Society of Ethnobiology

To attend the 34th annual Society of Ethnobiology meeting of course. Regular readers would know that I’ve been using this meeting as an excuse – as if I needed one – to travel to the United States for a couple of weeks each year.

In the past these meetings have been held at such wonderful places as the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Tulane University in New Orleans, Fayetteville in Arkansas and Berkeley in San Francisco.

Believe me, Columbus Ohio – which I’m sure has its attractions – doesn’t come within a scrub bull’s roar of any of the above for local colour and locations…

I gave up attending conferences without presenting at them a long time ago and this year I’m giving two presentations tomorrow in a session dedicated to ethnoornithology and  titled “Birds in historical, cultural & archaeological context” where we will “examine birds and human culture in a variety of contexts, including birds, humans and fire, birds and archaeology and what happens when birds, birders and sacred and ancient grounds meet.”

My co-presenter will be Rob Fergus, whom I only met in person for the first time at the opening reception for the conference but have known through various email, chat lines and mutual acquaintances for years.

Rob’s presentation will look at “Birds among the Modern and Ancient Maya“, specifically his:

“Ongoing field work by the authors among seven Mayan linguistic communities in Mexico, Guatemala, and Belize reveal details about the important roles that birds play in the daily lives of modern Mayan hunting, farming, and urban communities. These discoveries shed additional light on birds as depicted in Mayan ethnohistorical accounts as well as Ancient Mayan texts and iconography. Individual birds play specific roles in Mayan mythology and social practices, while birds in general are frequently viewed as spirit messengers that play important roles in forecasting social, meteorological, and ecological events in the community.”

The first of my presentations will, in line with the conference’s theme of “Historical and Archaeological Perspectives in Ethnobiology” examine the “Stone Bird Hunting Hides of the Victoria River District of Australia’s Northern Territory”:

In the Victoria River district of the Northern Territory local Aboriginal groups have long constructed stone hides to hunt a variety of hawks and kites. In this presentation I will discuss the construction, use and distribution of these hunting hides and present material from several interviews with Bill Yidumduma Harney, an elder of the Wardaman language group.

Picture by Rohan Clarke, Wildlife Images.com.

My other presentation will be based upon an article I wrote for the ABC’s The Drum late last year called “Trespass, Ticks and Twitchers: The Price of a Parrot.”

This article has morphed into: “The price of a parrot – birds, sacred ancient ground and twitchers”:

In early 2010 the Australian birding community was abuzz with news that large numbers of the Princess Parrot, Polyetis alexandrae, had moved from their traditional breeding and foraging grounds in the remote deserts of western Australia to an area within 4 hours drive of Alice Springs in central Australia. In this presentation I will examine the issues and conflicts that arose between local Aboriginal owners and custodians of the land, land managers and birdwatchers over access to the site where the birds were found, near to the oldest site of recorded human occupation in central Australia.

Anyway, I’ve still got to do some fine tuning before the off later this morning.

I’ll let you know how we go and of any other interesting presentations – of which I’m sure there will be many…

The local branch of the Liberal Party, the Country Liberals – aka the CLP – is sort-kinda-maybe bullish about its prospects in the Darwin-based seat of Solomon, currently held by Labor’s Damien Hale on a slim margin of 0.4% after distribution of preferences after taking the seat from the two-term incumbent, and now member for the seat on Fong Lim the NT Legislative Assembly, Dave Tollner.

Damien Hale MHR for Solomon

As the Darwin daily the NT News reported on 28 November:

The CLP has yet to choose its candidate. But the Northern Territory News understands that Darwin City Council alderman Garry Lambert, Palmerston Deputy Mayor Natasha Griggs and Tourism Top End head Tony Clementson have put up their hands. A CLP source said: “We’re not very happy with the field so far. “We want an energetic 35-year-old who can serve three or four terms in Parliament. Solomon is a marginal seat and Hale can be beaten.”

Notwithstanding the CLP’s apparent dissatisfaction with the candidates, the ABC reported two days later that the CLP had pre-selected the Natasha Griggs, the Deputy- Mayor of the satellite city of Palmerston:

The party’s president, Rick Setter, says public servant Natasha Griggs outshone four other candidates. “It’s not going to be easy because Kevin Rudd of course is very popular,” he said.

Natasha Griggs - CLP candidate for Solomon

The other House of Representatives seat, Lingiari, has been held – apart from a brief interregnum, by Labor’s Warren Snowdon since 1987 – losing it for a single term in the Howard landslide of 1996 and taking it back in 1998 and retaining the seat when it was re-named as Lingiari in 2001

Warren Snowdon - MHR for Lingiari

As the ABC’s Anthony Green notes, Snowdon took 3.5% off the CLP candidate Adam Giles – now in the NT Parliament as representative for the electorate of Braitling – in two party-preferred votes in the Federal election of 2007 after adding 2.4% in the 2004 election.

Snowdon nows sits on a very comfortable margin of 22% – taking his two party-preferred vote in 2007 to 61.2% to the CLP’s 38.8%.

As the NT News noted on 28 November in relation to Lingiari:

Veteran Labor MHR Warren Snowdon will defend Lingiari, which became one of the safest ALP seats in the country at the last election. The CLP is expected to announce Tennant Creek businessman Tony Civitarese as its candidate for the seat at a meeting at Katherine today.

The announcement of Civitarese as the CLP’s candidate seems to have been a bit of a cock-up one way or another.

Ten days later the NT News noted:

The NT News previously named Tennant Creek businessman Tony Civitarese as the candidate for Lingiari. He did not deny he had shown interest in standing but said he had never signed nomination forms.

Further in that piece, entitled “Past Labor friend joins CLP in grab for Lingiari”, Nick Calacouras noted, in part, that:

Indigenous domestic violence campaigner Bess Price has put her hand up to run as the CLP candidate in the Federal seat of Lingiari. Ms Price has supported Labor in the past and was appointed to chair the Territory Government’s Indigenous Affairs Advisory Council. She also sits on the Federal Government’s advisory council on violence against women. The Country Liberals are believed to have been talking to Ms Price since the Territory election in August last year. The Northern Territory News understands it was not until independent Territory politician Alison Anderson offered her support that Ms Price agreed to run. Ms Anderson has popular support and influence in her electorate of Macdonnell – which makes up 25 per cent of the landmass of Lingiari. The CLP is also canvassing potential independent candidates who might offer their preferences. The NT News also understands Ms Price was prepared to run in the seat of Stuart against Karl Hampton if Ms Anderson’s defection in July triggered a Territory election.

There is a fair bit more to Bess Price than Nick Calacouras revealed in that short piece and I’m sure that, in the event that she is successful in her bid for pre-selection by the CLP, there will be close media and political scrutiny of Bess Price’s candidacy.

Bess Price, prospective CLP candidate for Lingiari

Bess Price was on the Morning Show on Alice Springs ABC Radio with Alice Brennan earlier today.

I was just back from the pool so missed the first part of the interview but here is a verbatim transcript of the last few minutes:

Bess Price – …the Country Liberals will…might give me a chance to…um…have a say, and be heard…um…in, in, in…areas that we all believe in…and…I would have to make sure…sure that I have to negotiate with them as to…what I believe in…in what I strongly believe in…and which will need, you know, further talks with them as well.

Alice Brennan – So, have you spoken to the Country Liberals this week to confirm that, yes, you are interested?

BP – No, I haven’t…um…I will endeavour to do that when I’m back in Alice Springs…

AB – I guess it is a bit of a kick in the guts to the Labor Party given that you’ve been quite a supporter of the Labor party over the years…

BP – Well, I’ve always voted Labor…but I believe…but I believe Territorians deserve and demand better leadership…and a better future…

AB – And, of course have you approached Warren Snowdon and told him about your plans?

BP – I think you…well, it was shock for me as well finding out that there had been talks in the Territory about me standing for Lingiari but I guess it would be a shock for Warren as well. But I haven’t had an…um…communication with him right now. Um, but I’m happy to listen to…whoever wants to stand as…stand as well…listen and support whoever wants to stand as well.

AB – Well, we’ll wait and see the results of the pre-selection Bess and see how you go there.

BP – That’s right. We’ll wait and see.

AB – (laughs) Bess Price, thanks for your time this morning.

BP – Thank you.

I’m unsure about how well the admission the Bess had “…always voted Labor” will go down with the CLP pre-selection committee.

As she said, “…we’ll wait and see“.

In the event that Bess Price is successfully pre-selected it will be a big ask for her to overcome Warren Snowdon’s substantial margin – but stranger things have happened in the weird world that is NT politics.

I’ll keep you posted on any updates from the parties or further pearls of wisdom from any of the candidates.

And, in the event that anything of interest or relevance happens in regard to the two Senate seats in the NT – and they have always been split evenly between the CLP and Labor so the only issues of interest only occur in the pre-selection – then I’ll keep you posted.

I’ve written about the NT Ombudsman’s annual reports and the small glimpses that they provide into the various instances of misconduct by the NT Police before here – noting that her annual reports to the NT Parliament only document those matters that come to her by way of formal complaint.

