programs, infrastructure or production payments. At the end of 2001, approximately 34 ILUAs had been registered in Australia and many more were being negotiated.
The Western Australian government has also adopted a new approach to native title that favours mediation over litigation with determinations based on consent. These outcomes aim to encourage leadership and self-reliance and have positive social and economic implications for Aboriginal groups. For example, the Tjurabalan determination included a post-determination agreement allowing for the transfer of Aboriginal Lands Trust holdings to the Tjurabalan people. It is intended that the Prescribed Body Corporate arising from the native title determination will administer the native title rights and interests. Notable economic opportunities arising from this could include the ability to negotiate access fees for mining companies, the increased pastoral holdings of the Tjurabalan Pastoral Company and the employment opportunities associated with a proposed Conservation and Land Management program in the Lake Gregory area.
More effort is needed in providing training in financial management skills and business development, through the use of mentoring and training. In the Australian Capital Territory, the government provides a mentoring programme that aims to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people working in the private sector. As well as providing assistance to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, the programme also aims to raise the awareness of non-Aboriginal and non-Torres Strait Islanders employers to issues of cultural diversity through the provision of cultural awareness training. Reconciliation Australia will host a conference on banking and finance in indigenous communities in May 2002. Limited access to banking finance and emerging business technologies, such as e-commerce and internet trading also means that these new entrepreneurial avenues are not readily available to indigenous Australians.
Tasmania: Financial assistance to increase indigenous home ownership
The Tasmanian state government provides funding to the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre to assist Aboriginal first homebuyers with the payment of stamp duties. The assistance generally averages 10 first homebuyers per financial year. This initiative recognises that home ownership is a key element of economic independence and seeks to address the imbalance that exists between rates of home ownership for indigenous people compared to all Australians.
Top3. Ministerial Councils
The task assigned to ministerial councils is a central part of the COAG framework. It has the potential to lead to improved outcomes, better measurement of this improvement and better cooperation between ministerial councils and with indigenous stakeholders. Unfortunately, with the exception of MCATSIA, the Housing Ministers' Conference and the Community Services Ministers' Conference, and those ministerial councils which have been monitoring performance for some time, such as the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), the Australian National Training Authority and the Australian Health Ministers' Council, ministerial councils have yet to finalise action plans or establish agreed performance monitoring strategies and benchmarks. Attachment 1.A contains detailed updates on ministerial councils' activities to date.
While progress has been disappointing, a number of ministerial councils are already successfully undertaking the task of developing indigenous action plans and performance reporting strategies. For example, in March 2000, MCEETYA approved the publication and dissemination of two significant documents on national goals and models for effective schooling. Both documents are used to inform state-wide and school-based policy and programme development, to audit existing policy and programmes and to support the development of more effective partnerships between schools and their indigenous communities. Nevertheless, while MCEETYA has agreed to regularly publish learning outcomes for year 3 and year 5 literacy, in the most recent Report on Government Services, only limited 1999 learning outcomes data was published.
In May 2001, Commonwealth, state and territory housing ministers approved a statement of new directions for indigenous housing, Building a Better Future: Indigenous Housing to 2010 (BABF). In BABF, ministers committed to providing safe, healthy and sustainable housing for indigenous people. It was agreed that all jurisdictions will report annually to housing ministers and the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs on achievements against the outcomes in BABF. Housing ministers also agreed to focus efforts on helping indigenous community housing organisations improve their housing management and maintenance capacity.
The emphasis must be on facilitating partnerships between those ministerial councils that can have the greatest effect. Key ministerial councils have been encouraged to work together in areas where joint actions would yield better results, such as early childhood. This collaboration between MCEETYA, the Australian Health Ministers' Conference and the Community Services Ministers' Conference has the potential to be used as a future model for other ministerial councils.
