The real victims of the collapsing NSW rural economy are
Aboriginal people. While they are keeping dying towns alive, they
are often denied basic services, reports DAVID JAGGER, a
researcher for the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in
Custody.
As more NSW farmers are sacrificed to the depressed economy,
local governments have found their own victims.
Aboriginal rural workers lost their jobs long ago as farming
mechanised and then went into sustained recession. Now NSW rural
councils are refusing basic services to Aboriginal communities
while collecting millions of dollars in Commonwealth funds
intended for their often large Aboriginal constituencies.
Research by the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in
Custody into community unrest and high black custody rates
reveals that untied federal grants make this neglect possible.
Councils claim Aboriginal land is private and so not their
responsibility, while small rate debts on the land make sure many
Aboriginal communities go without services.
Federal and state Aboriginal Affairs departments assessed
services in 46 NSW communities in September 1988. They found
chronic neglect by all levels of government. Some two-and-a-half
years on, there is hardly a change, say Tom Popp and Tony Burton,
authors of the assessment report, and now senior officers with
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC).
``There is still no sign of significant contributions by local
government out of its own revenue specifically for Aboriginal
development infrastructure'', said Burton.
The report said $8-10 million in local government services was
needed to help achieve minimum living standards.
* Water supply ranged from poor to totally inadequate. In the
Bourke region, some settlements relied soley on untreated river
water.
* Most communities had no sewage services. In others, systems
were collapsing.
* Some had no garbage collection, almost all needed hard rubbish
clean-ups.
A year later, the NSW Local Government and Shires Association
reacted with a sample study in six council areas. More neglect:
* Aboriginal settlement roads were not maintained unless they
served the general community.
* Aboriginal housing, health and building standards were not
monitored.
In February, the World Council of Churches deplored conditions in
Aboriginal communities, including Wilcannia in western NSW.
Clearly, these reports are having little impact. So what is the
hold-up?
Sewage, water, access roads, garbage disposal and health and
building inspections are services paid for by councils when
provided to everyone in NSW, ratepayers or not, except
Aborigines.
Tom Popp concedes there have been isolated improvements on
Aboriginal communities. But he cannot think of one case where
shire council money has been used. Improvements usually come via
an ATSIC grant.
John McSullea, acting secretary of the Shires Association,
boasted some improvement by an example: an Aboriginal community,
given a grant for sewage instalment, paid the Wentworth Shire
council to do the work. The council had the expertise, the
community had a one-off $600,000. McSullea regretted the council
didn't employ an Aboriginal person on the job.
``A lot of Aboriginal communities do well out of grant funds'',
he said.
The Commonwealth often contracts councils to do work on
Aboriginal communities that is usually normal local government
responsibility, says Tony Burton.
Some NSW local councils are rich, some are poor. Generally they
cry poor. This is the first justification for neglect. McSullea
says shires should not have serviced Aboriginal communities on
the outskirts of country towns in times of relative wealth. Now,
in hard times, they cannot continue the favour. Isolated
Aboriginal settlements could never expect councils to provide
services that no-one else uses, he said.
Times are certainly hard in the bush. With prices undermined by
US subsidies, high costs and soaring interest rates have sent
many ratepayers bust. The state government has imposed a council
rate ceiling, the federal government a loan limit.
But are country shires really suffering?
Most shires collect about half their revenue from Commonwealth
general purpose grants. Municipal (urban) and shire councils
together received $243 million this year alone, paid via the NSW
Local Government Grants Commission. The commission gives more
money per head to councils with higher costs and small rates
revenues. For example, last year Bourke council, with a
population of only about 4000, and Botany with 35,000 both
received about $1 million.
Aborigines, almost half the total population in some western NSW
shires and up to 90% unemployed, reduce council rates revenue.
Jobless tenants often cannot pay the rent on Aboriginal Housing
Company houses, leaving the company unable to pay council rates.
At the same time, unemployment increases service needs. Yet
councils are not compelled to spend their Commonwealth funds on
Aboriginal needs - spending is left entirely to councils. The
councils deny their revenue is increased by Aboriginal
populations.
The 1988 Federal Human Rights Commission report on conditions at
Toomelah community said: ``It is at best ironic that local
government bodies in NSW refuse to service Aboriginal land while
receiving general purpose grants which, although not specifically
allotted for that purpose, are assessed in part on the existence
and needs of an Aboriginal community.''
Funding arrangements remain the same today.
McSullea said shires would ``fight tooth and nail'' to defend
their control over spending. He said the only way Aboriginal
communities would get improved services was to elect members to
councils.
Aboriginal councillors, like Aboriginal senior council staff, are
rare. One Koori councillor, Pat Dickson, recently produced a
video to encourage voter participation. In the only recent
attempt before this, the Commonwealth Electoral Commission rushed
just 1000 new voters onto the common electoral roll in the run-up
to the last federal election.
Councils claim Aboriginal rate debts put these communities at the
end of the queue for scarce resources. Owed are general rates,
payable regardless of service, councils say. They average about a
quarter of a small rural council's revenue.
McSullea agreed that councils, particularly in wheat and sheep
farming districts, are owed rates by white landowners too. And he
agreed that in 1988 councils were able to claim the bulk of
Aboriginal rate debts from Aboriginal Land Council funds through
amendments to the NSW Land Rights Act.
Not covered by these amendments, but with houses on Aboriginal
land, Aboriginal housing companies are the major Aboriginal
organisations left with outstanding rate bills. These companies
are the day-to-day managers of many communities. Many say service
should come first and will not pay rates until their land is
serviced. Stalemate.
Yet the companies' total bill to councils is only $626,000, a
small sum compared with Bourke Shire's rates revenue of $561,000
(only 12.5% of total revenue) back in 1985.
Some housing companies have had outside administrators appointed,
largely to recover debts, like Bakandji at Wilcannia, where the
person in charge now is the local shire accountant.
But even if all debts were paid, most communities would remain
unserviced, as NSW councils still consider Aboriginal land to be
private land.
The Human Rights Commission at Toomelah found that ``the term
`private settlement' has no legal meaning under the Local
Government Act or any other legislation''. McSullea said the
Shires Association has the opposite legal advice, knotting the
purse strings tighter.
This stance was taken before land rights legislation in NSW,
according to Jenny Onyx, a Shires Association consultant. It was
meant to resist pressure from some white farmers for council
services inside their properties, and was now ``a convenient
handle'' for councils when it comes to Aboriginal land.
The NSW Local Government Act is a 70-year-old law, so unwieldy it
is being completely rewritten. It is sometimes described as a
manual rather than a law.
One amendment made last year will remain in the rewrite. It
allows councils to service Aboriginal land - with a surcharge.
This is as close as NSW Aborigines have come to receiving basic
rights.
Tom Popp feels council attitudes are changing and that services
will improve with them. ``Aboriginal people are on the agenda
now'', he says.
They may be on the agenda only because western NSW towns will die
without them. Back in 1986, with the rural economy already in
trouble, the state government report on the Bourke disturbances
that year explained that small business interests had taken
control of Bourke Shire council and the Chamber of Commerce as
the power of farmers declined.
``The local economy'', the report said, ``while managed by non-
Aborigines, is dependent on the Aboriginal dollar and social
security pensions and benefits''.
With more farmers going bust, reliance on Aboriginal spending in
the local shops is increasing, though willingness to service
Aboriginal communities is not.
************************************************************
Reprinted from Green Left, weekly progressive newspaper.
Copyright by the author.