Indigenous Australians: Social Issues and Policy Overview

Introduction

The Indigenous population at the time of European settlement is estimated to have been at least 750,000. In the years that followed, this population declined significantly as a result of increased mortality and reduced fertility, and by the 1930s the total Australian Indigenous population was estimated to be only 20 per cent of its original size. Following a referendum in 1967, the Australian Constitution was altered to allow the Commonwealth Parliament to make laws with respect to Aboriginal people, and to include them in national censuses, from which they had been largely absent. In the 2006 census, 455,031 people identified themselves as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, comprising 2.3 per cent of the total Australian population.

Between 1996 and 2001, the average annual growth rate of the Indigenous population was 2 per cent, compared with 1.18 per cent for the total Australian population. The 2006 census also found that the Indigenous population is younger than the non-Indigenous population, with a median age of 21 years compared to 37 years for non-Indigenous Australians. Only 3 per cent of Indigenous Australians are aged 65 years or older, compared to 13 per cent of non-Indigenous Australians ('Indigenous Peoples: An Overview' 2008).

Background: European Settlement and Its Impact

In 1770, English explorer Captain James Cook claimed the eastern portion of the continent in the name of King George III. At that time, Indigenous Australians were divided into approximately 600 different tribes with hundreds of different languages. Archaeological evidence suggests that the ancestors of the modern Indigenous people of Australia migrated to the continent more than 50,000 years ago. Isolated from external influences, the Aboriginal peoples developed their own way of life in accordance with their religious and spiritual beliefs of the Dreamtime — the Indigenous time of creation.

Despite the knowledge and culture of these peoples, the British considered the Australian continent to be a terra nullius under English law — a Latin term meaning "land belonging to no one." Soon thereafter, the British decided to establish a penal colony in New South Wales, and on 26 January 1788, the First Fleet, led by Captain Arthur Phillip, arrived in Sydney Cove.

Soon after the First Fleet arrived, colonial governments began to grant, lease, and sell land to white settlers. As the colonial wool industry began to flourish, more settlers arrived to stake their claims on grazing land. As the availability of suitable grazing land diminished, expeditions were conducted to search for more fertile territory. Efforts were made to curb the spread of new settlements by New South Wales Governor Darling; however, this was done more to ensure that settlers remained within reach of colonial law enforcement than out of concern for the Indigenous inhabitants.

As unauthorized settlements began to claim unoccupied land beyond the boundaries set by Governor Darling, they encroached increasingly on Indigenous sacred sites, hunting grounds, and food supplies. The displacement of Aboriginal peoples from their land resulted in a drastic decline in their population. Many Aboriginal people were killed in conflicts over land use, and many more perished from malnourishment. Restriction of access to clean water and an adequate food supply exacerbated the plight of Indigenous people by increasing their susceptibility to disease. Furthermore, settlers brought with them a number of European epidemic diseases — including chickenpox, smallpox, typhoid, measles, and influenza — to which Aboriginal peoples had no immunity. Within densely populated communities in particular, these diseases were rapidly devastating. The introduction of venereal disease was also an issue, causing Indigenous fertility and birth rates to decline.

From the beginning, relations between the settlers and the Indigenous peoples were characterized by fear and curiosity. Unfortunately, a clash of cultures and disputes over land use doomed any chance of peaceful coexistence. Fighting was fierce at times, with both sides believing their survival was at stake, and acts of bloodshed and other atrocities were committed across the country. Settlers poisoned native water sources and dispersed poisoned food. They also formed Native Police Forces composed entirely of Indigenous people, using tribal rivalries to instigate violence between different Aboriginal clans. It was inevitable that the settlers — with the support of soldiers and police and an advantage in firepower and numbers — would eventually prevail. Violence against Aboriginal peoples continued in some parts of Australia until the third decade of the twentieth century. It has been estimated that between 1788 and 1900, violence, displacement, and disease caused the Indigenous population to decline by 90 per cent.

By the 1930s, a policy of assimilation designed to integrate Aboriginal people into white society — by forcing them to live in the same way and hold the same beliefs and values as white Australians — was beginning to emerge. Many reserves were closed due to overcrowding and increasing costs, forcing Indigenous peoples into cities and towns where they were left few options other than to live on the outskirts or in public housing. This led to the further deterioration of traditional Aboriginal culture. Most significantly, the assimilation policy led to many children being forcibly taken from their parents and families and placed in foster care or group homes. These children have become known as the Stolen Generation ('Impact of European Settlement on Indigenous People' 2011).