The point that I made then – that Carolyn Richards’ reports into NT Police misconduct present convincing support for the need for an independent authority to investigate allegations of misconduct by NT Police and public officials – are only bolstered by the instances of appalling conduct of NT Police revealed in her latest report.

You can see all of the NT Ombudsman’s annual reports here.

The chapters on NT Police misconduct make for fascinating reading, and there is little to suggest that NT Police conduct, and the quality, supervision and investigation of that conduct, has improved over time.

As Carolyn Richards told the local ABC in Darwin, past NT Police recruiting and training policies may be making no small contribution to these issues:

“…a lack of senior officers in the police force could be a reason why there have been some serious breaches of police duty of care for people in custody. “Because of the influx of new recruitments into the police and because there was a five year delay prior to 2001 where [there] were no police recruitments, we are now in the situation where we’ve got all these young officers out on the beat with six months training.”

The Northern Territory’s Acting Police Commissioner, Bruce Wernham, said: “All new police recruits undergo thorough and intensive training prior to operating under full supervision as probationary constables. “I note the ombudsman’s comments with regards to increased recruiting causing more complaints against less experienced police. “However, I am not aware of any evidence to specifically support this.”

The material in this post comes from just one of the case notes of complaints against NT police documented in the 2008-2009 annual report to the local Parliament of the NT Ombudsman, Carolyn Richards.

Some of the comments made by the unnamed Police Officer in the unidentified NT watchhouse to a prisoner being processed included:

“shut your face.”

“dumb f**k”,

“f**king loser”

“d**khead over there”

“… no brain”

“f**king retard.”

The case note, headed “No brains” detailed the treatment meted out by NT Police to a complainant who was arrested:

“…for breaking and entering. This person had fallen asleep outside the premises, due to being highly intoxicated, and was arrested at the scene. A complaint was subsequently lodged relating to his treatment whilst at the watch-house.”

Even before he made it to the cells he was getting the full benefit of the cop’s limited vocabulary:

“The complainant could be heard mumbling something whilst he was seated on the bench, although it was not discernable as to what was said. One of the attending officers responded with “shut your face.” Further comments made to or about the complainant within the next 30 minutes included, “dumb f**k”, “f**king loser”, “d**khead over there”, “… no brain”, “he’s from CSI, one of our smart criminals who breaks and enters and then collapses outside the scene” and “f**king retard.” There were several officers present during the comments, not one of them suggesting they were wrong or inappropriate.”

And it just doesn’t get any better – for the poor guy in the cell or the cop with the potty mouth.

Further examination of the audio and footage from the watchhouse cameras revealed this tasty little incident:

“…the duty officer was eating a piece of toast. He was pointing to the toast and then himself and later pointed to another breakfast behind the counter. In the officer’s statement he claimed he was indicating to the complainant that his breakfast was behind the counter. However on viewing the video it appeared the duty officer ate the complainant’s toast that was sitting with the complainant’s weetbix. He then went to a box sitting on the bin containing breakfast rubbish and took out a white bag with toast and a carton of milk. The duty officer then poured the milk on the weetbix and brought this, along with the toast in the white bag, to the complainant. It was concerning that the duty officer provided the complainant with toast and milk which appeared to have been taken from rubbish sitting on the bin.”

And thanks to the watchhouse cameras we now know that:

In addition to the inappropriate comments identified above the duty officer was heard and observed making the following statements to or about the complainant:

• “stupid f**king idiot”

• “make things quite clear, …, if you wanna f**kin’ play up I’ll make things hard for you”

• “god, he f**king stinks”

• “didn’t bang head for too long coz it hurt” one officer apparently mocking the complainant to another officer

• Two officers were joking about the complainant hitting his head against the cell door because he

wasn’t given a blanket. One officer stating that the complainant had said he would jump in the air

and land on his head killing himself. The officer then stating “go ahead, do it.” The other officer

stating “make sure you do it in front of the cameras”

• “piece of s**t that he is”

• After the officer established that the complainant was dialling his wife whom he had a domestic

violence order against, the officer said “get back in your f**king cell you spastic”; “you’ve got a

domestic violence order that says you are not allowed to contact her, you f**king wanker. You’re

not allowed to approach her, you’re not allowed to contact her directly or indirectly you f**king

wanker”

• “how about you shut the f**k up”

• “spastic c**t” whispered by officer

And what was the sanction meted out to the officer?

Here again from the NT Ombudsman’s annual report:

It was determined that some of the conduct was highly inappropriate for police officers and in breach of the NT Police Code of Conduct and Ethics and General Orders. The JRC recommended that the officers receive managerial guidance in relation to appropriate conduct when dealing with detainees. The JRC noted that it had already been recommended that the officers receive formal counselling.

The investigation also revealed that appropriate entries were not made into the watch-house log or offender journal.

Great – “counselling” and “managerial guidance” – no mention of the slap on the wrist, an apology to the complainant or any action against those other officers who, by their silent acquiescence, condoned their brother officer’s conduct.

As Glen Dooley of the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency (NAAJA) , which provides legal services and representation across the Top End of the NT, told the local ABC:

“…there should be tougher sanctions and more transparency.

“If we had a field officer and that field officer started calling that client a dumb whatever, a whatever loser and a whatever retard and then served them some food out of one of our garbage bins, that person would be sacked on the spot,” he said.

“The report here recommends the officers receive managerial guidance in relation to food hygiene and appropriate conduct when dealing with detainees. That’s limp to me.”

For the benefit of those members of the NT Police reading this who may have forgotten what it says – and for the rest of us who have most likely never seen it before – here is the NT Police Statement of Ethics:

STATEMENT OF ETHICS

Each member of the Police Force is to act in a manner which:

- upholds the rule of law;

- preserves the individual’s rights and freedoms;

- places integrity above all;

- seeks to improve quality of life throughout the community through involvement with the community;

- strives to attain maximum citizen confidence and satisfaction;

- strives at all times for professional excellence;

- strives to maximise the effectiveness of available human and other resources; and

- tempers authority with common sense, discretion and sensitivity

Any bids on how many of those points have been contravened here – all of them? – or none?

Have any thoughts about the effectiveness of the current investigative process for complaints against NT Police?

Your thoughts please!

Wadeye township

I’ve written here recently about the fantastic (in the original sense of that word) approach that The Australian and its dwindling number of northern correspondents take to just about anything to do with Aboriginal affairs here in the NT.

This past weekend The Weekend Australian continued this dubious tradition when it ran this piece from its northern correspondent, Nicolas Rothwell.

Rothwell examines apparently new economic and governance developments at the troubled remote township of Wadeye, in the west of the NT’s Top End.

And Rothwell, after many years in the NT, has apparently finally realised what anyone with any experience in remote Australia would have found out a long time ago – that Wadeye, like most small townships in the NT, and elsewhere – is a town that is “mostly ordered and peaceful”.

If you take the assertions in Rothwells piece at face value you would think that the good citizens of Wadeye had turned their backs on all forms of Australian mainstream governance and were boldly charting a course of their own, free from the controls imposed by Australian governments at all levels.

As Rothwell says:

“…what bureaucracy gives, it can also take away. Not only did the federal intervention of mid-2007 sweep through Wadeye; the Thamarrurr local council was wound up as the Northern Territory unveiled its new regional shires. The council, though, gave birth to a new Thamarrurr Development Corporation, which was bolstered by strong support from the Rudd government. The upshot of this administrative upheaval was a deepened desire among the Wadeye leadership group to pursue their own path.
…
“The idea aims to assert control over their own region and in time to supplant the long-established Northern Land Council, which is widely seen as a moribund arm of the Territory Labor Party. “We will set up our own council,” Nganbe says bluntly. TDC’s Berto says: “There’s a lot of people here not happy with the NLC and its complete lack of service, and its standing in the way of progress. We want to set the political agenda from the ground.”

And notwithstanding the brief reference to “strong support” from the Rudd government, Rothwell reckons that the people of Wadeye:

“…don’t like the deal on offer from mainstream Australia’s authorities. They want to keep their own culture, they want economic development and they want it on their own terms, under their control.”

What Rothwell is of course talking about here is localised Aboriginal self-determination, an aspiration that he has frequently, and as recently as six weeks ago, condemned to the dustbin of Australian political history:

“For some time it has been clear Aboriginal self-determination has had its day.”

Due credit should be given to the good citizens of Wadeye for getting their act together in what are incredibly difficult circumstances. By all accounts they have established a range of business enterprises that will provide real jobs and offer economic opportunities to locals.

Rothwell implies that the people of Wadeye have achieved these successes in spite of the bureaucratic and administrative barriers set up by governments at every turn. But it may be that a few inconvenient facts – for Rothwell’s thesis at least – might explain a somewhat different basis for some of Wadeye’s recent successes.

The bureaucracies that Rothwell says have taken so much from the people of Wadeye with one hand have been very busy giving bucketloads of money to the recently-established Thamarrurr Development Corporation Ltd (the TDC) with the other.

The TDC is a non-profit commercial operation limited by guarantee with no shareholders – just members that represent the 20 clan groups of the Wadeye region.

