It is a
well-known fact amongst the Australian populace that the indigenous population
experience a range of deficits in regards to social, economic and educational
experiences. These perceptions of deficit have in many ways characterised the
fluctuating relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians
since the early settlement. There have been a variety of initiatives aimed at
confronting these deficits from both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal parties.
Such developments date back as far as the early settlement and have continued
through to the process of assimilation and more recently, the official
recognition of Indigenous land rights. Along with these strategies exists a
wide range of support programs for Indigenous Australians in order to assist
them in experiencing a more equitable educational and social experience. These
governmental programs also unequivocally ensure lasting support in regards to
economic stability. Yet the issue is still, in many ways, ever-present amongst
Australian society. In his article ‘Honouring
Our Strengths’, Scott Gorringe argues that:
“nothing significant has changed….all that seems to happen is that
pictures get moved around a bit on the wall, or we put some new paint on them,
yet when it all comes down to it- it’s still the same old outhouse that we are
looking at” (2011).
Essentially,
his point can be simplified down to the fact that whilst Indigenous support
programs support a stable lifestyle. The fact remains that without these
political initiatives, majority of the indigenous population would struggle to
find suitable educational resources and potentially live an economically unstable
life. Therefore, the issue is being ‘sustained’ not in any way, as Gorringe
contests, solved. “Nationally we have
struggled to solve the ‘Aboriginal Problem’….now the white fellas and the
Indigenous fellas are having a go together. Yet I am not sure it will be
‘solved’ this time either” (2011).
Gorringe
explains “Deficit Discourse” as the
overriding component of the issue which seems to be unchanging. “Since contact White men have looked at me in
a certain way…I was seen to be doing something wrong…I lived in houses made of
made of grass and tree branches…what is more disgusting is that 200 years later
it’s still happening” (2011). This suggests that the startling issue here
which formulates the recognition of the ‘Aboriginal problem’ is covertly,
racism. The indigenous population are still perceived as somewhat a ‘primitive’
culture yet their educational and economic needs are equal to that of
non-Aboriginal Australians. For the ‘Aboriginal Problem’ to truly be overcome,
the indigenous population must be seen as equal to that of non-Aboriginal
Australians in regards to education, economic stability and social discourses.
Whilst government parties are clearly doing what they can, Gorringe argues that
“only Aboriginal led initiatives can
navigate effectively through this challenge” (2011).
Similarly, in
a feature article within The Australian
newspaper, former Aboriginal affairs minister Fred Chaney argues that a
solution will only be met by “engaging Aborigines”,
saying he was “tired of hearing high
policy and big ideas about how to alleviate Aboriginal disadvantage” (2009).
He argues that rather:
“The really important thing is to get permanent gains, not to waste
money. Those permanent gains will be best obtained if the Aboriginal people are
strongly involved…and that takes time” (Chaney, 2009).
The
governmental instigated initiatives to date all seem fixated on the notion of a
quick fix, adhering to scrupulous timelines and “harsh deadlines” (Chaney, 2009) to alleviate Aboriginal deficit. Chaney
rightly advocates that more attention should be paid to cause and effect of
government policies which confront Aboriginal disadvantage, stating that “I would like to see more attention being
paid not to speed of action, but on the effectiveness of action” (2009).
It is
undeniably clear that the Australian government are exploring a range of
different ways to confront Aboriginal deficit. Yet there is also no denying
that these almost fantastical approaches are in search of a ‘quick fix’ and
will in no way, in the long-term, alter the Aboriginal way of life in modern
society. They will only sustain and ensure the longevity of the indigenous
population with no essential alternation in living an independent way of life. As
both Gorringe and Chaney argue, the indigenous deficit lifestyle cannot
continue to simply be accommodated for. For lasting changes to take effect, the
Aboriginal population must experience change first hand and be personally implemented
in strategies aimed at reducing Aboriginal deficit and abolishing the proposed ‘Aboriginal problem’.
References:
1.
Chaney, F. (2009, July 11). ‘Engage Aborigines to solve race problems’.
The Australian. Available at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/engage-aborigines-to-solve-race-problems-rudd-urged/story-e6frg6n6-1225748424439
2.
Gorringe, S. (2011). ‘Honouring our Strengths: Moving Forward’.
Stronger Smarter Institute,
QUE, 21, 21-37.
No comments:
Post a Comment