What an odd experience!  I found myself looking over my own shoulder, not quite sure  how to react.  My ego was of course immediately affronted.   What do you mean you don’t think I can manage my own finances?  Who gives you the right to decide that? And, how do you decide that?  The fact is, I am quite proud of the way I manage my finances,  and do not care for anyone else to interfere with that.  But then of course, I am receiving a payment from the Government, so is it their right to decide what I do with it?  Or, is it my right to receive that payment because in this country we have committed to a decent income for all and value the work that parents do in looking after their children?

There is one more thing – I am white, middle class and educated.  I am not used to being told what to do and I do not like it.  It just so happens that my family and I have recently relocated to a remote Indigenous community and consequently are living in an area where income management is compulsory.  So, if my Indigenous neighbours must be income managed then why shouldn’t I?

Shopping for basics....

In 2007 income management, amongst other measures, was introduced as part of the Federal Government’s Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER or more commonly known as the Intervention), targeting all Commonwealth i

ncome recipients in 73 Northern Territory Indigenous communities, quarantining half of their payments, specifying what the money was not to be used for and where it could be spent.

The purpose?  Supposedly to help families better manage their money and look after their children.  The inherent assumption? That Indigenous income recipients can not manage money or their families. How insulting, paternalistic, racist – and just annoying.

The outcome?  Official studies show no clear evidence of the program’s benefits outweighing the possible harm.  For example, the Menzies Health Research Unit’s thorough statistical study of purchases pre and post the introduction of Income management in a group of stores showed no statistical evidence of better purchasing patterns after implementation.  Apart from making people’s finances significantly more complicated, the primary outcome I can see has been to make people feel less empowered and less in control of their lives – something that can only have negative consequences.  I do not see any evidence that it has influenced people’s spending habits, just as it has not affected mine.  People know what they need and want to buy and so they continue to do so, navigating the system accordingly eg using the 50% of funds that is income managed to buy their food and pay bills, and if they chose to do so, spending the rest on those things they aren’t allowed to buy through income management – cigarettes, gambling, sharing directly with family, etc.  It is in effect taking away responsibility from people in making choices about what they do with their income and how they manage their responsibilities. Surely this only increases dependency on welfare systems?

I am also aware that the sharing of the Basics cards, (an EFTPOS type card only accepted in income management approved stores,) is very common and therefore does not prevent the “humbugging” – a term I had never heard used so commonly before moving here, used to refer to the ongoing requests for money from relatives and friends – that the Government seems to think such a problem.  People live in extended family groups here and they share their resources.  Forcing people to have an extra account with an extra card does not change this.

For myself, my options were to accept income management and apply for a Basics card, which is accepted at all services and shops in this community (the options being so limited anyway), or not accept the payment and try to live off a reduced income whilst we raise our children.

Last week, however, I discovered that it is possible to apply for an exemption from income management. All I had to do was participate in a phone interview consisting of questions such as : “Do I have problems with people asking me for money all the time?” “Do I pay my bills on time?” “Do I save money and put aside money for big bills?” “Do I have a mortgage?” “Do I have any debts or have I had to apply for any urgent payments or loans from Centrelink?”  All of these I answered verbally with no further evidence required to verify my answers.  The only documentation I had to provide was a medical certificate of attendance for my son, presumably to show that I take him to the doctor and he is not neglected (if he was of school age I would have needed to provide a record of attendance). What a humiliating process for anyone to have to go through.

I am now exempt from income management for 12 months and must then reapply. I have since learnt, however, that only approximately 10% of people who apply for exemption are granted it, highlighting my awareness that it was the colour of my skin and upbringing in the dominant culture that made it so easy for me, further confirmed by the embarrassment conveyed by Centrelink staff who I dealt with at the awkwardness of the situation.  Moreover, there is a bribe of a $250 bonus every six months to encourage people to stay on income management voluntarily, which I was offered and refused.

In 2010, under pressure from UN criticisms of the Government’s suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act that had allowed it to apply income management to Indigenous people alone, the Government amended the policy and extended it to most income recipients in the Northern Territory on a non-racial basis. Since then, despite the scant evidence of positive outcomes, little official support and various formal inquiry and submission processes, (e.g. The Senate Community Affairs Committee Inquiry for which more than 80 submissions were received – almost all opposed to the extensions of forms of coercive income management,) the Government has chosen to further extend the program to what it defines as “appropriate target areas” with higher than average numbers of Commonwealth income recipients.  New legislation passed in June 2010 was supported by both the Government and the Opposition and only opposed by the Greens.

Consequently, the Government now has the power to apply income management anywhere in Australia and from 2012 it will be applied in five new areas in NSW, Queensland, Victoria and South Australia at a cost of $4000 per recipient per year in staff and administration (based on costs in the N.T.).

In her article on income management for Arena Magazine, Eva Cox writes:

“The use of initiatives like the Howard government’s Intervention to maintain policies that are discriminatory against minority groups and racist in origin, is seriously problematic.  What is interesting is that few in the progressive community are looking at these areas of social policy and considering what needs to be done to move back to a human rights and equity model.”