In the 2008/2009 round of funding for the Indigenous Heritage Program announced on 7 July 2008, the TDC was given two grants to a total of $62,704 for “the investigation and management of cultural heritage” of the Thamarrurr region.

On 8 October 2008 Federal Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin announced that TDC would receive $500,000 as “an establishment grant to deliver a range of business services” to the Wadeye region.

At it’s meeting of 10 February 2009, the Victoria Daly Shire Council (the Council), the local government body that replaced Thamarrurr’s predessor, the Thamarrurr Regional Council, passed the following Motion:

“That Council agrees to lease for one dollar ($1.00) to Thamarrurr Development Corporation for the period from the 10th of February 2009 to the 7th of December 2009 all non – fixed assets.”

At the following meeting on 7 April 2009, the Council, in the course of the Confirmation of the Minutes of the previous meeting, amended that Motion:

“The minutes of the ordinary meeting, item (8) TDC were amended with a further dot point
added, saying that if all the above conditions were met the vehicles would then be sold to the TDC for the sum of $1.00. The minutes were  then taken as read and accepted as a true record of the Meeting.”

The value of the assets leased to the TDC for $1, according to the Report provided to Council, was $760,073.

According to the same report, the insured value of the vehicles to be sold to Tharmarrurr upon it meeting Council’s conditions was $482,273.

You can read the Minutes of Council meetings and the Report from Council staff for yourself here.

On 4 March 2009, by joint press release Minister Macklin and Member for Lingiari, Warren Snowdon announced that TDC would receive a total of $650,000 to provide painting services and the purchase of civil construction machinery.

On 11 June 2009, in another joint press release, Snowdon and Macklin announced that TDC would receive a total of $1.422 million to purchase a mobile concrete batching plant and to provide accommodation for “key staff” at Wadeye.

As the ABC reported last month, the Thamarrurr Association, (also based at Wadeye but a separate entity to the TDC) following representations from then NT Indigenous Policy Minister Alison Anderson, received a $250,000 grant from the NT government in circumstances yet to be fully explained:

“Ms Anderson secured $250,000 of taxpayer funds for a corporation run by the powerful Yunupingu family in Arnhem Land, including Galarrwuy Yunupingu. The only other organisation to get $250,000 for community consultation is the Thamarrur Association at Wadeye, which has never declared an income before. The Government has not announced the payments and is yet to explain how the companies were selected. It says the money will pay for consultation on the Working Futures policy to help the Government get its service delivery right.”

I’ve not yet been able establish any direct connection between the TDC and the Thamarrurr Association – other than that they both do the same kind of business in the same small town.

On my back-of the-envelope reckoning the TDC has received control over $760,000 worth of assets for the bargain basement price of a single dollar from their local Council and, including the grant to the Thamarrurr Association, close enough to $3.5 million from the NT and Federal governments.

Not bad for a group that Rothwell says, “…don’t like the deal on offer from mainstream Australia.”

And what of the assertions in Rothwell’s article by TDC’s John Berto of the Northern Land Council’s “…complete lack of service, and its standing in the way of progress” at Wadeye?

John Berto should know all about the NLC and service delivery at Wadeye. After all, he had been a long-term employee of the NLC and for a period up to late 2006 he was the NLC’s Deputy CEO.

But Rothwell and Berto would also be aware of the benefits to the Traditional Owners of the Wadeye region (and beyond) resulting from the NLC’s negotiations on their behalf over the Blacktip gas plant and pipeline.

The deal negotiated by the NLC has given, and will provide into the future, significant economic and social benefits to the traditional owners and residents of the Wadeye region.

Indeed, there is every appearance that Rothwell consciously excluded these well-known and readily available facts from his piece because they did not support his oft-repeated spurious claims about the NLC. I found all of the material noted above after about ten minutes of searching on the web and a bit of scurrying about in the backblocks of various websites.

Rothwell ends his piece with a dubious comparison between Longreach in far-western Queensland and Wadeye, implying that Wadeye should be accorded the same services, government support and facilities as Longreach.

Longreach is a service centre in a region with a long history of extensive & highly productive mining, pastoral and agricultural activity. It is also has roads that lead from somewhere to somewhere else.

Wadeye services only itself and a few small homelands. It is at the wrong end of a long and rough road in a region with no history of pastoral, agricultural or any other significant development – apart from the above-mentioned Blacktip gas project.

Pity about those annoying facts getting in the way of a fantastic story.

Declaration: Bob Gosford has worked for the Northern Land Council as a legal advisor, most recently in 2008. He had no involvement in matters at Wadeye apart from a single meeting with an early version of the Thamarrurr council in about 2000.

Image from Getup

This a guest post from John Greatorex who worked as a teacher at Galiwin’ku on Elcho island off the coast of Arnhem Land for 27 years. He now is a part-time teacher of the Yolngu studies at a Darwin University.

He has now resigned from teaching to work with his Yolngu families on projects of importance to them – including the wonderful Arnhem Weavers group – you can find out more about the Arnhem Weavers and the food co-operative project they have recently started at their website.

Recently I was profoundly moved when I heard Richard Downs, an Alwayarra elder, seek refugee status for his people whose homelands are in the central east of the Northern Territory, Australia.

The Alyawarra were refusing to accept the impositions of the Federal Government through the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER), and as part of their action they have requested the United Nations (UN) register their people under the international refugee convention as internally displaced persons.

The ABC reported (26 August 2009):

“Mr Downs says people of the Alyawarra Nation have been left with no choice because the federal intervention in the Northern Territory has taken away their rights.” “We’ve got no say at all,” he said. “We feel like an outcast in our community, refugees in our own country.”

This was followed the next by another report on the ABC where Richard Downs said:

“We no longer have any rights to exist as humans in our own country and are outcasts in our own community”

On the 3rd September Richard Downs wrote:

“Your government’s so-called measures under the intervention go far beyond this [protecting women] to take away our dignity, our self esteem, and land control, disempowerment, human and indigenous rights.“… Your system is about creating divisions, hate and racism and control over people who are already struggling under oppression.”

When I read these statements I thought: “These people are making a stand in a climate of constant and negative stereotyping by governments and media; a difficult step for anyone.”

The Alyawarra, by refusing to be redefined, are taking active steps to take control of their lives.

Don’t we all want to be in control of our lives?

I would like to tell two stories which I hope will provide insight into why homelands are of crucial and critical importance to their traditional custodians.

The following stories attempt to represent what I have heard and learnt from Aboriginal mentors in east Arnhemland over several decades.

Not only does it make common sense, but it has been clearly demonstrated that the happiest and healthiest people in any society are those who are able to control the most important aspects of their lives.

Control over our lives is proportional to how we feel about ourselves, how society sees us, and our status within society.

In the Northern Territory the people with the least control over their lives are the First Nations peoples.

Disturbingly, recent Australian and NT Government policies, including the NTER, have further stripped away at Aboriginal people’s rights to control their lives in the Northern Territory. Traditional (nation) estates on which ‘prescribed’ communities are located have been compulsorily acquired by governments without negotiation.

Every Black Territorian living on ‘Aboriginal’ land receiving Centrelink or other welfare payments is compulsorily ‘Income-Managed’ (including old-age pensioners).

Black Territorians are negatively stereotyped as child abusers and alcoholics, poor school attendees and perpetrators of domestic violence.

Recently-announced policies now envisage forcing families off their custodial estates (away from their homes) into ‘growth towns’ for the convenience of government bureaucracies.

Public statements that redefine all Black Territorians in a negative way can only have a negative and debilitating impact. While governments, supported by the media, continue to negatively stereotype all Black Territorians, the health and well-being of these peoples will continue to decline.

In east Arnhemland where the Yolngu peoples live, and where I have spent much of the past 30 years, I can say for a fact:

“…there are homelands where school attendance is higher than anywhere else in Australia; where children are safer than in white towns and centres and where substance abuse and youth suicide are non-existent.”

So what is it that is so important and special about homelands for their traditional custodians and that underpins such successful outcomes?

The following two stories may provide some insight into these questions.

Story One.

Recently the Yolngu Studies lecturer, Yingiya Guyula, delivered the last class for the semester. He spoke about the first contact between his families and White settlers.

He told how fear of Whiteman first entered the lives of his families after his grandfather was shot by cattlemen. Before this incident his families had heard reports from further south that White men were scalping Black men; just like his families were skinning crocodiles.

Now they had to be ever vigilant and wary. They could no longer live peacefully, safely travel and hunt on their custodial estates; lands they had inhabited since the beginning of time.

Towards the end of the class a student added to Yingiya’s story.

She explained that when the Elcho Island missionaries called the twenty or so Yolngu nations to ‘the Light’, they didn’t understand. These missionaries failed to recognise the existence of strong and complex governance structures, where nation boundaries, established alliances and political structures were understood and respected.

By calling these diverse peoples into the Elcho Island mission, and onto the land of one nation, the missionaries were disempowering all the non-landowners.

She explained it like this.

“We Yolngu people are connected to our ancestral estates like a tree is rooted deeply into the soil. When the roots of a tree and the soil recognise each other, the roots will grow ever deeper and stronger, and the tree grows strong and bears good fruit.”

