News location:

Tuesday, November 12, 2024 | Digital Edition | Crossword & Sudoku

How ‘yes’ means ‘no’ for the ACT government 

Cartoon: Paul Dorin

The strong, nation-leading support we Canberrans have shown for a national Voice suggests to me a collective concern about the egregious failure of the ACT government to respond in any meaningful way to the needs of the local Aboriginal community,” writes JON STANHOPE.  

ALONG with a majority of Canberrans, I voted “yes” in the recent Voice referendum. 

Jon Stanhope.

The reasons or rationale for those of us that voted “yes” are likely, in the main, to have been similar.

However, a factor in my decision to vote for constitutional recognition of First Nations peoples and an elected Aboriginal Voice to the Australian Parliament was that Aboriginal peoples in the ACT experience the worst or among the worst outcomes against most indicators, in Australia. 

This is despite having, for more than the last decade, had both a progressive Labor/Greens government and an elected Aboriginal Voice, namely the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elected Body (ATSIEB). 

I should acknowledge I was responsible, as the then-chief minister of the ACT, for the establishment of ATSIEB. I established it in response to the decision taken by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) to abolish the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC).

While it was Prime Minister John Howard who moved the motion at COAG that ATSIC be abolished he was supported by a majority of state and territory leaders. I was one of the two who dissented, and I later created ATSIEB in an attempt to fill the void, at least within the ACT, created by the dismantling of ATSIC. 

In response to the distressing outcomes being experienced by Aboriginal residents of Canberra, Julie Tongs, CEO of Winnunga Nimmityjah Aboriginal Health and Community Service, of which I am an employee, and a cohort of acknowledged Aboriginal leaders in the ACT have been calling for several years, for a royal commission-style board of inquiry into Aboriginal disadvantage in the ACT. 

Regrettably their representations have fallen on deaf ears despite the continuing slide in outcomes. Recently, in “CityNews”, I summarised the disturbingly poor outcomes being endured by the Aboriginal community of Canberra, which reveal that, across a wide range of indicators, the ACT has either the worst or among the second or third worst outcomes in Australia. 

I think it’s reasonable to conclude that the strong, nation-leading support that we Canberrans have shown for a national Voice to the federal parliament is a response that reflects much more than our belief that both constitutional recognition and a legislated Voice are appropriate and just. 

It suggests to me that we are collectively concerned about the egregious failure of the ACT government to respond in any meaningful way to the needs of the local Aboriginal community. 

In other words, we were placing our faith in the capacity that we believed a national Voice might have, to either ensure or encourage the ACT government – and indeed all other governments – to take the needs of the Aboriginal community seriously. 

To illustrate the seriousness of the ACT government’s failure to support the Canberra Aboriginal community and its lackadaisical approach to addressing disadvantage I will highlight a couple of examples, say incarceration rates and child protection. 

The Productivity Commission reported in January that the rate ratio of Aboriginal men to non-Aboriginal men incarcerated in Canberra is 21 which is the highest rate in Australia. The national average is 15. Aboriginal peoples in the ACT constitute 1.9 per cent of the population but 26 per cent of the detainee population. 

In addition, the recidivism rate of Aboriginal detainees at the AMC is 92 per cent, also the highest rate in Australia. The increase, over the last decade, in the Aboriginal incarceration rate is also by far the highest in Australia. 

The Productivity Commission also reported that the rate per 1000 Aboriginal children under a care and protection order in the ACT is 91.4 (the third highest in Australia) while that for non-indigenous children is 6.8. 

There has been no change in these rates of contact in the last four years. An Aboriginal child in Canberra is 14 times more likely to be in out of home care than a non-Aboriginal child. 

In light of these dire outcomes, one would assume that the ACT government would have committed to the implementation of concrete and considered responses. 

Unfortunately, that is demonstrably not the case. For example, in respect to child protection, despite having the third-highest rate of Aboriginal children in out-of-home care the ACT has the lowest level of funding in Australia of intensive family support services. 

Promises made and abandoned, commitments rescinded

In a similar vein despite, six years ago, having commissioned, with great fanfare the Our Booris Our Way review of child protection, the committee’s recommendations, have in the main not been implemented. 

Similar disdain for commitments made to address incarceration rates are perhaps best illustrated by the mysterious and unexplained abandonment of the much-hyped election promise to “Build Communities Not Prisons”, the centrepiece of which was a commitment to the construction of an 80-bed Reintegration Centre at the AMC. 