Why is that? Is it because it doesn’t affect us?  I admit that it has been very uncomfortable for me to recognise my own increased interest and indignation at the policy since its imposition on myself.  Or, is it our lack of knowledge and understanding that causes us not to act?

I think there is also a general sense that we, in the dominant culture, do not really know what is going on in Indigenous communities, which is understandable as most of the information we receive is filtered through Government channels and the media, leaving us uncertain as to how to respond.  We are told that child, domestic and drug abuse in Indigenous communities is rife, that communities are falling apart, that something must be done! For sure, there is gross inequality and disempowerment in Indigenous communities but one thing I can tell you, continuing to further disempower people is never the answer.

As dominant culture Australians we must not continue to support policies and programs that continue to disempower Indigenous communities, however well intentioned they may be.  We need to ask ourselves – are Indigenous people gaining control over their lives through this? Are they being empowered? Or does the power remain with those in the dominant culture?

Reference:

Income Management – Eva Cox Arena Magazine, 08 2011-09 2011 No 113 pg. 38-39

Jessie Pangas joined the AHED team in Galiwin’ku in July 2011.

Media Release:   Tuesday  28/06/11

The Only Intervention Needed

“The only intervention needed in the Northern Territory is an intervention in communication” Richard Trudgen, author of Why Warriors Lie Down and Die, responds to the news that the Gillard Government will spend six weeks in talks with Indigenous leaders looking for new ideas to deal with the disadvantage that Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory experience.

“The Government needs to turn away from paternalistic programs and deliver real programs that empower the first Australians.

Right across the remote areas of Australia Aboriginal people, who speak an ‘original Australian language’ as their home language, are cut off from life saving and life changing information that other Australians receive in excess.” explains Richard.

For most of these Aboriginal people, English is still a very foreign language, which means that a visit to or from government authorities, service providers, or a trip to the doctor or hospital is a frightening and confusing experience of powerlessness. For their children, schooling is traumatic, dumbfounding and demeaning; resulting in young people having no hope for themselves in a world they cannot understand.

Even in important meetings with government or other statutory bodies, these first Australians are forced to receive information in English. This means they do not understand what is being said and due process cannot occur. They are deliberately locked out of the modern information era, leaving them to fill hospitals, jails, rehabilitation centres and unemployment queues and remain living on the fringe of Australian society, at a massive cost burden to the Australian community.

Witiyana Marika and Richard Trudgen play a Manikay (Songline) at Bridging the Gap seminars.

These Australians need news, current affairs, general and personal information in a language they can understand. Let’s level the playing field. They could receive information through language centres and radio services. Whole communities could learn to speak English through ‘learn English’ radio programs. Information programs in their language will close the gap permanently.

“How can feeding children in schools, creating a generation of super dependent young adults, ever close the gap? Let’s spend the public purse on programs that will change things for the good by giving all Australians access to good information. An intervention in communication would solve so many problems far more effectively!”

This is one of the issues that Richard Trudgen, Witiyana Marika and Dianne Gondarra address in their Bridging the Gap seminar series, held in capital cities around Australia. The next seminars will be held in Sydney, Brisbane and Darwin in October and November. See www.whywarriors.com.au to register.

For more information or interviews please ring Richard Trudgen (08) 8987 1664

All of us carry with us unconscious associations and biases that without us even knowing, are downloaded by our minds, from our peers, our environment and our experiences. The human social animal has a habit of creating biases and generalisations about people groups based on many characteristics, including racial ones.

Studies have found that even among those of us who know that negative racial generalisations are useless or even wrong, we still subconsciously hold biased and negative associations. You can test your own negative association at implicit.harvard.edu.  This test is not a racist detector – it is a very clever way of testing your negative and positive automatic (unconscious) associations on racial, gender and many other categories.  Give it a go and see what unintentional bias you might have.  If you don’t believe the result, it’s worth reading about the test to discover how it works and its scientific rigour.

However, no matter what result you get, the tests show conclusively that most people (regardless of race) harbour unconscious racial prejudices whether we like it or not.  These studies show that regardless of race, people in many parts of the world tend to have automatic negative associations with black people and dark skin tone.  For example African-Americans often unconsciously hold similar prejudices against people of there own race as the unconcious prejudices held by “white” Americans.    If you would like to read more try “The Hidden Brain,” a book by Shankar Vedantam.

All of us working cross-culturally need to recognise that this prejudice will influence our own behaviours no matter who we are. Because these unconscious associations will influence or interactions with and reasoning about the Indigenous people we work with.  It is very important that we recognise this.

We need to be able to see the good and the bad in others, but unconscious racial prejudiced tends to blind us from the seeing the good others.   Can we beat automatic negative associations?… No, but I believe we can build positive ones.  Spend time in reflection to catch and challenge bad attitudes when we see them raise their ugly heads.  We do this by deliberately identifying useful positive generalisations that balance or subvert the negative generalisations we have identified   – and this will help change balance the automatic bias.