“The missionaries pulled us up by the roots and placed us in the mission and onto soil that was foreign. Our roots could not grow into the mission soil, that soil does not recognise us, and our roots do not recognise that soil. Our roots would only stay in the surface soil. A tree may stay alive on unfamiliar and alien soil, but it will not find nourishment, it will be stunted and will not bear good fruit. We can be only strong and independent on our homelands; not in the mission; not in the “town”.

Story Two.

In 1984, with the best of intentions, the Northern Territory Government developed a constitution for the community council on Elcho Island. The new constitution made provision for members to represent the 20 or so nations who lived on the mission (in 2009 residents still use the term mission).

An old man and I were talking one day. He had been elected chairman of the council. He described how he felt in conflict, he did not feel comfortable talking about the land where the mission stood, it wasn’t his land. He understood why some council members didn’t attend council meetings. He explained that it was disrespectful for non-landowners to discuss the mission land. So how could the council work?

I could see what he was saying. I grew up on a family owned farm. We would have been very upset if the government had decided that our neighbours had the right to make decisions about our farm.

I noticed that although he attended council meetings, he didn’t make public council announcements, he always deferred to the land owners for such matters.

When a Yolngu man or woman speaks of the critical importance of land, I now know they are not talking about land in general. They are referring to their very own homeland.

If you are motivated to do so, please have a look at the online homelands petition, and consider supporting this cause.

http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/Homelands

John Greatorex

7th September 2009

Note: The quotes in these stories are used with permission.

Further to this post and the one following I have highlighted the relevant comments from Alison Anderson that seem at odds with comments made by Richard Downs.

I’ll ask Richard about Alison’s comments a bit later today:

“Death by consultation.” By KIERAN FINNANE.

For the Intervention Rollback Action Group (IRAG), led by Mount Nancy town camp resident Barbara Shaw, it must have seemed like a coup: here supposedly was a joint statement from MLA Alison Anderson, well known supporter of the Intervention, and Richard Downs and Rosalie Kunoth-Monks, well-known opponents. It was calling for Aboriginal nations “to stand up against the absolute racist oppression, forced assimilation and attempts to destroy Aboriginal people being caused by the intervention measures”.

Ms Anderson has rocked a few boats lately – was this another one? She was still on the road back from Ampilatwatja where she had met with Mr Downs and Mrs Kunoth-Monks when she told the Alice News: “Those are Richard’s and Rosie’s words. “I’m not going against the Intervention, but they are because they haven’t seen any good come out of it.”

She says the joint statement was put together by a white woman on the community and she had not checked it before leaving to return to Alice Springs.

“At no stage did I say that I didn’t support the Intervention, but we can’t have a continuous Intervention – we need human and social development.

“At Ampilatwatja they’ve seen nothing come out of the Intervention except for a police presence at Alpara. “They’ve sat there for two years thinking something will happen and nothing has. I’d rather live in the bulldust than in the houses out there.” What about Income Management, one of the strongest initiatives of the Intervention – does that not also apply at Ampilatwatja? Says Ms Anderson: “I still think Income Management is a good thing – when I’m travelling around I can see the faces of the kids shining because they’re getting enough to eat. “But some people at Ampilatwatja don’t like it, they want to be able to manage their own money.” She says the Eastern Plenty has been failed by government policy, including the Working Futures policy which she launched while still Minister for Indigenous Policy with the Territory Government.

Update – Monday 31st August – I have now been able to establish that the media release considered below is in fact genuine.

In a following post I’ll put up an interview that I held with one of the signatories, Richard North, earlier today that sorts out a few of the questions I posed below.

Well, a few of them anyway.

Earlier today I again tried to contact Alison Anderson through her electorate office in Alice Springs. The mobile of one of her electorate officers was switched off but at the office itself I was informed by one of her staff that “Alison Anderson has concerns about the Media Release” but that staffer refused to elaborate on those concerns other than to say that Ms Anderson would make no further comment.

Ms Anderson would be “out bush” for the rest of the week. I pointed out to Ms Anderson’s staffer that she must surely be within mobile range (thanks Telstra) sometime soon and that I would be happy to speak to  her at any time and merely sought some answers to a number of obvious questions that arose from her apparent dramatic change of heart concerning the NT Intervention.

It is also a reasonable expectation that a politician that puts their name and contact details on a media release that reveals a fundamental change of philosophical and political direction would make themselves available to respond to the many questions that arise from those revelations.

But the usual rules of political behaviour don’t necessarily apply in the NT and also, apparently, to the conduct of our newly independent member for Mcdonnell.

That’s all by way of an update here – wander over to the next post for a look at the interview I conducted earlier today with Richard Downs, a co-signatory of the Media Release with Alison Anderson and Rosalie Kunoth Monks.

If there was one issue on which Alison Anderson has maintained a consistent position over the past two years of her turbulent tenure as MLA for the remote NT seat of Macdonnell it was her voluble support for the NT Intervention.

Just a month ago she was quoted in the NT News, praising former federal indigenous affairs minister Mal Brough and criticising her own party’s equivocal support for the Intervention:

“The fact is that Mal Brough had the guts to trigger an intervention. I think the man had guts,” she is quoted as saying. “I think what federal Labor has now done is the opposite.
“It is killing off the intervention without killing off the intervention. “We are killing people by consultation.”

As former chair of the NT Intervention Task Force, Sue Gordon told The Australian three weeks ago, Anderson:

“…is a very passionate lady, and she does put Aboriginal people first,” retired West Australian magistrate Sue Gordon said. “She was the only member of the NT government who stood up and supported the emergency response.”

In the same article the architect of the NT Intervention, Howard’s Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough also supported Anderson’s resolute support for his Intervention:

“Alison Anderson, to her enormous credit, has been consistent on these issues now for a number of years,” he said. “She has stood up to the bullies in the Labor Party and has now finally made the ultimate sacrifice. That is true principle…”

But it seems that consistency those “true principles” have been ditched and Anderson has joined the ranks of the “urbanised saviours” that she has so vehemently criticised in the past who:

“…know nothing about living amongst the poverty and abuse in remote communities have condemned the intervention,” Ms Anderson said. “My people need real protection, not motherhood statements from urbanised saviours. I live my law and culture and I will represent my people regardless of what’s fashionable. My people need the help and want the help from this intervention.”

Yesterday – according to the Media Release attached below – Anderson joined the widely respected and outspoken Chairperson of the Barkly Shire Council, Rosalie Kunoth-Monks (who would be more familiar to many Australians as the female lead in the ’50’s film Jedda) and Richard Downs, a spokesperson for the hundred or so residents of Ampilatwatja that walked off from their township to a remote bush camp a months ago.

As recently as two weeks ago Richard Downs was scathing of Anderson’s performance as the local member representing his community.

As he told the ABC’s Alice Brennan, his community was:

“…disappointed they have not heard from the politician. “Nothing,” Richard Downs said. “It just shows to me what sort of a person she is. “She doesn’t have concerns enough to give us a call and say, ‘Look, I’m going to visit with you, I’m going to listen to you and see what we can do.’ “You know the rules, you should have stayed in there and looked after your constituents – that’s both black and white. “Look, do what you want to do but we certainly ain’t gonna support you no longer.”

Downs has been a savvy user of the internet and the media and has established the InterventionWalkOff blog and website to give voice to his community’s concerns.

In a recent post, entitled “We are refugees in our own country”, the residents of Ampilatwatja made clear their views about the NT Intervention:

“The NTER legislation constitutes serious, substantial and persistent racial discrimination against Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, multiple violations of the Race Convention and other international human rights covenants, to which Australia is signatory.
Aboriginal people had no other option but to walk off the Prescribed Area, thereby removing them from being subject to the NTER legislation, and which additionally accords them the status of being internally displaced refugees.”

So, to The Northern Myth at least, it is more than passing strange that Anderson would join with such strident critics of the Intervention which she has, perhaps with equal vigour, supported.

But in the weird world that passes for NT politics right now surprises are coming thick and fast. And just maybe Anderson took the trenchant criticisms from her constituents at Ampilatwatja to heart.

Yesterday Anderson, Kunoth-Monks and Downs co-signed what appears on its face to be an extraordinary press release (see text below), with the following as a joint statement:

“Richard, Rosalie, and Alison stated that “Aboriginal people are depressed and cannot see the light for the future, after experiencing decades of marginalisation, decades of being treated as second class citizens in their own country and the absolute racist oppression.”

Anderson is quoted as saying:

“…the failure over decades of health, education and basic infrastructure, has been an attempt to keep Aboriginal people unhealthy, uneducated and locked in poverty”, to weaken the people so they cannot fight.”
…
“this is the proudest moment of her life; to be here, with Alyawarra people, to hear and see them saying: “enough”.

The Northern Myth had some concerns that the joint Media Release may not be genuine, in part because of the extraordinary nature of what appears to be a world-class backflip-with-double-pike from Anderson to withdraw her consistent support for the Intervention and also because it was riddled with spelling, grammatical and syntactical errors.

Downs, Kunoth-Monks and Anderson give their contact phone numbers at the bottom of the press release as media contacts.