Early Childhood
MCEETYA has produced a discussion paper titled Solid Foundations: Health and Education Partnerships for Indigenous Children Aged 0 to 8 Years. Both the Australian Health Ministers' Conference and the Community Services Ministers' Conference have considered the paper. Responses from both have been very positive and supportive, with a joint health/education working group proposed for establishment in 2002. Simultaneously, at the end of 2001, the chair of MCEETYA's new Taskforce on Indigenous & Targeted Initiatives of National Significance wrote to AHMAC proposing a joint meeting. These initiatives will get under way early in 2002, with proposals for joint action between the Health, Community Services, Education and Training Ministers to be presented to the relevant Ministerial Councils during the first half of 2002.
In June 2001, MCATSIA wrote to other ministerial councils offering advice and appropriate support in implementing the COAG reconciliation framework. MCATSIA hosted a workshop in Perth in July 2001 to provide advice on the development of benchmarks and the role that MCATSIA would play in working with other ministerial councils and providing systemic advice to COAG on the quality of what ministerial councils produce, what gaps remain and where further improvements can be made. One of the key messages from the workshop was the need to improve links between ministerial councils to help reduce systemic barriers that impede progress on indigenous issues; and the importance of developing action plans in partnership with indigenous people and communities (including, but not limited to, ATSIC).
In its action plan MCATSIA has identified two actions relating
to the plans developed by other ministerial councils. These actions
are to identify where the gaps are, by reviewing ministerial council
action plans, performance reporting strategies and benchmarks; and
to comment on the extent to which the action plans are addressing
the gaps that have been identified. MCATSIA met in March 2002 and
will meet again in September 2002 and will consider the action plans
that have been forwarded to COAG by September.
| MINISTERIAL |
RECONCILIATION ACTIVITIES |
Australian |
A report was due to be considered by the Council in November 2001, however, this meeting was cancelled due to the Federal election. An updated report including progress with the development of an action plan, performance reporting strategies and benchmarks for Aboriginal Reconciliation will be considered at the next Council meeting in May 2002. In the meantime, the Council's senior officials group, the Standing Committee on Transport (SCOT) has requested that, with respect to the three key outcome areas identified by COAG, each transport agency should examine and report, by 30 June 2002, on the contribution it can make by:
SCOT also agreed to the establishment of a working group/contact
group comprising representatives from all jurisdictions and
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC),
to identify 3-4 focus areas to progress the process.A final
plan including agreed actions, performance reporting strategies
and benchmarks is expected to be considered by Ministers in
November 2002. |
Cultural |
Cultural Ministers' Council (CMC) has not met since the COAG commitment was made.CMC, meeting in Melbourne on 1 May 2002, will consider a draft Action Plan and related material being developed by a Working Group of Senior Officials under the CMC Standing Committee. The chairing role of the Working Group - agreed in 2001 - has been the subject of lengthy review. Now chaired by NSW, and comprising representatives of QLD, NT and the Commonwealth, the Working Group has recently agreed to a process for compiling a Report to Ministers comprising inputs from all jurisdictions, and including proposals for consideration by CMC that would be consistent with the priority focus areas identified and agreed by COAG to advance reconciliation. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: VIC |
Environment Protection and
Heritage |
The new Environment Protection and Heritage Ministerial Council brings in NEPC and Heritage Ministers Meeting. The draft Action Plan was considered by the Environment Protection and Heritage (EPH) Standing Committee on 30 November 2001. The EPH Standing Committee resolved to adopt the draft EPHC Action Plan subject to any comments by MCATSIA, and to further consider transmitting the Action Plan to the Council following receipt of any comments from MCATSIA. The draft Action Plan was sent to MCATSIA for comment on 7 December 2001. The MCATSIA Secretariat expects to be able to provide comment from the relevant MCATSIA working group to EPHC in the near future. The EPH Standing Committee will next consider the Action Plan on 21 March 2002 for transmittal to the Council. The Council meeting at which the Action Plan will be considered is expected to be held on 2 or 3 May 2002. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: WA |
Health and |
(a) The AHMC Action Plan will report on key cross jurisdictional initiatives and performance monitoring in relation to improving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health status. The action plan provides for reporting on progress in the development of joint action plans for service policy, funding and delivery. The AHMC action plan is expected to be finalised shortly. (b) An interim response from the Community Services Ministers' Conference has been sent to the Prime Minister as Chair of COAG. Further information on the benchmarks and performance monitoring strategies will be provided later in the year. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth/SA |
