What can ‘The Voice’ do for the economic security of Indigenous people and their communities?
There are inherent differences between Indigenous Australians and the rest of us.
Life expectancy for Indigenous males is 8.6 years lower than an average Australian male. It is 7.8 years lower for Indigenous females. The numbers are even lower in some jurisdictions. This is despite all the programs, and all the money, and all the good intentions since the 1967 referendum that gave the Commonwealth the power to make special laws with respect to ‘Aborigines’ living in a state.
There has certainly been a positive change. More Indigenous people are in employment, have a home and business ownership. We’ve also seen higher education standards and improvement in many areas of health, participation in the arts, science, sport etc.
The point is that the disparity in Indigenous life outcomes remains a blight on all of us.
Then there is the situation of the communities in central Australia and other remote areas. The human cost is obvious and disturbing. There is also the ongoing dollar cost for non-Indigenous Australians through programs funded by our personal and corporate taxes. The inability to close the gap is borne by everybody, including the taxpayer. It is in our interest to get this right.
In focusing on the economic side of ‘The Voice’ we are not being avaricious or uncaring. We are recognising that those who are well-off, those who are better-off, live longer. Economic security is difficult if you’re homeless or living in an overcrowded house or worse, in a makeshift shelter. It is difficult if you live in an unsafe environment, without the education to make informed life choices, including choices about health and financial security.
So, there is a strong commercial argument to support ‘The Voice’. The ongoing failure of Indigenous servicing is a significant drain on the Australian economy. Indigenous Australians have been rallying for decade upon decade for a say in getting the system right, but their calls have fallen on deaf ears.
‘The Voice’ means that when governments seek to make decisions that affect Indigenous Australians, they must listen to advice from those who understand the impact those very decisions will have on the very people they are targeting — the Indigenous people.
More effective decision-making should translate to more effective programs and services and greater government responsiveness to Indigenous needs and aspirations — resulting in the more effective use of tax resources.
An example of how change can be constructive is superannuation. Under our current system, a worker must contribute 10.5% of their income to a superannuation fund. The system has many flaws and lots of vested interests but is mainly a successful way for people to focus on retirement.
However, if your life expectancy is more than nine years lower than non-Indigenous Australians aren’t you disadvantaged by that system? You have less chance of ever seeing the funds you are forced to pay for a future.
Superannuation is designed by the mainstream for the mainstream.
So, what can we do about this difference? Ask Indigenous people is what.
They will seek expert advice, and consult in their own way with their own communities, using their own language where needed and possible. Then come up with potential solutions.
Other economic outcomes can be achieved around local economic development and change management. Imposing ‘our’ way of doing things often doesn’t work in Indigenous communities. Having policymakers in places like Canberra, which are very remote from Central Australia, make decisions on their behalf has been shown to fail.
As it stands, the policy boffins in Treasury make decisions on behalf of too many mainstream communities, but we in the mainstream can fight back and undo the damage they cause because we are at least part of the system. Indigenous communities will always struggle to deal with this type of remote control; and when they try, they are quickly put back ‘in their place’ by events such as The Intervention by John Howard or the recent blanket removal of the welfare card and alcohol bans.
So, we come to small business. What has ‘The Voice’ got to do with small business?
Firstly, there are still people who believe running a business is not part of Indigenous culture. Yet for millennia, there was trade between communities right across our continent and that trade was conducted by specialised groups conducting short and long journeys with their goods.
Our latest statistics show there are between 12,000 and 16,000 Indigenous-owned businesses in Australia. This includes independent contractors and community enterprises.
Often, when policies and programs are developed for small businesses, the difference between the needs of Indigenous businesses and non-Indigenous businesses is often not realistically considered.
There is definitely better recognition of the fact that regional and remote Indigenous economies are different. Significant research over the past 30 years, for example, has confirmed regional and remote economies are ‘hybrid economies’, with customary (or Indigenous) private and public sectors interacting in different ways. This difference is yet to be reflected in policy associated with First Nations’ economic development.
There is also not a lot of information on non-Indigenous businesses working with Indigenous communities and their impact — good or bad. Indeed, we see the current system sometimes being gamed by savvy non-Indigenous businesses who see an opportunity to make good profits at the expense of the smaller traditional communities by taking advantage of the different value systems that exist between our cultures.
‘The Voice’ can give an improved focus on the needs of Indigenous business operators.
Small business people need to be able to start and grow as they wish in their cultural environment and then in the wider economy as desired. Those who elect to move straight to the outside economy — particularly artists — need to be either supported or left alone but must be recognised as an integral part of Indigenous communities achieving economic security.
Australia’s economic wealth to a great extent is a function of our abundance of resources. Our modern export economy has been built firstly on the sheep’s back, then through our production of wheat, and most recently the export of our minerals. All these exports and the wealth they have generated, when you track it back, are products of the lands, waterways and seas of this continent; lands, waterways and seas of the First Nations peoples of this country.
It would be good if Indigenous peoples are better and formally heard on how these economic resources can be managed and used in the future.
‘The Voice’ provides a mechanism to be heard.
Peter Strong is the former chief executive of the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia. John Robinson is an experienced community development expert, operating in many different overseas cultures and throughout urban and Indigenous Australian communities.
Peter Strong is the former chief executive of the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia.
John Robinson is an experienced community development expert operating in many different overseas cultures and throughout urban and Indigenous Australian communities.