Many people in the Australian community hold negative attitudes toward Indigenous Australians (Griffiths & Pedersen 2009). This attitude puts Indigenous Australians at a considerable disadvantage in almost all areas of wellbeing. Before anti-racist strategies are adopted, however, it is essential that strategists have a clear understanding of why people hold such attitudes.

According to Hart, Thompson, and Stedman (2008), the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia was flawed from the beginning by its references to the Aborigines of Australia. The Federation was founded on the assumption that the Aborigines would, quite literally, disappear. The two mentions they received in the Constitution were both negative. This left Indigenous citizens exposed to the partiality displayed by the Constitutional architect, federation activist, and Australian Prime Minister Alfred Deakin, who argued that federation acted on "the desire that we should be one people, and remain one people, without the admixture of other races." Compounding this, founding Prime Minister Edmund Barton had proposed in 1889 that a constitutional power was needed so that the Commonwealth could "regulate the affairs of the people of colored or inferior races who are in the Commonwealth."

Current Social and Policy Issues

Indigenous Australians have become recognized as one of the most disadvantaged Indigenous nations across all developed Western countries. The inequities suffered by Indigenous Australians, when compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts, extend across a wide range of quality-of-life indicators, including higher levels of unemployment, lower levels of physical health and economic well-being, and an increased prevalence of negative mental health outcomes and psychosocial stressors. In addition, Indigenous Australians are the most educationally disadvantaged Australians — a matter of great concern, given that education determines life opportunities. Bodkin-Andrews, O'Rourke, and Craven (2010) argue that education should be recognized as a pivotal point of intervention for righting the inequities suffered by people from disadvantaged backgrounds, and that identifying culturally appropriate methods of redressing the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students is of paramount importance.

In a review of articles published in the Australian Journal of Social Issues between 1961 and 2005, Melissa Johns and Will Sanders identified five key recurrent themes related to Indigenous issues: education; health; alcohol use; violence and the criminal justice system; and child welfare. From 2005 to the present, many significant and controversial changes in Indigenous policy have been implemented, many under the 2007 Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) and the more recent Council of Australian Governments (COAG) commitment to "Closing the Gap" on Indigenous disadvantage. Notable recent developments have also included former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's apology to the Stolen Generations and Australia's endorsement of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), along with a stated commitment to "reset" its relationship with Indigenous Australians (Jordan & Bulloch 2010).

However, Johns and Sanders argue that there was "more continuity than change" in the debates surrounding Indigenous policy. For example, some of the earliest articles they identified concerned the question of "assimilation." In a 1968 paper, Henry Schapper understood assimilation as a project of advancement, including the narrowing of socioeconomic gaps between Indigenous and other Australians. While the term "assimilation" is no longer in vogue — having been replaced by "mainstreaming" or "normalization" — this perspective has retained strong currency. Aspects of the NTER have focused on normalization, at times suggesting the conversion of Aboriginal settlements into "normal" suburbs with private home and business ownership.

In the 1960s and 1970s, contributors to policy debate noted the poor status of Indigenous children on measures of formal educational outcomes in comparison to the rest of the population. Proposed solutions ranged from the use of coercive measures to increase school attendance, to new curricula and teaching styles designed to better attune teachers to the "learner's frame of reference." These alternative approaches could be characterized as those focused on behavioral change versus those focused on creating an attractive and culturally relevant learning environment.

There are tangible links to more recent policy debates. A 2006 article discussed the rise of Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) in the Howard Government's approach to Indigenous affairs. Under these agreements, state funding for specified services and infrastructure was made contingent upon Indigenous peoples' commitment to behavioral change. Several SRAs involved Indigenous commitments to increase school attendance rates in return for government-funded facilities such as air conditioning units or public swimming pools. While many participating communities expressed satisfaction with their SRAs, others described individual agreements as patronizing and coercive. Recent attention has shifted away from SRAs, and only a handful of new agreements have been signed under the current Federal Government.

A similar approach to school attendance is embodied in the new arrangements for income management in the Northern Territory. From August 2010, compulsory income management has applied to many people, including long-term welfare recipients and those deemed to be "disengaged youth." Where parents subject to income management under these criteria have school-aged children, they are able to seek exemptions if they can demonstrate that their children are regularly attending school. This aspect of the policy is clearly designed to provide financial and other incentives for parents to send their children to school, and could be argued to punish those who do not.

Conclusion

Indigenous policy debates continue to revisit the same ground because, rather than coming to a point of synthesis, the dominant perspective moves back and forth between three competing principles: equality, choice, and guardianship. Over the last decade, the dominant view has swung away from choice toward the guardianship principle.