There is a raft of similar examples of promises made and abandoned, of reports commissioned and shelved and commitments rescinded. 

For example, what ever happened to the detailed report prepared, in June 2017, by Legal Aid ACT on the advantages of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Experience Court Reports? When can we expect to see the government’s implementation of the report prepared by Prof Morag McArthur in respect to the prerequisites for raising the age of criminal responsibility? In addition, there are recommendations by the 100, in reports of the Inspector of Corrections and the ACT Auditor-General that have not been actioned or implemented. 

In speaking with Julie Tongs about the strong support in the ACT for the Voice and for constitutional recognition of First Nations people, she said to me, wistfully, how great it would be if all those people in Canberra who got out and voted “yes” would do what they could to ensure that their government, here in the ACT, committed to keeping its promises and genuinely sought to address the needs of their Aboriginal neighbours and fellow citizens. 

 

 

Who can be trusted?

In a world of spin and confusion, there’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in Canberra.

If you trust our work online and want to enforce the power of independent voices, I invite you to make a small contribution.

Every dollar of support is invested back into our journalism to help keep citynews.com.au strong and free.

Become a supporter

Thank you,

Ian Meikle, editor

Jon Stanhope

Jon Stanhope

Share this

4 Responses to How ‘yes’ means ‘no’ for the ACT government 

G Hollands says: 24 October 2023 at 9:12 am

Well perhaps if indigenous Australians in the ACT didn’t break the law in greater numbers then they might not be incarcerated! When you have a close look at the closing the gap criteria there is a large room to move and the characterisation of this is just a little more complicated than a simple comparison. I look forward to a greater public discussion about the issues.

Reply
David says: 24 October 2023 at 9:28 am

I think your article highlights how Australia has dodged a bullet by voting No. Looking after the disadvantaged of any race has descended to a bunch of non-disadvantaged people writing reports, setting up committees and getting funding to support their lifestyles. The definition of insanity is often quoted as repeating the same thing and expecting the results to be different. The Yes campaign should reflect on whether spending over two years and several hundred million dollars trying to get an unnecessary constitutional recognition for a representation to parliament was the best way of helping the disadvantaged. They have a voice to parliament and that is what they used it for! While they are reflecting on that they should also consider the misinformation about cities being the educated. I’m well educated by most measures but ask me to read Latin and I’m uneducated. When it comes to the plight of the disadvantaged, people from regional areas are far more exposed and likely to be educated. They don’t have to rely on some report quoting statistics potentially tailored to achieve the funding being sought. Regional areas probably voted No because they were better informed, have experienced the challenges for decades and were probably insulted by being presented a single page justification. They wanted to know what was really going to change. Don’t hand over the cash until you’re convinced you’re going to get what is needed. Yes campaigners should also be wary of calling for more funding, that is beginning to sound like another cash grab for funding more committees. Start by highlighting what is going to be done at the coal face. Sometimes situations are improved by removing cash/entitlement and providing incentive.

Reply
Hamba says: 24 October 2023 at 12:03 pm

ACT Labor and the Greens have mastered using Aboriginal ‘narratives’ to their electoral advantage. Beyond that, their interest in Indigenous issues approaches nil. Only one party in Canberra has committed to commissioning and funding the long-requested board of inquiry: the Liberals. One year from now, we’ll find out if all the Yes voters were being fair dinkum or just virtue-signalling.

Reply
JacintaFan says: 24 October 2023 at 1:31 pm

“…despite having, for more than the last decade, … an elected Aboriginal Voice, namely the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elected Body (ATSIEB)”:
– Aboriginal peoples in the ACT experience the worst or among the worst outcomes against most indicators, in Australia.
– the ratio of Aboriginal men to non-Aboriginal men incarcerated in Canberra is 21 which is the highest rate in Australia.
– Aboriginal peoples in the ACT constitute 1.9 per cent of the population but 26 per cent of the detainee population.
– the recidivism rate of Aboriginal detainees at the AMC is 92 per cent, also the highest rate in Australia.
– The increase, over the last decade, in the Aboriginal incarceration rate is also by far the highest in Australia.

All of which proves that the local ACT ABTI Voice (ATSIEB)is useless, ineffective and should be disbanded.
The ineffectiveness of the ACT ABTI Voice also indicates that a national ABTI Voice would be just as useless.
The Australian people (except in the ACT) can see through BS and did the right thing by rejecting the referendum proposal with a resounding NO.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Follow us on Instagram @canberracitynews