The Northern Myth called Downs several times but his phone was switched off.

Kunoth-Monks is “in town” and staff at the Barkly Shire don’t know her mobile number.

Anderson’s contact number on the media release is for her electorate office in Alice Springs.

The Northern Myth called late last night and eventually spoke to Anderson’s electorate officer, John Rawnsley, who is also a blogger, Deputy Mayor of Alice Springs, and was, at least as recently as last month, Anderson’s “anointed” successor for her seat of MacDonnell.

Rawnsley was unaware of Anderson’s comments in the media release, saying only that as far as he knew she was “out bush and beyond mobile range”.

The Northern Myth spoke to Anderson’s electorate office this morning and was again informed that she was “out bush and out of mobile range” but that would try to pass a message to her.

As at the time of posting Anderson has not responded to The Northern Myth.

All a bit strange for the co-signatories to a Media release trumpeting an event that Anderson described as “the proudest moment of her life”.

But Anderson has been promising a lot lately.

Just three weeks ago, after walking away from her position as the most powerful elected Aboriginal woman in the country, she told the ABC that events of the first day of sitting of the NT Parliament in the following week would be:

“…the biggest day in Territory history,” she said. “Let’s all wait until Tuesday. I think it’s going to be the greatest gift to Territorians. “It will be the greatest surprise to Territorians. I’ll leave the surprise as a whole package.”

There was no “big day”, no “great gift” and no “great surprise. It all ended in tears, with Alison’s grand plans in tatters thanks to the deal done between Gerry Wood and NT Chief Minister Paul Henderson.

And it remains to be seen how Anderson implements the call made in yesterday’s media release to:

“…stand up against the absolute racist oppression, forced assimilation and attempts to destroy Aboriginal people being caused by the Intervention measures.”

The Northern Myth still cannot confirm whether the Media Release is genuine…if you know otherwise, please pass on a comment to that effect.

For present purposes we are assuming it is genuine.

Here is the text of the Media Release – make of it what you will.

MEDIA RELEASE – The First Australians call for an end to oppression

Aboriginal people are standing up and calling on all the leaders from all the Aboriginal nations, to stand united against oppression and dictatorship

Statement from Richard Downs, Rosalie Kunoth-Monks, and Alison Anderson,

27 August 2009.

This is a very significant day…on this day, Richard Downs, community elders and members from Ampilatwatja, and Rosalie Kunoth-Monks met with Alison Anderson, Independent member for Macdonnell.

A resolution was made to call together the Aboriginal nations, from across the Territory, to unite under one banner to stand up against the absolute racist oppression, forced assimilation and attempts to destroy Aboriginal people being caused by the intervention measures.

Richard, Rosalie, and Alison stated that “Aboriginal people are depressed and cannot see the light for the future, after experiencing decades of marginalisation, decades of being treated as second class citizens in their own country and the absolute racist oppression.”

Alison Anderson stated that “the failure over decades of health, education and basic infrastructure, has been an attempt to keep Aboriginal people unhealthy, uneducated and locked in poverty”, to weaken the people so they cannot fight.

Aboriginal people have been patient for too long; but no longer – enough is enough. It is time for the people to come together…with one voice.

Alison said “this is the proudest moment of her life; to be here, with Alyawarra people, to hear and see them saying: “enough”. Alison has now made a commitment to rally her peoples across the following nations and language groups: Pintupi, Walpiri, Pitjantjara, Yangantjara, Arrernte (Eastern and Western), Lowitja, to join with the people from Ampilawatja on Alyawarr land, in their struggle against oppression.

Rosalie will rally people from the Utopia region; Anmatjarra, Kateytye and Waramungu to come together over the next weeks.

Aboriginal people come from a noble lineage; Mother Earth holds us to this land – we belong to this land; the land underpins everything that we are. Our language, our laws, our culture, and our rituals are an expression of this belonging, which has been in place since time immemorial. The land and law is us – no one can separate that.

From that place of safety and strength, we call on all the Aboriginal nations to unite with us and call on all levels of government to stop dictating the terms to Aboriginal.

The “Aboriginal industry” is worth billions of dollars, which is squandered by never ending layers of bureaucracy. Aboriginal people call for control of their own affairs – through direct funding from the federal government for our plans and visions for the future, rather than being squandered by the Northern Territory government on things like wave pools and convention centres.

“Let us set the flames alight”, said Richard Downs – let us remove ourselves from the governments’ oppression and unite and strengthen each other, in our resolve to no longer be dictated to.

For more information: www.interventionwalkoff.wordpress.com

Media contacts:

Richard Downs – spokesperson Alyawarra nation

Rosalie Kunoth-Monks – spokesperson Utopia region

Alison Anderson – Independent member for Macdonnell

How – and why – Canberra’s law saved NT Chief Minister Paul Henderson’s flailing government.

The obvious story about what happened in NT politics over that past couple of weeks is now well known and widely reported – best by the ABC in Alice Springs and Darwin and the local Darwin-based and Murdoch-owned daily, the NT News.

Labor’s saviour Gerry Wood spelled it out chapter and verse in this remarkable and refreshingly frank speech to the NT Legislative Assembly on Friday 14 August that reveals his decision-making processes and (some of) the machinations behind the recent chaos in the NT.

But none of the press – local or national – or commentators appear to have caught the real back-story to this chaos.

And, as always in politics, law and the lawyers – while not having the last word – had a substantial part to play in the result.

The legal structure imposed by the NT Self-Government Act 1978, an Act of the Commonwealth Parliament, is ultimately administered in the NT by the local gubernatorial equivalent, NT Administrator (and former NT Solicitor-General) Tom Pauling QC.

In the NT a vote of no-confidence in the government of the day would be taken under Part V of the NT’s Electoral Act – legislation subordinate to the NT Self-Government Act.

The Northern Myth’s reading of this legal situation – where local NT law determines the process involved in a no-confidence vote but Commonwealth law provides the constitutional backstop – is that any competent constitutional lawyer would have made it clear to anyone seeking their advice that the ultimate decision as to whether a proposed Chief Minister had the confidence of a thirteen member majority of the Legislative Assembly would be made by the Administrator – an office appointed by the Governor-General of Australia.

Important in this analysis is that Wood only needed to make one deal – as he did with Henderson – to maintain Labor in power. If he had supported the CLP there would have been three deals – between Wood and CLP opposition leader Terry Mills, between Mills and Alison Anderson and between Wood and Anderson.

In that scenario the risk of any of those three deals going pear-shaped, particularly those involving Anderson, was substantially higher than with the single deal between Wood and Henderson.

It is also interesting to speculate as to whether the Administrator would lightly have accepted that any minority government relying on Alison Anderson’s support could be stable.

And, as Gerry Wood made clear during his public statements and in his speech to the Legislative Assembly on Friday 14 August, his primary consideration was the stability of any future government.

Wood and CLP Opposition leader Terry Mills have consulted regularly since the last election just a year ago and it is understood that until early August this year both accepted that Wood would support Mills as the new Chief Minister when Alison Anderson eventually spat the dummy and defected from Labor – as I predicted in Crikey as long ago as February this year that she was always going to do.

But that Mills could rely on Wood’s support was bad analysis – by Wood, by Mills, and not least by The Australian – which had consistently expressed a Machiavellian support for Anderson – because that analysis was made without any appreciation or focus on the precise legal structure imposed by the NT Self-Government Act 1978, or on the position which the Administrator ultimately may have taken in the responsible performance of his function under that statute.

And the failure to appreciate this scenario falls hardest on Anderson and the mob of advisers that so gleefully assisted with her failed attempt at king-making – they didn’t appreciate the importance of the Administrator in the whole affair.

Wood (at least early in the game), Mills, Anderson and her gang of boosters must have all thought that seizing power in the NT was like a coup at a footy club – all you need to do is get the numbers and you are in!

On this analysis, once Gerry Wood accepted – following legal advice he would have received in the first week or two of August – the character of the legal structure created by the local Electoral Act and the Commonwealth’s gift of restrained power inherent in the NT Self-Government Act – and also accepted the widely held view that Anderson was a self-indulgent loose cannon who should not be in any parliament, let alone be in any government that he would be a part of – then an agreement with Paul Henderson for a minority Labor Government emerges as the only realistic prospect that would preserve not only stability in government but also keep him in the game.

The third option of an election would likely have left Gerry Wood as no more than an independent with little real influence against the substantial CLP majority the likely result of a landslide electoral victory.

A year ago Terry Mills and the CLP came within 82 votes of seizing power in the NT. This past month he has come within a hairs breadth of grabbing it again. The CLP now smells the blood of the Henderson government in the muddied waters of NT politics and has, rightfully, been pressing it’s challenges to the Government with renewed vigour.

But, as I have shown here, as long as Alison Anderson remains the only means by which Mills and the CLP can unseat Henderson and Labor, or unless Anderson somehow undertakes the very difficult task of remaking herself as the voice of reason and reliability, Mills cannot rely on Anderson to help him form an alternative government.

Assuming that Henderson can make his deal with Wood stick until the next election in 2012 I offer the following tentative views on the near future of NT politics.