The blame game has two parts the first arises because the dominant culture recongises that they alone cannot know how to solve the problems experienced by Indigenous peoples. But instead of working along side the people, the dominant culture tends to distance itself by pushing Indigenous individuals or organisation to be the saviours of their own people.  This sets up unreasonable expectations for Indigenous organisations and particular individuals, such as well spoken leaders, liaison officers, health workers or council members.  Although these people are often very intelligent and remarkable individuals, people in such roles tend to have an expectation forced on them by others, that they can and must fix the Indigenous problems.  This becomes internalized and can result in an impression that they must have some special ability to fix things, and a fear of failure.  As the son of the ‘guru’ Richard Trudgen it is possible that I fall into this category myself; I expect myself to do miracles sometimes, and get sensitive when I am challenged. This is the danger, that when things go wrong, or if someone disagrees with these special people, blame is the unconscious reaction.  A sense of self inspection can be lost if one is put under these kind of expectations. This is a danger for all of us, but if is particularly so when a culture is created around an individual or even whole organisations, which  says, “You are the solution, so your position must be respected.”  Consequently, by holding on to the false idea that we are the solution, when something goes wrong or is disagreeable, immediate response is that it must be someone else’s fault.  Any criticism or challenge is taken as an accusation or attack against the special role of appointed saviours.  And in response some other person or organisation becomes the subject of rumour or even public accusation, producing a counter response leading to bickering and bad politics between and within Indigenous organisations.  This part of the blame game encourages defensiveness who have been “puffed up” with unreasonable expectations, and produces a reluctance to criticise for fear of reprisal in others.  This process is damaging to the whole system as fair and positive criticism is needed for accountability.  This defensiveness and blaming fractures trust and limits good dialouge.

The situation is compounded between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups.  Some Indigenous people are very defensive because they have experienced so much unfair treatment personally and generationally that they are easily offended and become defensive to protect themselves.  On the other hand those in the dominant culture, having become aware of the harm their heritage has caused Indigneous people over the years, seem to carry a sense of guilt.  I’m sure many Balanda (‘white fellas’, dominant culture people) have sensed this.  If you have been confronted by an Indigenous person, it is like a sense that, “Oh, I must be careful talking to this person and not say anything that might offend.”  The result is that when we unknowingly enter ‘the game’, Balanda walk around thinking, ‘I must not blame the Indigenous person’, while the Indigenous person walks around feeling, ‘I must not be blamed’.  This creates a rift of dishonesty as Balanda personnel fail to challenge the Indigneous person and the Indigenous person becomes quickly defensive in times of conflict and cannot accept being challenged.  The game becomes most imporant when we realise that this can be come a mechanism of control over ourselves or others.  There are those who work the blame game to their advanatage, in fact we all do this some times.  Indigenous people can control  Balanda, and thus whole organisations at times, to do what ever they want by pulling the right guilt strings.  Balanda can control some Indigenous people, and thus whole organisations at times, by using false praise and rumors.

We need to escape this ‘blame game’.  Organisations should not be so offended when someone or another organisation points out a problem.  We need to work together to identify real problems and help fix them. The first key to escaping this negative cultural dynamic is humility, recognising that you are a unique person, but no one special.  Humility also means assuming the best of every other person, which helps us to recognise when hurt is unintended.  The second key is to realise that we are part of the ‘Blame Game’. We need to recognise our guilt over issues or our fear of being criticised and dela with it.  he best way to do this is to reflect on why you feel that when you encounter situations that bring up this emontions.  Then think about what should be the appropriate response  that you would use next time (eg. how would you treat a person in this situation there where no power or racial issue involved).  If we do not work to release fear and guilt associated with the other cultural group we will be controlled by it in our selves or be controlled by others pulling our strings.

The stand backish approach I have just described is a very safe way to engage in a new culture such as when one starts working with Aboriginal people. But the real trick is to balance this learning and understanding of culture in your head, with a different kind of understanding. We could call it learning, by experience, but it is not the experience I want to emphasise. It is letting go of our fear to let our real person inside come out. A genuine expression is much more valuable than a cold and calculated one when it comes building relationship with others even in another culture. I have recently realised that for all my experience with Yolngu people, I have huge difficultly knowing how to simply relate to an Indigneous person. Meeting someone in the street the other day I just didn’t know how to express myself to this person. I felt like I needed to know what would be the right thing to do? However, after thinking about this I realised that my awkwardness was a disadvantage in this and that I needed to allow a greater degree of self expression. Some ‘white fellas’ get along very well with Indigenous people because they are able to remain genuine or respond naturally to people. This is a more extrovert characteristic and it is very important for enabling personal relationships with people in other cultures. Visiting, meeting and talking to others is essential to learning to relate to another culture. If we do not allow relationships to blossom we remain marginal to the culture looking at it from the outside. Instead, get involved and let yourself bubble out when ever you can. The danger here is breaking a social rule or taboo and this can be embarrassing or even harmful to yourself or others. However, we cannot allow this to keep us introverted. The trick is to balance natural self expression and being aware of the cultural environment you are in, learning both from the mistakes, and relationships that arise from letting go, and from the observations and questions that arise from awkwardness.