The Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage Report
7 July 2009
Download a copy of the Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage Report Q&A
Download a copy of the Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: key indicators
1. What is the Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report?
2. Is this a one-off report?
3. What does the 2009 report say?
4. Why are there such high levels of disadvantage?
5. Has anything improved?
6. Has the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NT Intervention) made a difference?
7. How do we improve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ life chances?
8. What are examples of things that work?
9. Are there differences between outcomes for Torres Strait Islander and Aboriginal Australians?
10. What is the Government going to do in response to the report?
1. What is the Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report?
Commissioned by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) and produced by the Productivity Commission, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage (OID) reports on how Indigenous Australians are faring. It examines the gaps between Indigenous and other Australians in the areas of life expectancy, infant mortality, education, employment and imprisonment, among others. The aim of the report is to help governments and others working to close the gap know where to target their efforts and where programs and interventions are working. Along with pointing out where more attention is needed, the report highlights success stories where progress is being made.
2. Is this a one-off report?
Released on 2 July 2009, the current report is the fourth the Productivity Commission has released since 2002 when state/territory and federal governments committed themselves to overcoming the disadvantage experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. The next biennial report will be released in 2011.
3. What does the 2009 report say?
The 2009 report indicates that so far little progress has been made in overcoming the disadvantage experienced by Indigenous people. It found that across virtually all indicators, there continues to be wide gaps in outcomes between Indigenous and other Australians.
These indicators include:
- Early child development
- Education and training
- Healthy living
- Economic participation
- Standards of home environment
- Degree of safe and supportive community, and
- Governance and leadership.
4. Why are there such high levels of disadvantage?
Indigenous disadvantage is a product of many interconnected historical, social, economic and political factors. Which of these factors is most to ‘blame’ is the subject of much debate. What we do know is that disadvantage in one or two areas of life can affect a whole range of other important areas. For example, poor education and unemployment are connected to poorer health outcomes and higher rates of imprisonment, and these in turn affect overall life expectancy. We also know from research that disadvantage is often ‘passed on’ through generations – for example children of parents who are unemployed are more likely to be unemployed themselves. Studies have also shown that grief and trauma such as that experienced by members of the stolen generations is also passed on through generations and can affect the life chances of Indigenous children today. Recognising the interconnectedness of disadvantage, the OID report explains that reducing the life expectancy gap involves a wide range of measures targeting chronic disease, poor nutrition, access to clean water and sanitation, drug and alcohol consumption and overcrowded housing.
5. Has anything improved?
The OID report has found that although the gap has narrowed in some areas (housing overcrowding, access to clean water, functioning sewage and electricity service) many areas have had no improvement or the gap has widened. These areas include substantiated child abuse and neglect, family and community violence, imprisonment and juvenile detention and literacy and numeracy skills.
Other areas of progress for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians over the past decade include improvement in employment rates, income and home ownership. These have also improved over the same period for non-Indigenous people which means that the gap has not actually decreased.
6. Has the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NT Intervention) made a difference?
Due to delays in collecting data and time lags between governments making policy and changes taking place in communities, it is still difficult to say what effect the Northern Territory Emergency Response has had on closing the gap.
7. How do we improve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ life chances?
The OID report has identified several ‘success factors’ after talking to Indigenous people and governments. Some of the key ingredients for success, they have found, include 1.Cooperative approaches, where Indigenous people and governments work together, often with the non-profit and private sectors as well, have proved widely successful. 2. Community involvement in program design and decision-making is important - a ‘bottom-up’ rather than ‘top-down’ approach and 3. Good governance at organisational, community and government levels is critical to the success of programs, along with ongoing government support. A lack of any of these factors can often contribute to program failures.
8. What are examples of things that work?
Stories of success are highlighted throughout the 2009 report. Many involve programs that were designed and put into action by Indigenous people to address problems in their communities. For example, the Kimberley Satellite Dialysis Centre (WA) is an Aboriginal community controlled health service providing a culturally safe environment for Aboriginal patients. Attendance and acceptance of the service have been excellent. After the centre opened in 2002, the proportion of haemodialysis patients receiving treatment in the Kimberley region where the service operates increased from 10 to 65 per cent.
The four success factors
- Cooperative approaches between Indigenous people and government, often involving non-profit and private sectors as well.
- Community involvement in program design and decision-making — a ‘bottom-up’ contribution, rather than just relying on ‘top-down’ direction.
- Ongoing government support — human, financial and physical. We have often seen, even between editions of the OID Report, promising programs that have initially been very successful lose momentum for want of sustained government support.
- Good governance — as noted earlier this cannot be taken for granted, but must be nurtured and supported. It is needed in both Indigenous communities and organisations, and within government itself.
9. Are there differences between outcomes for Torres Strait Islander and Aboriginal Australians?
The report refers to the Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006 Census which suggests that Torres Strait Islander people tend to have slightly better outcomes in indicators of disadvantage than Aboriginal people. However, there are still significant gaps between Torres Strait Islanders and non- Indigenous people.
10. What is the Government going to do in response to the report?
On 2 July 2009, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) met in Darwin to discuss the report’s findings. The council agreed to implement strategies:
- To identify areas where additional funding will be of most use.
- To reach education targets related to school enrolment, literacy and numeracy.
- To improve the affordability and availability of healthy and nutritious food in remote Indigenous communities.
- To better provide services to urban and regional Indigenous communities.
- To improve access to the Internet in regional and remote communities.
- To invest $46.4 million over four years to improve the evidence base and the quality of the data.
