Stephan Rainow
Please note I make this submission as an individual living on a “Prescribed Area” not as an employee of Nganampa Health Council. I will comment first on some general issues and then on some specific areas of concern.
General
The circumstances facing communities and people living in remote areas are the result of long term under investment by both the public and private sector. Ongoing poverty is a major stimulant for many of the issues facing people and their responses to these issues. We often comment “wouldn’t be good if they pumped all the tyres up”. There is also confusion over what is an indigenous culturally driven response and what is simply a manifestation of the culture of poverty.
There have been numerous reports over the last 30 years that point to a lack of government service delivery, a lack of cooperation and coordination between agencies delivering services and funding programs and a poor understanding of the value of corporate knowledge in Indigenous Affairs. The introduction of the policy of self management / self determination also placed a high management burden on communities and individuals and operated in an environment of unstable policy, program and funding platforms for over 30 years. In effect it meant a form of construction like architecture on quicksand. Government policies changed, government departments changed, acronyms changed and government staff turnover was and still is high. As a result a community management dynamic that was reactive rather than proactive and strategic dominated and “crisis management” was the norm. Effective, strategic self management never had a chance.
Welfare dependency became entrenched with little capacity provided for people to trade their way out of dependency. Economic development was touted as “ the way forward” and yet no efforts of any meaningful scale were made to map, secure and consolidate the existing economies which have been depredated by unscrupulous traders and as a whole poorly regulated by those agencies with statutory responsibilities. You can get rich off the poorest people and “low rent” economic relationships often emerged that encouraged corruption, graft, fraud at the local level.
In short I believe that there was a failure on the part of government to discharge their fiduciary duty to their citizens that has led to the crisis in remote communities and that rather than deploying a punitive approach to deal with this “ recalcitrant” population a supportive approach should be adopted. It is ironic that a federal government in an effort to deal with a situation the result of a long term across the board lack of investment in a population of people chooses to put aside an act aimed at protecting human rights.
Specific
The overall approach seems to smack of the notion “one in all in”. This has caused a deal of confusion and fear amongst the family group where I live. The common theme in family discussions is that a case management approach should have been taken rather than that everyone has to pay for the sins of a few.
Alcohol
In the case of the Iwupataka Land Trust there has never been a request on the part of the Steering Committee to have the area declared dry as opposed to Hermansburg, Utju and the majority of other bush communities. On the block where I live people go to work. They have been going to work and raising their families for years. They pay taxes. They have also built three houses, a clubhouse and extended a further two dwellings. They have an application in to IBA for business support. The children eat well and go to school. One is completing a business degree at a university, two are in their final year of an apprenticeship, one is working in the SA Health Department, one is doing ranger training and one is playing in the AFL for the Kangaroos. Often there are visitors from interstate including doctors, lawyers, vets, architects, industrial designers and once the Cardinal Archbishop of Paris all of whom enjoyed a glass of wine or a beer during their visit. Currently Iwupataka is a prescribed area and it is illegal to have alcohol. People faced with laws or rules that offend their sense of themselves and their sense of citizenship often resort to humour to ease a stress. In our case there is always the question whether “Check Point Charley” is set up down the road and the 2.4 x 2.4 m sign saying WARNING {which must frighten the tourists} makes the Land Trust look like the Gaza Strip. People feel they have been “Broughed Up”. History has shown that those rules or laws that are perceived as being silly will be ignored however under the current circumstances those who wish to have a beer after work are breaking the law and engaging in criminal behaviour. Clearly the Intervention should have strongly supported those communities who for years have requested a police presence to help deal with their issue in relation to alcohol but to include an area not declared dry is a bungle and is further alienating and potentially turning into criminals the people living on the land trust. They now feel as if they are sub citizens. Currently they go to work, the children go to school, are well fed, are not abused etc and so on in effect they are “normal” and yet now feel stigmatised, marginalised and discriminated against. A case management rather than a one in all in approach should have been taken.
Property Rights
There appears to be confused messages about this particular aspect of the intervention. Currently fixed assets on the Land Trust are assets of the Land Trust however information has been tendered to the effect that current and future housing assets will become assets of NT Housing and managed as per NT Housing criteria. All of the houses constructed on the block were built either through historic grant in aid funding or were owner built. The letter of offer for those houses built through government funding does not state that the houses may be resumed by government and become government assets at a later date. The families living in these houses were formerly clients of the NT Housing Commission and do not wish to return to this form of housing welfare. They believed that they were simply getting a ‘hand up’ and that they could wean themselves off the need for government support.
Much of the government both territory and federal proposals re housing have been based on a Price Waterhouse report on the CHIP program where Indigenous Community Housing Organisations were deemed to be failing in the delivery of housing. However this report made no mention let alone analysis of the state and territory indigenous housing authorities who receive the bulk of the housing dollars under the bilateral agreements and whose main task it is to roll out both capital and recurrent programs. In fact IHANT has been known to under expend their annual allocation and in South Australia the Office of Aboriginal Housing has $10 million under expended which has accrued since 2004.There is no evidence that public housing authorities can deliver housing better and more cost effectively than ICHOs. In fact the Fixing Houses for Better Health program that ran in the town camps in Alice Springs showed that Tangentyere were one of the better housing management bodies nationally and one of the major results from this program was a saving of 103 megalitres of water/year through the identification of problems with the mains supply and r&m on household supplies.
I believe that any attempts to seize or resume assets will be met with intense resistance and any measures to manage housing on the part of NT Public Housing or Housing Commission will be singularly unsuccessful.
Stores
Poverty is still the major determinant of the capacity of people to purchase healthy affordable food and other essential items. It is noteworthy that the increasing cost pressures have been recognised as a major factor by governments in relation to pensioners [the economically vulnerable.]. I believe that even if stores are running efficiently and professionally there will still be a “gap” in peoples capacity to pay. A subsidy needs to be applied. Such a subsidy has been modelled by NATSEM. Cost drivers are increasing faster than disposable income levels and income management alone will not ensure the ongoing ability to purchase healthy affordable food and essential items. “White fraud” also continues to drive up costs and needs to be tackled at a serious level. In my view given the low level of disposable income stores are an essential health service rather than an enterprise. Many are incorporated as not for profit organisations and should only operate on a break even basis with some capital for future proofing. Access to affordable healthy food is becoming more problematic given the global food crisis, the increasing fuel costs and the drought. Poor nutrition is the primary biologic insult on the foetus in the womb and there are many studies that link poor nutrition particularly in early childhood to chronic ill health in later life.
Stephan Rainow