|
|
|
|
Emeritus
Professor Helen Hughes (Australian National University) is
a Senior Fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies.
Mark
Hughes, her husband, is an independent researcher.
|
|
|
|
Skip to make comment
|
Send to a friend
NZCPR
Guest Forum
Who
are indiginous Australians?
Helen
Hughes and Mark Hughes
13 June 2009
In 1967
Australians overwhelmingly supported a referendum that altered
the Australian constitution in regard to Aborigines and Torres
Strait Islanders. The strong support was a measure of
mainstream Australia's belief that Australia's first migrants
should be treated as equals. Substantial funding for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art, dance, music,
literature and film has seen their flowering and incorporation
into a broadening stream of Australian culture. The land
rights movement returned land to Aborigines and Torres Strait
Islanders. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land holdings
now total about 1.25 million km2, approximately
five times the size of New Zealand.
Multiple
waves of migration to Australia, plus intermarriage firstly
with Macassans from the Indonesian archipelago, and then with
European settlers, has made a nonsense of any notion of
‘blood quantum’ for defining ratios of descent. Censuses
merely ask ‘Is the person of Aboriginal or Torres Strait
Islander origin?' In the 2006 census there were 517,000
positive responses - 2.4% of the population. A much larger
(and rapidly increasing) number of respondents, 1.3million,
left the census question blank. If DNA testing were used to
identify descendants of intermarriage, it may be that few
Australians have only Aboriginal ancestry, while the number of
Australians with some Aboriginal or Torres Strait ancestry is
likely to be in the millions. Rates of intermarriage between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous are high. With each new
generation the proportion of an individual's
Aboriginal ancestry decreases, while the proportion of the total
population with some Indigenous ancestry increases. It
will eventually approach 100% of those born in Australia.
Of
the 517,000 Australians who identified as Aboriginal or Torres
Strait Islanders in 2006, two thirds - 350,000 - chose to work
in mainstream jobs ranging from unskilled occupations to
professionals and managers. They own, are buying or
commercially renting their houses, send their children to
mainstream public or private schools, pay taxes, play sport
and enjoy other leisure activities and participate in civil
society. Like immigrant cohorts, they are still occupationally
skewed toward lower socio-economic status, but have health,
education and longevity characteristics of the mainstream
population while continuing to see themselves as Aborigines
and Torres Strait Islanders.
Of
the remaining 200,000 people of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander descent, the majority - about 130,000 - live in
welfare-dependent settlements in capital cities and towns,
like other welfare-dependent Australians. They have similar
socio economic characteristics, often living in public
housing. Less than 15% of Aborigines and Torres Strait
Islanders - about 70,000- live in remote northern Australia on
communal, inalienable Aboriginal land title. Of these, about
60,000 are in small townships of 500-2000 people, while about
10,000 live in 500 'Homelands' mostly with populations of less
than 100.
An
Aboriginal real estate agent or supermarket manager who drives
home each evening to his suburban house, his spouse who also
works and their children who attend a mainstream school are
not regarded as ‘Aboriginal’ by the ‘Aboriginal
industry’. Government policies are targeted at the minority
of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders on welfare, but they
are not evidence based. They are based on indicators such as
longevity and literacy that are misleadingly averaged across
mainstream and welfare groups. These averages mask zero
literacy and more than 20 years shorter life spans in remote
settlements.
The
impossibility of defining ‘Aboriginality’ emerges in
defining entitlements. Self identification breaks down when
entitlements are in sight. The right to reside in a community,
distribution of royalties and hunting rights lead to frequent
court disputes over ‘who is Aboriginal’. As the value of
land, royalties, forestry, and farming on the 1.25 million km2
increases, the disputes will become worse.
Over
the past 40 years, two sharply different approaches emerged to
making up for past transgressions. On the right, conservative
governments sought to give Aborigines and Torres Strait
Islanders access to education and hence to employment. On the
left, Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders were held to be
different from other Australians. This difference was to be
preserved by a return to hunter-gatherer life styles in
Homelands.
Instead
of compensating Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders for
past inequality, positive discrimination has led to appalling
living standards. Communal, inalienable land title has
deprived Aborigines of the private property rights that
enabled other Australians to acquire land, houses, business
and other assets. Jobs are limited to government services with
virtually all taken by non-Aborigines because separate schools
with special curriculums result in 100% illiteracy and
non-numeracy. Australian apartheid policies have had the same
dreadful results as they did in South Africa, but they
continue to be supported by the ‘Aboriginal industry’. In
South Africa, the left led the fight against apartheid; in
Australia it supports it.
The
Australian Commonwealth spends more than $4billion
annually specifically on Aborigines and Torres Strait
Islanders. This funding is mostly absorbed by the federal and
state/territory bureaucracy that manages the funding, the
office holders of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
organisations and the staff, consultants and contractors,
mainly non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, who service
the remote settlements. Recognising the failure of past
policies, initiatives have now been focused on the 26
principal remote settlements where separatist policies have
created dysfunctional communities.
Waves
of migration have contributed to the evolution of most
nations. Relationships to country evolve with each wave of
immigrants. Not only have families of European origin that
have farmed land for generations developed strong ties to
their land, but many migrants begin to feel more at home among
eucalypts than pine trees or bamboo thickets long before they
lose their accents. Consequently there is increasing
resistance to the use of ‘indigenous’ as a synonym for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander.
Although
Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders are recognised as the
first immigrants, their attachment to country is not unique.
All Australians - those that are indigenous because they were
born in Australia and those who immigrated and become
Australian citizens by choice - are entitled to equal rights
in return for equal responsibilities.
Skip to top |
Skip to make comment |
Send to a friend
Your
Comments:
To comment go to
letters to editor
>>>
Skip to top |
Send to
a friend:
|