As usual, it is all about survival – and naked ambition.

Henderson’s government is fragile at best – but thanks to Wood he has his bum on the seat of power and after the hard lessons he and his government have learned over the past twelve months he should (with substantial qualifications!) hold on to power until the next election. But Henderson’s deal with Wood says that all bets are off if he loses the leadership of his party – and even before Henderson’s recent troubles there were plenty of rumblings about likely and expectant challengers for his job. This presents a real problem for Labor – Henderson’s deal with Wood effectively stymies any reasonable succession planning before the next election, by which time Henderson may still present as a substantial electoral liability.

Mills has his own demons within the CLP and has also learned some tough lessons over the past twelve months. For mine at least, he deserves a third tilt at the top job – providing he can avoid any reckless challenges from within his own party. But for many in the CLP  he is a bit too much of a nice guy – and there is every chance that he will be toppled in the very near future by any of the, at least, three very keen challengers lining up behind him. And the haste with which he recently offered both Wood and Anderson senior ministries will be seen as poor judgement – as will his silly proposal that his first Ministry would consist of less than ten Ministers – that would have, once Wood and Anderson were allocated Ministries, denied many of those in the CLP with legitimate (and the ill-founded) ambitions of higher office and created unnecessary tensions.

And for Anderson – prior to the last election – and as recently as a month or two ago – she was saying that she would only serve two terms in the NT parliament. Less than four weeks ago the NT News reported that she had anointed her (then) electorate officer, the 28 year-old Alice Springs Deputy Mayor, John Rawnsley, as her successor for the seat of MacDonnell. No-one – perhaps not even Anderson – knows what will happen next but Anderson could (a) step down soon and force a by-election; (b) stay in until the next general election is held in 2012 or sooner and then retire; or (c) re-contest the seat at the next general election as an independent. Whatever happens she will be a rather lonely figure on the cross-benches in the Legislative Assembly.

And Gerry Wood – ’nuff said – he has done a great job for his electorate, and most likely the NT, and has secured his seat for as long as he wants it!

And if ever anyone wanted a good reason why the NT will never achieve Statehood – at least not in my lifetime – events in the past year in NT politics provide several salutary lessons.

And just for a further update, at the bottom I’ve included a par from Endeavour Consulting’s views about the recent events in the NT and the “misleading and eccentric” reporting of recent events in the NT by The Australian journalists – as reported in Crikey yesterday.

Over the weekend of Saturday & Sunday 15 & 16 August The Australian maintained it’s bizarre position that Alison Anderson was a visionary that could do no wrong and was now a victim of a dastardly conspiracy by a manipulative Gerry Wood and the forces of absolute evil behind NT Chief Minister Paul Henderson’s ruthless determination to hang on to power at the expense of “her people” – whomever they may be.

There are, of course, many other more considered views about Anderson’s recent contributions to political life in the NT.

And, as Alice Brennan of the ABC in Alice Springs reported on Friday 14 August – there is at least one mob of “her people” that are less than impressed with Alison Anderson, at least in her capacity as their local member:

“Rebel MLA ignoring us: community. The residents of Ampilatwatja, 325 kilometres north of Alice Springs, walked off their community a month ago protesting against their living conditions. A spokesman for the Ampilatwatja community, which is in Ms Anderson’s electorate, says it is disappointed they have not heard from the politician. “Nothing,” Richard Downs said. “It just shows to me what sort of a person she is. “She doesn’t have concerns enough to give us a call and say, ‘Look, I’m going to visit with you, I’m going to listen to you and see what we can do.’ “You know the rules, you should have stayed in there and looked after your constituents – that’s both black and white. “Look, do what you want to do but we certainly ain’t gonna support you no longer.”

As reported previously by Crikey and much more colourfully and disdainfully at VexNews here and here, being a journalist or political spinner in Darwin these days carries some serious personal and professional risks.

And, not least among the small gene pool of journalists and spinners in the NT, The Australian’s local journalists appear to have been in the recent political mess in the NT up to their necks.

On the weekend in question The Weekend Australian’s coverage of the outcome of the biggest political crisis in the short and inglorious history of the self-governing NT was limited to this cursory assessment by Natasha Robinson of Friday the 14th’s proceedings in the NT Parliament and to publishing the full text of Anderson’s self-serving-in-shameless-defeat-but-none-of-it-was-my-fault speech to the Legislative Assembly during that Friday’s marathon sittings.

As this excerpt shows, Anderson’s speech was pretty much all-about-Alison:

“I have always been a passionate politician; I speak out for what I believe in. I spoke out against the Labor government when it took over Aboriginal land at McArthur River. I crossed the floor with two of my Indigenous colleagues. I did not have to cross the floor then; it was not my people, it was not my land. The fact that the Labor government extinguished the right of these Aboriginal people forever is what made me act on my principles and come to support the member for Arnhem on that occasion. Two years ago, I spoke out for the federal Intervention when Territory Labor wished it had never happened. Now, I have spoken out against SIHIP, the biggest scandal I have seen in my political career. I have left the government and given away my ministerial portfolios. I am not one to keep quiet when the wellbeing of my people is at stake, but my Labor colleagues were quite prepared to sweep this disaster under the carpet.”

The Australian’s nominal contingent of three NT-based journalists has been numerically diminished since Natasha Robinson fled southward late last year after reportedly declaring her inability to work with local “Chief”, Paul Toohey, who himself recently pulled the pin on principle from News Limited over “Northern Correspondent”, and current partner of Anderson, Nicolas Rothwell’s closeness to the recent chaos in the NT.

Rothwell is by all accounts unwilling to write about current events in NT politics without making a declaration to his readers about his relationship to Anderson. Robinson is now back in the NT and is supported by a bevy of other flacks not seen here before and that seem unsuccessfully to be trying to fill the substantial gap left by Toohey’s absence. Toohey is apparently looking for work in Darwin and may well turn up to strut his stuff at the wonderful little Darwin nightclub “Happy Yess” this Saturday night with his occasional band, The Presley Boys.

Crikey had earlier sought details of the rumoured declarations of the relationship between Rothwell and Anderson made by Rothwell to both his superiors at News Limited and to various politicians and staffers at the NT Parliament but received no responses.

Meanwhile, from the same Murdoch stable as The Australian, the local daily tabloid NT News has come through the last couple of months with a greatly enhanced reputation as the local journal of record.

Previously more well-known for it’s “tits-and-crocs” coverage rather than in-depth political analysis, the NT News has, during the recent series of rolling constitutional crises that have beset the NT , presented some of the best journalism on local politics I’ve seen in the twenty-five years I’ve had the general misfortune to read it.

Over the last few weeks in particular its coverage and commentary has been thorough and insightful and it can rightfully claim, through the work of Nigel Adlam and Nick Calacouras in particular, that it has led the journalistic charge and provided both a source of valuable commentary and an all-too-rare outlet for reader’s opinions via its letters and the publication of reams of text messages.

I cannot say how long this golden thread of quality in NT journalism will last – but judging by the manner and tone of this response from NT News Editor Julian Ricci to comments made in a Crikey piece by David Curl last week – informed and insightful comment and real citizen access to its pages might be hanging around in the Top End’s only daily for a good while yet:

The editor of Northern Territory News Julian Ricci writes: There are so many blatant falsehoods and inaccuracies in the dribble that appeared under David Curl’s byline (twice) that it barely deserves a response. But he, and Crikey, cannot be allowed to get off that lightly.

Curl (yesterday Item 10 NT washup:desperately seeking stability) writes that the recent Territory government crisis was precipitated by the resignation of two ministers who both resigned citing articles in the NT News, and not over some major policy issue. That bit’s at least true … well, at least, that’s what both former ministers are on the record as saying when they stepped down. He states that both pieces were written by senior journalist Nigel Adlam. Wrong. The first article was written by political reporter Nick Calacouras which led to the resignation of Minister for Indigenous Policy Marion Scrymgour.

The second was a commentary piece written by Adlam at the senior editorial team’s direction. It was the opinion of the newspaper. The new Minister for Indigenous Policy Alison Anderson blamed Chief Minister Henderson’s lack of rebuttal for her resignation.

…

Finally, Curl states “free speech and independent opinion* are also in dangerously short supply” in the Territory. We say if Curl regards the NT’s non-aligned daily newspaper, a regional bi-weekly, four community newspapers, several regional weeklies, the ABC, three commercial TV stations and many more radio stations as a “dangerously short supply”, he must regard Sydney and Melbourne as the only population centres where people can relax, free of the misplaced fear of manipulated news coverage.

FOOTNOTE*: Over the last nine days of the political crisis the NT News published more than 100 letters and more than 350 text messages on the subject from its readers.

And finally, as promised above, this from Endeavour Consulting’s “Political Developments in Australia – July 2009” as reported in Crikey yesterday:

Indigenous housing and the defection of Alison Anderson: “Anderson’s position is, of course, completely spurious. The delays in delivering the housing package essentially demonstrates the Commonwealth’s ongoing incompetence in delivering any social programs in the NT… These developments demonstrate the continuing poisoning of NT indigenous affairs and politics by the NT indigenous intervention, which has caused the breaking up of political alliances and divisions within the Aboriginal leadership group. The negative effects of this have been reinforced by the misleading and eccentric coverage of NT issues in News Ltd publications.”