Housing |
The Housing Ministers Conference met in May 2001 in Alice Springs and endorsed the paper 'Building a Better Future - Indigenous Housing to 2010'. The HMC response has now been forwarded to the Prime Minister, including a copy of 'Building a Better Future'. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: NT |
Immigration and Multicultural
|
The development of an action plan to support the COAG reconciliation framework was placed on the agenda of the MCIMA meeting held in Sydney, 19-20 April 2001. A working party has been established to develop an action plan, performance reporting strategies and benchmarks. The action plan is still being developed but it is expected that MCIMA will finalise its response at its next meeting in April 2002. The Plan is expected to include the following elements:
Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Tasmania |
Industry and Technology |
The object of the Industry and Technology Ministers' Council is to develop sustainable, internationally competitive Australian industry, to support and promote Australian science, innovation and technology and ensure Australia's attractiveness as an investment location. As such the target of Council activities and associated awareness strategies is most commonly a firm rather than an individual, local or community group. Due to the timing of the COAG review of ministerial councils, the new ITMC has not yet had a formal meeting. However, at an informal meeting in April last year, Commonwealth, state and territory ministers agreed to include, where appropriate, issues of indigenous economic development. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth. |
Local |
A consultant, engaged by the Australian Local Government Association on behalf of the Local Government Minister's Council, has completed an 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Reconciliation Action Plan'. The draft plan was sent to members of LOGJOG for comment in October 2001. The draft plan will be considered at the next LOGJOG meeting which is yet to be scheduled. The draft plan will then be considered at the first meeting of the newly formed Local Government and Planning Ministers' Conference. The meeting schedule has been affected by the late appointment of the Commonwealth Minister. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: NT |
Minister's |
At the Women's Official's Meeting of 15-16 November 2001 a working group of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander policy officers from various states met to provide advice to the Women's Official's Meeting as to the direction of the Action Plan. A national framework will be developed which will address overarching issues. Each state and territory will develop, through community consultation, locally applicable action plans that will become attachments to the national plan. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: ACT |
Ministerial |
Following earlier initiatives under MCEETYA during the period of the 1990s, in March 2000 MCEETYA approved the publication and dissemination of two significant documents. The Statement of Principles and Standards for More Culturally Inclusive Schooling in the 21st Century was structured to reinforce and complement the (then) new National Goals for Schooling in the 21st Century, also adopted by the Ministerial Council at that same meeting. The second document, the Model for More Culturally Inclusive and Educationally Effective Schools with the Statement, was similarly widely distributed. Both documents were used in a variety of ways to inform statewide and school-based policy and programme development. They were also used to support the professional development of school principals and teachers.Both documents are in broad use in all jurisdictions, and they are being used to audit existing policy and programmes and to support the development of more effective partnerships between schools and their indigenous communities. At the July 2001 Council meeting, in addition to receiving a progress report on the implementation of the above two documents, the Ministerial Council also noted four new information papers:
These papers form the basis of significant additional initiatives to address key indigenous issues in the early childhood, vocational education & training, and higher education sectors .In terms of educational measurement and reporting, important progress has been made in reaching definitional agreement so that data will be rigorous and consistent. In March 2000, MCEETYA endorsed the adoption of the ABS standard for identifying indigenous students for the purposes of reporting nationally comparable outcomes against the National Goals. These data are published annually through the Annual National Report on Schooling in Australia (ANR), produced by MCEETYA. This decision ensures that data in the key focus areas of Literacy, Numeracy, Science, VET in Schools, Information & Communication Technology, Civics & Citizenship, and Participation & Attainment, will be gathered in ways that are accurate and that provide rich trend data, over time. Together with the related data gathered against the performance indicators and targets central to the Commonwealth's Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Programme (IESIP - running, in effect, since 1989), these directions are starting to produce a much clearer and sharper picture of measured progress. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: VIC |
