Beginning in the 19th century, the welfare of Indigenous Australians has been negatively influenced by the outcomes of European colonization and in the modern day, Australia continues to see significant inequity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous welfare. In response, the Australian government signed the Closing the Gap Statement of Intent, a piece of legislation with the goal of eliminating this inequity by 2030; however, studies indicate that the welfare gap is not being closed and may even be widening in areas like employment and life expectancy (Council of Australian Governments, 2017). This essay will argue that Closing the Gap policy has consistently lacked Indigenous consultation, cultural sensitivity, and qualitative evaluation, resulting in an overall lack of autonomy given to Indigenous peoples which has caused a
failure to close the welfare gap.
Historically, government programs have not fully included Indigenous Australian perspectives regarding planning and implementation of legislation. One such example is the Australian government’s failure to include a racial non-discrimination clause in its constitution. Indigenous activists have heavily advocated for inclusion of a non-discrimination clause in the Australian constitution, and yet, Australia still lacks this piece of legislation. Lack of constitutional recognition of Indigenous rights make it possible to appeal legislation surrounding these rights (Davis, 2015), creating uncertainty and a clear lack of autonomy for Indigenous peoples. As Davis argues, “Indigenous peoples have never attained the degree of political legitimacy required to influence public institutions” (p. 42). Constitutional recognition of Indigenous rights is significant because it would give Indigenous people leverage to negotiate with the Australian government (Cronin, 2017). A lack of constitutional recognition is a clear denial of Indigenous autonomy in relation to policy-making and sets up a scenario in which there is little investment in Indigenous-related government programs by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Senator and Yaruwu leader Patrick Dodson confirms this, stating that the Aboriginal Nation is “cynical, frustrated and angry” at the policies put in place (and lack thereof) by the Commonwealth Government thus far (2018, p. 126). Further, separate studies done on Indigenous healthcare and early childhood programs show that community involvement and consultation in the planning and development of government programs was crucial to the success of these programs. A study done by the Australian Institute of Family Studies found that community consultation in the planning and implementation of early childhood care programs was a key to their success (AIHW, 2013). Another study done on Indigenous healthcare found that community consultation improved Indigenous access to healthcare (Hayman, 2010). Lack of Indigenous autonomy due to government policy can be seen as a key contributing factor to the lack of success of Closing the Gap programs.
Many of the governmental approaches to Indigenous advancement involve encouragement to assimilate into Australian society with “lack of acknowledgment of diversity of Indigenous circumstances, values, norms, beliefs, etc.” (Altman, 2010, p. 115). Altman uses the economic sphere to make this point, asserting that policy has been focused on Indigenous assimilation into the market economy rather than encouragement of participation in Indigenous institutions that contribute to the economy. As such, the Closing the Gap Refresh shows that Indigenous employment outcomes have not improved since implementation of Closing the Gap programs in 2008 (Council of Australian Governments, 2017). A more recent critique by Sims asserts that the social inclusion movement, under which Closing the Gap policy falls, may promote hegemony and subtle racist ideals because it encourages Indigenous people to assimilate to Western standards of living and behaving (Sims, 2014). An earlier report emphasizing the connection between Indigenous culture and well-being asserts that the government tends to correlate Aboriginal well-being with “socio-economic indicators and bio-medical measures” rather than key Aboriginal cultural principles like “connection to Country” (Kingsley et. al., 2013, p. 697). This is demonstrated by the above-mentioned emphasis that Closing the Gap programs place on assimilation, especially in areas such as the economy. Despite Indigenous welfare policies being put in place with the intention of improving Indigenous outcomes, the Commonwealth Government has shown a lack of cultural sensitivity bordering on thinly veiled racism which reverses any progress made by these programs.
Further analysis of the Australian economic sphere shows that current government policies don’t acknowledge the value of Aboriginal culture beyond its market value (Woods, 2016). Additionally, the Closing the Gap Next Phase Discussion Paper acknowledges that while the policy lays out many quantitative goals involving Indigenous health and employment outcomes, it does not measure economic, social or environmental goals. All indicators for Closing the Gap success are defined as statistics: for instance, “95 per cent of all Indigenous four year-olds enrolled in early childhood education by 2025” (Council of Australian Governments, 2017). The Commonwealth Government has denied autonomy to Indigenous people by regarding Closing the Gap goals and outcomes as statistical only while failing to acknowledge the reality of Indigenous circumstances. A 2015 study indicates that cultural and familial obligations play a large role in influencing Indigenous healthcare outcomes (Waterworth et. al.), and yet, these factors are not considered in the Closing the Gap objectives.
In conclusion, the Closing the Gap legislation has failed to bridge the welfare gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. This is in large part due to the lack of consideration of Indigenous perspectives, lack of acknowledgement important Indigenous principles and institutions, and a failure to regard Indigenous success as more than a set of statistics, and is demonstrated by the vocalized frustrations of Indigenous groups and activists like Patrick Dodson. Future policy might be more successful if it focuses on granting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples autonomy and voice in dictating the structure of policies from the top down. If programs designed to close the welfare gap in Australia are indeed deemed necessary and beneficial by Indigenous people, they should be structured either by Indigenous leaders or with heavier consultation of Indigenous groups, and with higher consideration given to cultural beliefs and practices. Feasible avenues to achieve this as indicated by Indigenous opinions and research include constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights, education programs on Indigenous culture for non-Indigenous professionals (i.e. healthcare professionals), and community consultation during the development of welfare programs.