Got a comment about the NT News, The Australian, The ABC or any other coverage of the recent events in the NT?

Post a comment and have your say – register -it only takes a minute – and share your thoughts!!

The Terms of Reference for the review, now known as the Yu Review, included, where here relevant:

The NTER Review Board will:

1. examine evidence and assess the overall progress of the NTER in improving the safety and wellbeing of children and laying the basis for a sustainable and better future for residents of remote communities in the NT…
2. consider what is and isn’t working and whether the current suite of NTER measures will deliver the intended results, whether any unintended consequences have emerged and whether other measures should be developed…
3. in relation to each NTER measure, make an assessment of its effects to date, and recommend any required changes to improve each measure and monitor performance.

In making these assessments and recommendations, the Review Board should give particular regard to the government’s intention that Indigenous interests be engaged to ensure effective policy development and implementation processes…(emphasis added)

The Yu Review was publicly released by Macklin on 30 September 2008.

In relation to engagement by those politicians and bureaucrats responsible for the development and implementation of the Intervention the report was scathing.

These excerpts are from the Executive Summary:

Support for the positive potential of NTER measures has been dampened and delayed by the manner in which they were imposed. The Intervention diminished its own effectiveness through its failure to engage constructively with the Aboriginal people it was intended to help.

…

The single most valuable resource that the NTER has lacked from its inception is the positive, willing participation of the people it was intended to help. The most essential element in moving forward is for government to re-engage with the Aboriginal people of the Northern Territory.

And apart from the failure to engage with the Aboriginal people the subject of the Intervention, the Yu Review also found that the Intervention was constructed and pursued in an information and evidence-deficient vacuum insufficient to properly inform the establishment of the Intervention or to justify its continuation.

From page 16 of the Yu Review:

Apart from some initial scoping data, there was little evidence of baseline data being gathered in any formal or organised format which would permit an assessment of the impact and progress of the NTER upon communities. The lack of empirical data has proved to be a major problem for this Review and is an area that requires urgent attention.

Three weeks after the release of the Yu Review Jenny Macklin’s announcement to The Sydney Institute on 21 October 2008 that “…we must continue sound, evidence-based policy interventions that close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians,” gave some heart to many concerned about the way the Federal Government policies in the NT had been designed and implemented.

That Macklin considered that she even needed to mention the word ‘evidence’ in relation to the development and implementation of policy shows just how far from the norm the Intervention was.

Within the week she’d turned that on its head. As John Tomlinson noted in a piece published by Online Opinion:

Contrary to recommendations made by her own Review, Minister Jenny Macklin has decided to continue, for at least another year, with compulsorily quarantining half of the Centrelink payments paid to Aboriginal people living on 73 Northern Territory communities. Minister Macklin says she is maintaining quarantining because some women from the communities have asked her to continue it.

So much for sound evidence-based policy-making – at least in the Federal sphere. And there has not been much evidence since that time that Macklin’s words to The Sydney Institute were little more that empty rhetoric.

I’d have some serious reservations about according anyone in the NT Government with more than a passing familiarity with the concept of evidence-based policy-making.

A prime example of this is the ‘cobbled-together-over-the weekend’ policy introduced by then NT Education Minister Marion Scrymgour in late last weekend that mandated that all children in previously bilingual schools in the NT, who overwhelming have an Aboriginal language as their mother tongue, be given 4 hours of English only education each morning. A bit like teaching Mongolian to a classroom full of Swahili speakers.

And while there is no reference to an evidence base or community consultation in the recently announcement by the NT government of a new policy called “Working Future“, that policies roots reach back to a decision in September 2007 by Mal Brough to hand responsibility for homelands (Governments prefer the term ‘Outstation’) funding to the NT Government by 1 July 2008.

In October 2008 the then NT Indigenous Affairs Minister, Marion Scrymgour, released the NT government’s Outstations Policy Discussion Paper that sought to “…stimulate consultation and discussion over the development of a Northern Territory Government policy on outstations.”

As the ABC reported in mid-October 2008, the major premise of the discussion paper was that a large number of homelands in the NT would have their funding and in-kind government support withdrawn from 1 July 2009:

Govt moves to shut down Indigenous outstations. The Northern Territory Government is formulating a new policy to stop funding to remote outstations that aren’t fully established and permanent. The Minister for Indigenous Policy Marion Scrymgour has released a discussion paper on small remote communities and has called for community feedback.

A total of 43 submissions were received in response to the discussion paper and Pat Dodson was engaged to head a team to conduct a number of ‘community engagement’ sessions over a two week period in December 2008.

The Community Engagement Report (“the Dodson Report”, available here) of those consultations points, yet again, to the lack of available data upon which to base the policy outlined in the discussion paper and the need to collect data to measure the impact of the proposed policy:

For example, it is important to quantify what costs may be incurred by not investing in homelands. For example, loss of potential income from arts and tourism industries; loss of health and wellbeing; increased human services and infrastructure costs (e.g. correctional services, public housing, homelessness, police, alcohol and drug rehabilitation) through approximately 10,000 remote Indigenous Territorians moving permanently to larger communities and towns/ cities with some expected increase in anti-social behaviour. Finally, the cost benefit analysis needs to account for the significant contributions which homelands make (and could potentially make) to the cultural, social, health, environmental, economic and security values enjoyed by all Territorians and all Australians.

In relation to policy development and further consultation, the Dodson Report notes that:

During the community engagement sessions in December 2008, participants were informed that further community consultation on the development of the homelands policy would occur in March through June 2009. It is recommended that during these future consultation sessions that all available data, including the outcomes from the economic modeling study and the cost/benefit analysis, as well as NTG proposed regional models of delivery are presented for public comment.

In relation to policy implementation and the delivery of municipal services to homelands, the Dodson Report recommends:

That the NTG facilitate and coordinate negotiations between Shires and Homeland Resource Agencies (HRAs) to determine as to whom and how the essential and municipal services are to be delivered to all those living in homelands within each Shire area. Those in receipt of such services must be consulted as part of this process. Consideration should also be given to Shires eventually taking over the delivery of all essential and municipal services to homelands as part of their responsibilities as the third tier of Government.

Much of the Dodson Report is couched in the sort of bloodless bureaucratese that infects most government-commissioned reports. But perhaps the most disappointing revelation is contained in the first footnote:

It should be noted that many of the written submissions to the NTG were made after the originally published submission deadline of 1 December 2008. Because of the lateness of many of the submissions, not all were read by the authors in time to be considered in this report. Therefore, the recommendations within are derived in the main from the community engagement sessions held between 1-12 December 2008. Readers should note that the Office of Indigenous Policy (Department of the Chief Minister) is currently preparing a full analysis of all written and video submissions for consideration by the NTG.

So much for the NT government’s aim of “stimulat[ing] consultation and discussion over the development of a Northern Territory Government policy on outstations.”

Other concerns with the NT government’s handing of this policy remain.

When, if ever, will Anderson’s Office of Indigenous Policy publicly release all of the 43 submissions provided to Dodson and his team? Or even it’s “full analysis of all written and video submissions”?

Where is the analysis of the costs of the estimated “10,000 remote Indigenous Territorians moving permanently to larger communities and towns/ cities with some expected increase in anti-social behaviour”?

Where is the “further community consultation on the development of the homelands policy would occur in March through June 2009″?

One week ago the Northern Territory Indigenous Affairs Minister Alison Anderson announced her government’s ‘Working Future‘ policy the outcome, apparently, of her government’s analysis of the October 2008 Discussion paper and the Dodson report.

Two days later she appeared on the ABC’s NT version of Stateline, where she was interviewed by Mel James, the best television journalist on NT television.

Mel had obviously spotted a striking similarity between key components of Anderson’s plan and that originally proposed by John Howard’s Indigenous Affairs Minister, Mal Brough, in 2007.

Mel put this to Anderson in no uncertain terms:

MJ – Alison Anderson, this sounds very much like the policy that Mal Brough was proposing. It’s exactly the same isn’t it?

AA – Oh look, this has been a policy that’s been delivered and, um, developed by the Henderson Labor government. It’s got nothing to do with Mal Brough whatsoever.

MJ – It does sound remarkably similar to the plan that he was putting forward when he was the Indigenous Affairs Minister.

AA – This is the…like I said Mel, this is a policy thats been developed by, er, the, um, Henderson Labor government…

But, nothwithstanding Minister Anderson’s claims of authorship, there is a direct line that runs from Mal Brough and the handing of responsibility for homelands funding to the NT Government in September 2007, through the office of Brough’s successor Jenny Macklin, to the present day.

On important part of that connection is the decision by Macklin that imposed Commonwealth government conditions upon the State and Territory Housing Ministers in relation to remote Aboriginal housing.

In mid- January 2009 the National Indigenous Times reported that Macklin directed the Housing Ministers by letter in which she:

…tells the state and territory housing ministers that Commonwealth funds must not be spent on public housing on Aboriginal-owned land in remote regions unless Aboriginal landholders first agree to lease their property.

