Improve education, employment and community safety for indigenous Australians

THE most pressing issue facing indigenous Australians has nothing to do with constitutional recognition. It’s not whether we are recognised in the preamble or the body of our Constitution. Nor is it the race provisions in the body of the document.

Right now, as it has remained for decades, the most pressing issues facing indigenous Australians are getting our children to school, the parents to work and to make our communities safer.

Without doubt symbolism has an important place in our society and this is amply demonstrated by a history rich with great events and colourful characters.

But symbolism can take us only so far unless there are solid achievements to match. For indigenous Australians the national story is big on symbolism but light on results. It shouldn’t be a choice of symbolism or solutions. We should have both. We should be able to settle the issue of the Constitution without losing a moment’s work on practical indigenous advancement.

As I look back at some of the recent events described as defining moments for our ­nation, what I see is not encouraging. Hundreds of thousands of Australians ­walked across bridges and planted cut-out hands in lawns. As a nation we cheered Cathy Freeman to victory at the 2000 Olympics, and so many placed all their hope in the 2008 apology from the then prime minister, Kevin Rudd.

Millions of Australians invest enormous amounts of emotional energy into indigenous affairs for what always ­appears to be a great cause at the time. Yet grand gestures come and go, and indigenous people continue to endure unacceptable disadvantage. It seems we are capable of doing only one thing or the other.

I support minimalist constitutional recognition for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. I do not support grand ­gestures that may detract from immediate and substantial imp­rove­ments in education, employment and community safety.

I fear there is a limited store of goodwill from everyday Australians when it comes to indigenous affairs. The feel-good campaigns allow mainstream Australians to assuage their conscience, but too often that’s as far as it goes. They can tell themselves, “I’ve done my bit”, without having to confront the issues that really matter. When the public is heavily invested in symbolic gestures and compassion is a finite resource, then important work such as tackling indigenous disadvantage suffers from not enough support.

Not prepared to settle for mere symbolism, Andrew Forrest foc­uses on ­indigenous education and employment as the means to rid indigenous Australia of the scourge of welfare. Not everything in his report will be acceptable to everyone. But his proposals on education and employment should be the subject of national discussion in indigenous affairs.

Faced with a choice between the symbolic or the practical campaign (but apparently not both), we should ask ourselves which would be better for Australia in 10 years. Objectively, the imperative is to fix indigenous education and employment, whether by Forrest’s suggestions or some other way. When we are well and truly on the path to overcoming indigenous disadvantage we could try for minimalist constitutional recognition. In the meantime, indigenous Australians can continue to enjoy bountiful recognition in many ways. Some are genuine and some not so much.

Do not expect consensus from the indigenous population on the way ahead. There is pride in the cultural diversity within the indigenous population, which originally comprised a couple of hundred language groups. The result, not surprisingly, is that not all indigenous people agree on all topics. Social generalisations fail within the indigenous community just as they do with any other social or racial group. Expect indigenous people on the side of both the yes and the no campaigns for constitutional recognition.

In indigenous affairs our solutions are nowhere near as good as our marketing and consultation.

This campaign is no different. There is the Recognise campaign through Reconciliation Australia, an expert panel, a joint select committee and even a panel to review national support for the campaign, but alas no proposal and so the real debate — yes versus no — hasn’t even begun.

Meanwhile, a couple of hundred thousand indigenous people continue to suffer each day, trapped by poverty because of poor education, unemployment and decades of bureaucracies unable to make tough decisions.

In this newspaper this week, John Hirst wrote: “The obvious place for recognition is in the preamble.” (“Let’s bring our Constitution in line with current practice”, Commentary, Sept­ember 4.) I look at it differently and believe the obvious place for recognition is second in line ­behind a three-way tie for first: education, employment and safer communities.

Wesley Aird is an adviser to the government on welfare reform and a member of Recognise What?