There may be something in the order of one organisation for every 100 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia. The ratio of bureaucrats to Indigenous people must be similar.
The government’s “Indigenous Advancement Strategy”, introduced in 2014, was to target complexity and inefficacy in federal funding to the Indigenous sector.
But little seems to have changed. When the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Senator Nigel Scullion from the Northern Territory, released the funding outcomes, Amos Aikman of The Australian reported:
More than half of all grants published in two funding rounds are for amounts of less than $15,000 and for periods of fewer than six months, even though the government has been warned that having many short-term funding agreements can make it difficult for organisations to attract, train and retain indigenous staff.
The Northern Territory is receiving extraordinarily generous federal support on a per-capita basis, more than 40 times the average of all other jurisdictions, from the $4.9 billion four-year IAS funding pot alone.
Although it was based on his own published analysis, Scullion said Aikman’s reportage was flawed.
On September 5, Aikman reported that The Australian had obtained records of all IAS grants to mid-August, comprising more than 8500 payments to almost 3000 organisations, worth a total of just over $4.1 billion. Aikman also wrote: “When given an opportunity for the second day running to provide evidence in support of his claims, [the minister] again produced none.”
In other words, we are flying blind as to the claims being made.
Some call it the “ghetto”, but I think it resembles – in the way that the Australian government treats it – the apartheid system in South Africa...
The reporting systems are very tricky. Figures issued by Senator Scullion are only part of the problem. Meanwhile, in another portfolio, Attorney General Senator Brandis cut the Indigenous legal services and the UNSW Indigenous Law Centre funding by more than $45 million, only to reinstate some of that funding after an outcry. This was in the context of rapidly escalating Indigenous arrest and imprisonment rates, along with the removal of Indigenous children from their families.
According to one of my sources, the Northern Territory – while receiving large grants under the “Strategy” – had its contractual funding from other federal schemes cut by tens of millions of dollars. This must be the case in other jurisdictions, as is clear from WA Premier Barnett’s tantrum and very public threat to close 500 communities over federal government funding cuts.
Unable to make sense of Scullion’s figures, Opposition Spokesman Shayne Neumann wrote to the Auditor-General asking him to investigate. In his letter, he referred to more than $14 billion worth of applications, half of which he said were non-compliant, and to a mysteriously shrinking $2 billion funding pot.
Indigenous leaders are apoplectic about the “Strategy”.
Noel Pearson scored it 2 out of 10. He was further quoted by Aikman (“’Bonfire of regulation’ fizzles out before it gets to the bush”, September 12) as saying, “Most Australians have no idea that the greatest beneficiaries of investment of indigenous funds are non-indigenous organisations not based in the communities in whose name the expenditure has been justified by parliament.”
Pearson called them “parasitic organisations”. Patrick Dodson and Fred Chaney were also scathing. The glaring omission from the “Strategy” is the involvement of Indigenous leaders.
Since John Howard’s termination of ATSIC, there has been no formal relationship between Indigenous Australia and the government. The result has been worsening outcomes, with more dependency on government funding, not less.
It is the most incompetent and damaging experiment in Indigenous Affairs in many decades.
The Indigenous sector is a world apart from the public and private sectors, largely dependent on government funding. For a good part of the financial year, the Indigenous entities deploy their staff applying for funding according to criteria that make the fine print on mortgage documents seem trivial. They must also report on funds granted by a federal department, amid a maze of complex performance indicators and government funding contracts. A departmental officer might then require contract variations, delaying settlement again and again.
More than 2300 Indigenous corporations were registered under the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (CATSI Act), according to a 2010 report of the Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations. These numbers in Indigenous corporate service represent a very high level of civic engagement and participation. It compares very favourably with the non-Indigenous population, particularly in light of disadvantages that Indigenous people confront.
But this uplifting story has a downside: this is an enormous administrative load to carry. Any Indigenous entity that receives Indigenous funding must be incorporated under the CATSI Act. Native title groups recognised under the Native Title Act with ‘determinations’ must also incorporate under the CATSI Act.
Some call it the “ghetto”, but I think it resembles – in the way that the Australian government treats it – the apartheid system in South Africa, when blacks were confined to “Bantustans” or black townships, and different laws applied to them.
The “Strategy” and bureaucratic maze underpinning it is Kafkaesque. Inside the system, we become lost, disoriented in an environment where nothing makes sense but everything is complex and menacing. A large part of the blame for this nightmare lies with government bureaucrats – and with the ministers to whom they report.
Two years ago, Noel Pearson convened a meeting of Indigenous leaders for a new approach that would be enabling, not disabling. The result of two years of hard work to build a relationship between the Indigenous sector and Australian governments was presented as the Empowered Communities: Empowered Peoples report to former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.
No formal response was received, other than a letter of acknowledgement. It stayed at the bottom of the pile, while Minister Scullion prioritised the government policies over Aboriginal empowerment and involvement in solving the problems. The outcome is this Kafkaesque maze – and impending closure for many Indigenous services and communities.
It is the most incompetent and damaging experiment in Indigenous Affairs in many decades. Let’s hope that this madness ends soon.
Professor Marcia Langton is the Foundation Chair of Australian Indigenous Studies at The University of Melbourne.