“Ensuring sufficient tenure to support substantial government investment in housing and infrastructure on Indigenous held land must be the first priority in order to allow housing projects to proceed quickly,” Macklin writes.

“The Australian Government minimum requirements in this regard are… government must have access to and control of the land on which construction will proceed for a minimum period of 40 years.”

…

Macklin also directs the states and territories to embark on a series of “tenancy management reforms” aimed at ensuring that landowners are not able to intervene in the relationship between the government, as the public housing provider, and the tenant.

She also instructs the ministers to ensure that if Aboriginal groups are acting as public housing providers, that no construction begins until they agree to be replaced at any time “if required”.

I have more to say about the apparent willful blindness that affects successive Federal and Territory Ministers in their development and implementation of policies for the provision of services to Aboriginal people in remote communities – but I’ll leave that for another day soon.

What these examples show is that Governments have a responsibility to ensure that when they develop and implement policies, particularly where those policies affect Aboriginal people living in remote circumstances, they have a responsibility to firmly ground the policy development in sound evidence and qualitative, social science research. It goes without saying that these same factors need to be considered through the implementation and life of the policy.

The NT Intervention is an exemplary case study in the costs (both in money and policy effectiveness terms) of not properly designing and implementing policies in this area.

We can already see the costs of the abject failure of the NT Intervention – what will be the costs of failure of Working Future?

The collapse of Great Southern and Timbercorp has only served to highlight the flaws in an industry that many believed was unsustainable from the beginning. “The original plan was to get city money into the bush,” says Liberal senator Bill Heffernan, a long-time critic of the MIS industry. “But it quickly grew into an industry of greed that relied on the generosity of the Australian taxpayer.”

And he might have added the venality of the promoters and the rank foolishness of the so-called investors.

Not long ago, just before Great Southern really went south, Michael Pascoe had this to say about the banks that have supported these rorts and the mug punters that invested in them:

So ANZ has a $500 million exposure to the failed Timbercorp tax deduction empire. What fools. It’s hard to know for whom to feel the most scorn – bankers stupid enough to back inherently flawed businesses or the mugs suckered into buying products on the lure of tax deductions – and the salesmanship that tends to come with particularly fat commissions. And then there’s Great Southern Plantations, trading presently suspended pending some further attempt at rescue. Ditto the scorn for all involved. Oh, and the various “independent” expert reports that have been purchased by management at various times, never mind alleged “investment recommendations”.

Angus Grigg also makes the following interesting comments about the impact of the MIS industry on the Douglas Daly region to the south-west of Darwin:

The Douglas Daly region of the NT provides a recent example of how quickly an area can change once the MIS industry moves in. The Queensland Country Life newspaper has reported a doubling of prices for cleared freehold land over a two year period.

…

It also estimates that 50 per cent of the 100,000 hectares of freehold land in the region, two hours south of Darwin, has been snapped up by the MIS industry. To many observers the situation in the Douglas Daly neatly encompasses the advantages enjoyed by the MIS industry over traditional agriculture.

The ABC’s The Country Hour covered the controversy over the MIS schemes move into the Douglas Daly in March 2008.

Back then it reported that:

In the Daly, south-west of Darwin it’s believed cleared land that was worth about $1m a few years ago is now being sold for up to $14m. Herron Todd White’s Land valuer Frank Peacock says he’s heard the same thing, but he couldn’t be specific about which properties are changing hands because many of them are still being settled. He can confirm though, that there has been huge interest from forestry companies. “The majority of land sales over the last 18 – 24 months has been to timber plantation companies and I’d estimate close to half the freehold area in the Douglas Daly would have gone to tree growers.”

He says freehold land, as opposed to pastoral land, has risen to $2,500 a hectare, and some sales have risen to $4,000 a hectare. “It’s unprecedented really for cleared freehold land in the Daly. It’s just a matter of supply and demand and there’s only 25 or so properties in the Douglas-Daly and they have the rainfall and the close proximity to the Port of Darwin and they also have the well-drained red soils and when it’s in tight supply that will underpin demand.’ The Northern Territory government’s moratorium [on land clearing] on the Daly has also seen prices elevated, and Mr Peacock expects values will hold because there are up to five plantations companies vying for freehold land in the Daly.

The Country Hour believes the forestry companies buying up land are Great Southern Limited, Timbercorp, Northern Tropical Timber, and Plantation Tropical Timbers. New South Wales Snowy River grazier Robert Belcher compares these companies to cancer. He’s dedicated his life to lobbying against corporate forestry companies because he says he’s seen the devastation they cause to rural communities. “The first thing you’ll see is a massive acquisition of land, that will displace population and you’ll start suffering population decline which means your infrastructure services will decline. For example educational facilities, health facilities, that sort of thing. I’ve seen it in every state in Australia. “It happens everywhere where there’s rainfall and decent soils. Anywhere from Grafton in New South Wales to Tasmania.”

…

But, one of Australia’s largest tree companies has rejected claims it’s driving farmers out of the Douglas-Daly region.

Great Southern Limited, has recently purchased land in the area, to plant African Mahogany trees. Communication manager David Ikin says the forest industry will strongly support the local region.

And at about the same time the ABC also reported the comments about the effects of the MIS industry from of the operators of a company established to produce biofuel in the NT:

But, Energy Crops Australia were more concerned with what’s happening in the Douglas Daly because they can no longer afford to invest there. “The Douglas Daly has been crucified by the managed investment scheme where the price of land has escalated beyond all reality. Come By Chance (sic – should be “Kumbyechants”) sold for $15 million dollars, purchased for $1.4m four years ago. It’s out of anyone’s price range who hasn’t got massive tax deductibility.” He says these companies will crucify the community and have devastating social implications. “The Douglas Daly as a farming community is finished. When people are getting that sort of money they’re just taking the money and running so there’ll be no farming in the Daly, there’ll be just trees.” He says he’s aware of Great Southern Plantations, Timbercorp and another two forestry companies buying up land in the region.

And, as that icon of independent journalism, the NT News reported as recently as January this year, a lot more land in the Douglas Daly was being acquired, or was targeted for acquisition, to be turned into plantations:

The Northern Territory’s timber industry is likely to undergo a rapid expansion following the buyout of four cattle stations. Up to 40% of the newly-acquired stations will be planted with African mahoganies and the rest of the land kept for cattle. The stations are the 5000ha Stray Creek, 16,000ha Gypsy Spring and 5000ha Kumbyechants in the Douglas Daly region and the 5000ha Rocktear Park near Katherine.
Plantation Tropical Timbers paid $5.9 million for Kumbyechants and Willmott Forests paid $5.5 million for Rocktear Park.The stations are all small but further buyouts are expected.

As recently as three weeks ago the voice of the Australian plantation timber industry, the Australian Plantation Products and Paper Industry Council was trying to put a brave-faced spin on the imminent collapse of the MIS house of cards :

Timber plantations funded through managed investment schemes (MIS) will continue to grow a large proportion of Australia’s future wood resource, despite the decision by leading agribusiness MIS manager, Timbercorp, to go into voluntary administration. Richard Stanton, CEO of Australian Plantation Products and Paper Industry Council (A3P) said today that Timbercorp’s decision was a response to the convergence of several factors directly affecting that company’s business, and did not indicate an impending collapse in plantation forestry investment or some inherent problem with the MIS business model. “Forestry remains a sound long-term investment, negatively correlated with other asset classes, which many regard as an important element of a diversified investment portfolio,” Stanton said…”Up from about 5% in the late 1990s, MIS forestry now accounts for more than a third of the national plantation estate – nearly 700,000ha of 1.97m ha at the end of 2008 – and over 80% of the annual establishment of new timber plantations, as well as a substantial and increasing area of replanting following final harvest.

It is a little too early to tell what the medium-term effects of the collapse of these schemes will have on the viability of what is undoubtedly a valuable and useful agricultural enterprise – there is nothing wrong with growing high-value fine grade timber, for which there is a growing market – but it remains to be seen how many of the trees that have been planted will ever be harvested – or just be left to rot in the ground.

But back to Blinky Bill Heffernan – the ABC reports today that:

Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan has announced the Senate’s current inquiry into food production will now also consider the impact of MIS. He says startling evidence has already come forward.

Looks like the Senate Committee are going to be very busy in the NT for a while – the Senate Environment, Communications and the Arts Committee is currently conducting an inquiry – with Hearings on the Tiwi Islands as I’m writing this post – into “forestry and mining operations on the Tiwi Islands”.

You can see the Terms of Reference for that Committee here and what appear (because I haven’t got around to looking at them…yet) to be a very interesting set of Submissions – here.

The collapse of Great Southern is of great importance to the Tiwi islanders – Great Southern bought out the previous operators, Sylvatech, a few years ago and the forestry scheme, which will produce pulp from about 30,000 hectares of Tiwi lands, has been mired in a web of controversy since the beginning – a coming attraction here at the Northern Myth.

The forestry operations on the Tiwi Islands are a very complex issue to tackle – so bear with my while I get my head around it!