Ministerial |
The Australian and New Zealand Minerals and Energy Council (ANZMEC) was disbanded in June 2001. Immediately prior to this the Federal Minister for Industry, Science and Resources launched the "Working in Partnership - the Mining Industry and Indigenous Communities" programme which aimed to "support and encourage the cultural change that is taking place in relations between the mining industry and indigenous communities and to promote long term partnerships between indigenous communities and the exploration andmining industry". Two new Ministerial Councils have been formed: 1. The Ministerial Council on Mineral and Petroleum Resources (MCMPR). 2. The Ministerial Council on Energy (MCE). MCMPR officials had finalised the Council's action plan which was submitted to the Council for its consideration at its inaugural meeting on 4 March 2002. Council agreed that it could not agree to the plan as it stood and directed that officials review the plan and submit another draft for Ministers' consideration out of session. Work at officials' level on a new plan is currently under way. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth/NT |
Ministerial |
The Ministerial Council on Energy (MCE) has had its own Working Party prepare a draft 'Indigenous Action Plan' which was put to a meeting of the Standing Committee of Officials on 19 February 2002. MCE considered a draft of the plan on 15 March 2002 and requested that further work be undertaken before the plan is provided to COAG. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: NT |
Ministerial |
MCATSIA has developed an Action Plan that has been approved by the Prime Minister. MCATSIA is now focused on implementing this action plan and will work closely with other ministerial councils to assist in finalising their action plans. Work on appropriate performance indicators and benchmarks is continuing and was discussed at the MCATSIA meeting on 15 March 2002. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: QLD |
Ministerial |
The most recent Senior Officers meeting (December 2001) agreed to a draft action plan to be put to the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General in March 2002. It is expected that the Attorneys-General will agree in principle to an action plan at the March meeting. More work, however, will be required on developing consistent reporting methodologies across jurisdictions before performance reporting strategies and benchmarks can be agreed upon. The A-Gs are committed, on an individual basis and as members of SCAG, to pursuing improved outcomes on Aboriginal justice issues consistent with the outcomes of the Ministerial Summit into Indigenous Deaths in Custody. Therefore, the Standing Committee will:
Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: NSW |
Ministerial |
The Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy (MCDS) considered the COAG request to ministerial councils regarding reconciliation at its annual meeting on 31 July 2001. Through the National Drug Strategic Framework, the MCDS has been progressing priorities similarly identified by the COAG Reconciliation Framework, culminating in the development of a Strategy to address substance misuse among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The Strategy will:
The Strategy will provide an appropriate vehicle to progress the parallel priorities of the National Drug Strategic Framework and COAG. A consultant has recently been contracted to develop the Strategy. Development will include a two-phase consultation process involving targeted remote, regional and urban community consultation followed by a broader national stakeholder consultation. The Consultancy is managed by the (MCDS endorsed) National Drug Strategy Reference Group for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and is due for completion in July 2002. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth. |
Primary |
The NRM Standing Committee established a Taskforce consisting of representatives from the Natural Resource Management Standing Committee, Primary Industries Standing Committee and the Environment Protection and Heritage Standing Committee to ensure that the Action Plans developed by all three Councils were consistent and had a common framework and approach. The combined Taskforce has finalised the NRMMC and PIMC Action Plans, which was submitted to the PIMC Standing Committee at the 21 March 2002 meeting and may be considered by PIMC at their meeting of 2 May 2002. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth/Tasmania |
| Ministerial |
The Australasian Police Ministers' Council, at its meeting on 28 November 2001, resolved: 1. to endorse the following Action Plan to advance Aboriginal reconciliation :
2. to forward the Plan to COAG.The APMC also resolved to advise COAG that the National Commitment to Improved Outcomes in the Delivery of Services to Aboriginal Peoples and Torres Strait Islanders, endorsed by COAG in December 1992, should be updated to reflect current circumstances. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: ACT |
Ministerial |
