Cover Letter

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re- Inadvertent consequences of the Federal Government’s 2007 intervention in Indigenous Northern Territory communities.

The Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation (LNAC) is the peak body that represents the Larrakia people; the traditional owners of the greater Darwin land and sea area. The Larrakia have a responsibility to care for visitors when they are on country. They expect that visitors will meet their obligations of respect to the cultural authority when on country. This expectation has become increasingly difficult for Indigenous visitors to meet. The capacity of the Larrakia to take responsibility for the care of visitors on country has also been stretched, particularly over the past 12 months.

The Larrakia Nation has a suite of critical care frontline programs, funded by the Northern Territory Government, which are provided to Indigenous visitors who staying on country (without shelter). This is known locally as living in the Long Grass although this type of habitation has been categorised as primary homelessness by the Australian government. Key programs and services include: Proof of Identification; Return to Country; Connect to Country; Personal Support Program; Outreach and Case Management; Larrakia Intervention Transport Service (LITS); and the newly established Night Patrol; and the Healthy Engagement in the Long Grass Program (HEAL).

The LNAC also have an active Research Division with specialist expertise on ‘being houseless and homeless in Darwin’. The information contained within this submission is derived from a sound evidence base and a detailed knowledge of the subject matter.

In June and July of 2007, Larrakia Nation staff documented an unusual influx of Indigenous visitors from remote areas of the NT to Darwin. The timing of this influx coincided with the Federal Government's announcement to implement a number of initiatives in remote Aboriginal communities in the NT. With funding support of Oxfam Australia, an inquiry was undertaken by Holmes et al (2007) to firstly confirm the existence of an influx and if so, find out the nature of its permanence. Secondly, it aimed to briefly explore the reasons visitors were coming to the Long Grass and whether the Government’s intervention had had a role in their decisions.

This inquiry confirmed an increase in primary homelessness in Darwin between July and August, 2007. A conservative estimate revealed that the new Indigenous population staying in the Long Grass exceeded 150 people, increasing the base-line population by around 40%. Given that the Northern Territory already had the highest rates of homelessness in the country, the extent of growth of abject poverty, in such a short period, concentrated in Darwin was (and remains) deplorable. An increase in Darwin’s Long Grass population signals a proliferation of new informal camps that without thoughtful action will likely become highly dysfunctional.

Holmes et al (2007) found that the announcement of the Federal Government’s intervention in Northern Territory (NT) communities was a key contributor to the increase, influencing Aboriginal peoples’ decision to leave their home communities and stay in Darwin’s Long Grass. More than half of the participants in the study indicated their intention to never return home. They are now displaced, homeless and houseless.

In the Long Grass, individual’s health and life quality rapidly declines as they move into chronic homelessness and many will experience periods of crisis within this context. This is problematic for government and non-government agencies which provide basic and crisis services to this population. Holmes et al (2007) found that individuals were unable to access the few services available to them in order to prevent a crisis event. This situation was exacerbated by the reduced capacity of service providers to respond to the needs of this population as they became more complex. The reduced capacity stemmed from the meagre operational resources and the litigious environment to which service providers had to negotiate.

Holmes et al (2007) commented that while the Government’s intervention were a strong contributor to increased rates of homelessness in Darwin, the intervention-related reasons were multiple and interconnected and caused problems, worries and stressors for study participants. They included: a perceived loss of rights, autonomy and purpose; an increase in violence and conflict in communities; fear and confusion over the new laws; a lack of future; and restricted access to alcohol. These findings were consistent with Memmott and Fantin (2001), Maypilama et al (2004) and Holmes (2007), in that they pointed to deeper unresolved issues, emphasised by the intervention.

In the 2007 study, participants also experienced problems, stressors and worries in the Long Grass. In addition to a perceived loss or violation of rights, access to water, food and blankets were consistently raised as being problematic and few individuals had used the services set up to assist this population. This study concluded that the Government’s interventions have inadvertently displaced Aboriginal peoples. In doing so, the socio-cultural and poverty issues for many had only deepened and shifted location, while the challenges for service providers in Darwin had escalated.

The Larrakia Nation highlighted the importance of ongoing monitoring of the social and poverty related issues associated with the Federal Government’s intervention policy as it impacted on Larrakia country. With several funding partners, we developed a more detailed study. The research question directing this present inquiry asked:

What do Indigenous people staying in Darwin’s Long Grass require to attain an acceptable level of health and life quality and to be law abiding citizens?

In order to respond to the above question, the following aims were developed:

To monitor changes to the population influx into Darwin of remote visitors and make comparisons with data/findings from the 2007 study by Holmes et al.;
To explore the reasons why individuals/groups left their homes;
To explore the perceived positive/beneficial elements of the interventions;
To trial an adaptation of Davies and Dart’s (2005) ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) method to gather data which documents the perceived significant changes to peoples lives;
To explore the reasons why individuals selected Darwin and stay in the Long Grass (i.e. mapping mobility pathways with institutional/homeless knowledge);
To explore the drinking patterns of individuals/groups;
To determine if barriers exist to detoxification/ rehabilitation from alcohol and work with Long Grass groups to overcome these;
To identify problems experienced by people in the Long Grass and develop strategies with Long Grass groups, government and non-government agencies to overcome these;
To identify the stressors individuals in the Long Grass have experienced;
To assess the incidence of trauma and trauma-related illness (using quantitative methods) of individuals in the Long Grass (N.B. to complement qualitative data collected in previous research projects); and
To explore the perceptions of non-Indigenous residents who live in close proximity to Long Grass camps.

