“The ACT government seems to be hoping to avoid the perception, as the self-declared most progressive government in Australia, that it appears not to give a hoot about the needs of Aboriginal people,” writes columnist JON STANHOPE.

MY last “CityNews” column was about the staggering 252 per cent increase in the last decade of the number of Aboriginal people imprisoned in the ACT.

In it I noted that indigenous leader Julie Tongs believed that one of the factors that may have contributed to the ACT having by far the highest increase in Australia in the imprisonment of Aboriginal people was the decision by the ACT government to abandon plans announced and funded in 2007 for an Aboriginal-specific drug and alcohol residential rehabilitation facility. 

The link that Ms Tongs, CEO of Winnunga Nimmityjah Aboriginal Health and Community Service, was making was, of course, between the very high level of substance use and addiction in the Aboriginal community and the consequentially high levels of offending behaviour.

Coincidentally, at roughly the same time that Ms Tongs raised concerns about the impact of the decision of the government to abandon the planned Aboriginal drug and alcohol facility, the Liberal’s spokesperson for Health, Vicki Dunne, received responses from ACT Minister for Health Rachel Stephen-Smith to a series of questions on notice.

One of the questions, asked on November 29, 2019 was: “Why is it that the ACT does not have a residential rehabilitation facility more than a decade after the Assembly appropriated money for such a facility.”

Ms Stephen-Smith answered that question on January 17 by simply referencing a statement made by the Planning Minister Mick Gentleman, in 2014 which Mrs Dunne clearly, and I agree, justifiably felt was completely irrelevant, and so asked a follow up question on February 14 in the following terms: “Did the Minister fail to answer the specific question given:

1.  The appropriation of money in the 2007-2008 Second Appropriation Act for “a culturally appropriate residential drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility in the ACT, servicing the adult indigenous population…”
2.  The statement made by former Chief Minister and Treasurer, Mr Jon Stanhope, in his speech for the Appropriation Bill 2008-2009 that “we have committed resources to initiatives such as an indigenous drug and alcohol residential rehabilitation facility”. 

Ms Stephen-Smith answered that question on April 6, in part, by claiming: “No, the question was answered.”

While Ms Stephen-Smith may very well claim that an answer was provided to the questions asked by Mrs Dunne it cannot in all honesty be said that the question asked was answered. It quite clearly and undeniably was not. The minister is, if one is to be polite, “spinning”.

The decision to establish an indigenous-specific, therapeutic drug and alcohol residential rehabilitation facility in the ACT was made by me at a time when I was Chief Minister, Treasurer and Minister for Indigenous Affairs.

The record, including the Budget papers, is clear and unambiguous about the government’s intentions. 

The words used in the relevant Budget papers have the meaning commonly, and indeed universally, ascribed to them and no amount of obfuscation, dissembling, spin or wishing it otherwise for whatever obscure reason will change that fact. 

I personally oversaw the consultation on the proposal, was briefed by officials on the detail, agreed the plans for its implementation and the development of a model of care and operational protocols and I settled the level of funding to be included in the Budget. 

In other words, I know precisely what was intended. I also know that the monies expended on this project are not being applied to the purpose for which they were appropriated.

The nonsense spouted by the minister and her predecessor on this subject really has gone on for far too long.

It is clearly open, of course, to any government to change the purpose for which funds have been appropriated to another purpose.

It happens all the time. The change does obviously need to be formalised. These are after all public monies and governments are accountable for every cent. A change in the purpose of appropriated funds typically requires the tabling of an instrument prescribed by the Financial Management Act. If that has been done in this case then perhaps the minister could make a copy of the instrument available. If it has not been done then at a minimum the auditor-general and perhaps even the Integrity Commission, should get involved. If the auditor is inclined to cast an eye over this shambles some of us would be intrigued to know how the eight fully contained bedrooms included within the facility to accommodate Aboriginal clients undergoing drug or alcohol rehabilitation are being utilised, for instance have any of them ever been slept in, by clients, that is.

The question that most mystifies me about the ACT government’s tortuous dissembling and spin on this project is why, after having spent $12 million on its construction, it refuses to simply admit that it changed its mind. What is it trying to hide? 

The best guess that any of us can make is that it is hoping to avoid the perception, as the self-declared most progressive government in Australia, that it appears not to give a hoot about the needs of Aboriginal people.