In June 2000, Ministers agreed to a strategy and Blueprint for indigenous Australians in VET. The Blueprint sets out a national plan of action for Implementing the national strategy that aims to increase opportunities and improve outcomes for indigenous people in vocational education and Training. The Australian Indigenous Training Advisory Council (AITAC) has been established to monitor the progress of implementation of the Indigenous Blueprint. The committee includes indigenous community representation and representatives from each of the stakeholder groups in the Blueprint, including state and territory systems. The Blueprint covers a five-year period from 2000 until 2005, includes a Vision, four objectives and a range of actions for ANTA, the Commonwealth and state training authorities and a range of stakeholders. It also includes performance indicators, which are measurable. Each state and territory has signed up to the Blueprint and already some have launched a state action plan. Progress reports from all stakeholders tabled at last October's AITAC meeting have been evaluated. The evaluation will feed into a mid term review to be undertaken later in 2002. This review will inform future actions. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: VIC |
| Natural |
The NRM Standing Committee established a Taskforce consisting of representatives from the Natural Resource Management Standing Committee, the Primary Industries Standing Committee and the Environment Protection and Heritage Standing Committee to ensure that the Action Plans developed by all three Councils were consistent and had a common framework and approach. The combined Taskforce has finalised the NRMMC and PIMC Action Plans, which was submitted to the NRM Standing Committee at their 22 March 2002 meeting and may be considered by NRM at their meeting of 3 May 2002. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth/WA |
Online Council |
The Online Council endorsed an action plan at its meeting on 2 March 2002 and has forwarded this to COAG. The plan includes:
The seven key priorities are: (1) Investigate the extent to which indigenous people are currently accessing the Internet and explore specific factors affecting their Internet usage (2) Improve access to telecommunication infrastructure and computer facilities in indigenous communities. (3) Provide culturally appropriate education and training to encourage greater use of the Internet by indigenous people. (4) Encourage the development of Internet content with particular relevance to indigenous communities. (5) Promote awareness among indigenous communities of the benefits of participation in the information economy. (6) To identify and encourage the development of strategic partnerships in government, business and community, to improve access to and participation in the information technology industry for indigenous Australians. (7) To raise awareness for indigenous online business development. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: NSW |
Regional |
At its meeting on 8 June 2001, COAG agreed to create a new Regional Development Council (RDC) by amalgamating regional development issues from the Industry, Technology and Regional Development Council and the informal Regional Development Ministers' meetings. The first meeting of the RDC is expected to take place in July 2002. The Standing Committee on Regional Development (SCORD) will be advised that an indigenous Action Plan should be considered at its inaugural meeting in March or April 2002, for further consideration by regional development Ministers. In 2001 the Minister for Transport and Regional Services hosted two informal Regional Development Ministers' conferences. These meetings established a Regional Development Taskforce of senior officials. In line with the COAG reconciliation framework, the Regional Development Taskforce undertook to gather information from states and territories in relation to progress in advancing reconciliation through regional development activities in their jurisdiction, for consideration at an informal Regional Development Ministers' meeting which was scheduled to be held in October 2001. This meeting did not proceed and further meetings of the Taskforce were postponed pending the establishment of the Regional Development Council. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth. |
Small Business Ministerial
|
A SBMC Working Party met in September 2001 to review the SBMC Action Plan and developed a set of performance indicators to monitor the success of the implementation of the Plan. In addition, the Working Party identified issues of particular relevance to the development of programmes to support indigenous small business owners and intenders, such as:
The working party met again in March 2002 to progress these issues further. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: ACT |
Sport and |
The Sport and Recreation Ministers' Council met on Thursday 2 August 2001 in Adelaide. The COAG reconciliation framework was included as an agenda item, and will be a permanent agenda item at future meetings. SRMC agreed that:
Ongoing consultation will be undertaken with indigenous stakeholders through ISU representatives located in each ATSIC Council region. The ISU representatives already negotiate action plans with ATSIC regional councils, and these will inform the development of SRMC's broader action plan. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: Commonwealth. |
Tourism |
The Tourism Ministers' Council has drafted an Action Plan with performance monitoring strategies and bench marks, including a consolidation of activities and initiatives undertaken by the Commonwealth and state and territory governments in this area. It is expected that the draft Action Plan will be ready for dissemination to COAG in March 2002. Information sourced from Minco officials and provided by: QLD |
Return to COAG Communiqué - 5 April 2002