We are half way through this study. However, we are in a position to provide preliminary findings which relate to aims 1 to 9 and we are able to discuss the impact on Larrakia Nation programs. These finding highlight the social, cultural and economic consequences to: the Larrakia Nation; Larrakia country and people; and others living on or visiting country that have emerged through the Government’s intervention in remote Territory communities. More than 110 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted over an 8 week period commencing in April, 2008, with Indigenous adults who had come to stay in the Long Grass after 1^st July, 2007.

Key preliminary findings include:

There has been a doubling of service delivery across Larrakia Nation programs and services provided to Indigenous people who are experiencing primary homelessness in Darwin and Palmerston.
The unmet demand for Larrakia services has grown exponentially over the past 12 months. This ndicates there is a significant population who has stopped asking for assistance, particularly in seeking accommodation support.
The number of Proof of Identity cards issued by Larrakia Nation has seen a dramatic growth since July, 2007. A significant number of cards have been issued to new clients. This suggests many clients are coming to Darwin for the first time in their adult lives or are staying for significantly longer than they have previously needed to. This data confirms a steady growth in displaced peoples from home communities to Darwin’s Long Grass.
More than 70% of study participants were over 40 years of age. (Our recruitment strategy has meant that we had a representative sample in our study of the whole population). This finding points to an aged homeless population (in terms of Indigenous mortality) and has significant implications for the type of service needs of this population that extend beyond crisis services. Further, it raises the question of the appropriateness of the eligibility criteria for this population in terms of access to the aged pension and other aged-care services.
The above finding also raises the imperative of appropriate aged care support and services within communities. This study has found that many participants chose to be homeless in Darwin’s Long Grass rather than continue to endure abuse, violent attacks and theft of income perpetrated by youth in their community. This behaviour was most commonly associated with youth wanting and using marijuana. Some individuals had in fact been displaced in their community before coming to Darwin.
In home communities, escalating violence and family problems were identified by participants as the key reason for study participants leaving home.
Unlike the study undertaken in 2007, the majority of the participants in this study did not specifically attribute their move to Darwin to the Government’s intervention. The reason/s for this is unclear. It may be because participants in this study were disenfranchised in their home community and were not part of community discussions relating to the intervention. It may be because of low English literacy rates or lack of access to radio, TV or newspaper by this population. We are still analysing the data set but it appears that this particular population are ‘rolling with the policy punches’.
In the Long Grass, violence was a concern for nearly all study participants. People had left home to escape violence and were highly frustrated that they had to continue to negotiate it in Darwin.
The experience of people in the Long Grass was that the perpetrators of violence were both within family groups and people external to their family. Many people reported violent attacks from ‘cheeky’ teenagers (believed to be generally non-Indigenous).
Study participants reported that violence within families had led to family breakdown in Darwin, with larger groups dividing into smaller, sometimes more vulnerable groups. People were concerned about the pressure placed on the cultural fabric of their society when in the Long Grass.
Violence in the Long Grass was a catalyst for localised mobility as participants attempted to avoid trouble.
While violence may have been experienced on a regular basis by this population, the overwhelming majority of participants considered it undesirable.
Study participants were forced into localised mobility by police and council. (The new First Response program as added to this mobility in a significant way).
High levels of forced mobility meant that it was increasingly difficult for individuals to use critical care services effectively. The evidence tells us that these barriers to services reinforce social distance and cause individuals to accept poor physical and mental health. Individuals feel powerless and turn to self-medication, typically using alcohol and marijuana. Self-medication results in an increased sense of control in individuals’ lives.
The majority of the study participants used the Larrakia services, in particular the Larrakia Intervention Transport Service. To a lesser extent, Vinnies was used. Rarely was the use of other services mentioned.
The vast majority of participants indicated they wanted to stop drinking. There was a preference for doing this at home, out bush or at an outstation.
The vast majority of participants understood ‘stop drinking’ as a temporary break or rest. Generally, individuals wanted to get fat or strong enough so that they could return to drinking. This has implications for discourse around rehabilitation. More than half of participants had been to rehabilitation in Darwin previously and had used the services for respite or to recover from drinking related illness.
In addition to violence, key problems in the Long Grass identified by participants included loss of rights and autonomy (related to police and council harassment), the need for a blanket and a lack of food and water. This finding is consistent with those reported in the 2007 study.
Participants consistently raised their concern for family they had left behind in their home community.
Participants did come to Darwin to access alcohol. However, as noted, the primary reason was to escape violence and family trouble. Alcohol was often used as part of grief and pain management. About 25% of participants had left home to be with family already in the Long Grass.
Other reasons for leaving home included a lack of housing and the need to access medical services.

The widespread incidence of trauma and trauma-related illness in this homeless Long Grass context has not yet been integrated into social and health policy. Nor has it been specifically addressed through service provision. The present research being undertaken by the Larrakia Nation will add to the existing evidence-base in this regard.

What is happening in Darwin and in remote parts of the Northern Territory is the result of colonisation, profound neglect and abject poverty. Addressing poverty is central to preventing homelessness and maintaining healthy and functioning communities. Through the work of the Larrakia Nation, it has become increasingly obvious that there is a need to develop programs which build capacity within Indigenous society across the Northern Territory. This will be critical if economic engagement and enterprise development are ever going to occur.

When our 2008 study is complete, we will provide you with a copy of the research finding. We have also attached a copy of the submission we made to the Commonwealth Government’s (2008) Green Paper entitled, ‘Which Way Home? A New Approach to Homelessness’ (see appendix 1), as we see that this is directly linked to the present discussion.

We are pleased to provide you with evidence of the inadvertent consequences of the Federal Government’s Emergency Response impacting on Larrakia Nation, country and people. We are also pleased to discuss any aspect of this submission with you.

Dr Catherine Holmes
Principal Researcher

Ms Ilana Eldridge
Coordinator

15^th August, 2008

Return to top

Next: Appendix 1

Previous: Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation