|
March 21, 2006
The End of Ideology in Indigenous Affairs speech from Senator Chris Evans, the Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs is an interesting one. He rightly says that thirteen years of Labor government and ten years of the Coalition:
...have not delivered substantially improved outcomes for Indigenous people. On the key indicators in health, education, employment and housing success is minimal and in some cases the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous outcomes has widened. While both sides of politics have continued the ideological war, Indigenous people have continued to live in third world conditions, and the disillusionment of the wider community has grown.
Then some self-criticism of the traditional ALP approach to improving Aboriginal wellbeing:
Labor in government pursued an agenda that focussed on rights, reconciliation and self determination. Labor is proud that its agenda led to the establishment of ATSIC, the Mabo legislation, the Aboriginal Deaths in Custody Inquiry, the Indigenous Land Fund and the Reconciliation Council. Labor invested a great deal of energy and political capital into this agenda and we are despondent at the Howard Government's undermining of so many of these measures. Labor's ideological commitment to the rights agenda, self-determination and reconciliation was not matched by a successful attack on the fundamental causes of Indigenous disadvantage. We put too much faith in the capacity of the rights agenda to contribute to overcoming entrenched Indigenous disadvantage.
That self-reflection is refreshing to see. The rights agenda was narrow and limited, and the failure to deliver substantial improvements in Indigenous well-being provided conservatives with an opportunity to trash the real achievements of the Hawke / Keating period. It gave the Howard Government's the space to reject of self-determination and Aboriginal participation in decision making and service delivery; to encourage Indigenous people to participate in the mainstream, and to deny special needs or difference.
He says that both sides of politics have looked to minimising the political risks they take in the management of Indigenous Affairs by downplaying expectations and refusing to take responsibility for results. So where to now for the ALP?
Evans says that that means the ALP
"...abandoning our sense of misplaced moral superiority; acknowledging that the rights agenda is only part of the solution; accepting that confronting problems plague many Indigenous communities; and becoming more focussed on outcomes....Above all, the approach that Labor takes from here on will be driven by the evidence of what works and what does not. That must be our guiding principle. Labor wants to be driven by what is successful in reducing Indigenous disadvantage. To succeed we will need to look beyond our ideology and look to the evidence. "
So where does that lead? To the policies of Noel Pearson:
One area where Labor must engage more and adopt a less ideological stance is in the welfare debate. Noel Pearson's contributions on economic development, welfare dependency and individual responsibility have fundamentally shifted the Indigenous debate. His contributions have been more powerful because they are made by an articulate and passionate Indigenous person... His approach and new "get tough" language have invoked considerable criticism and unease from many Indigenous people. The truth is his agenda pushes the debate to issues where many of us are not comfortable to go. His language has been chosen to win conservative support, but he does confront real and raw issues that challenge us all. Many on the left of politics have failed to respond, in part because it takes them into the territory of very difficult and negative aspects of Indigenous life.
Senator Evans adds that, though Noel Pearson's language has been chosen to win conservative support, he does confront real and raw issues that challenge us all. Evan's observation that many on the left of politics have failed to respond, in part because it takes them into the territory of very difficult and negative aspects of Indigenous life is suprising, as is the fact that many Indigenous leaders seem reluctant to publicly engage in part because of their nervousness about the media treatment of Noel's critics.
This is suprising because Pearsons' ideas are an adaption of the Third Way to indigenous people. These pathway, which has beccome part of the reform agenda in Cape Yorke is about enhancing freedom and building capacity.
|
