Bringing-Them-Home-Report-Web

In 1992 the Council of Australian Governments endorsed a ‘NationalCommitment to Improved Outcomes in the Delivery of Programs and Services toAboriginal Peoples and Torres Strait Islanders’. This commitment arose from anagreement by all levels of government on the need for co-ordination of delivery ofprograms and services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Guidingprinciples of this agreement are empowerment, self-determination and selfmanagementby Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The commitment isconsistent with a co-operative approach which recognises the responsibility of alllevels of government for the delivery of services to Indigenous people.States and Territories currently have responsibility for welfare and juvenilejustice services to all sectors of the community. The Commonwealth has specialresponsibility to Indigenous people under the ‘races power’ in the Constitution andunder human rights treaties ratified under the ‘external affairs power’. Sharedfinancial responsibility for the implementation of the recommendations of this Inquiryis required to fulfil these State, Territory and Commonwealth responsibilities. Theneed for proper funding was endorsed by the Social Responsibilities Commission ofthe Anglican Church.It will not be possible for the Australian States to implement ... minimum standards withoutadditional funding for training and for the support of Indigenous communities. Indigenouscommunities may not have the necessary expertise or resources initially to fulfil their roles inarrangements giving them more direct control over services ... control over services is not aeuphemism for poor quality provision (submission 525 page 11).The provision of funding must take cognisance of the principle of selfdetermination.Funding arrangements have been criticised for their excessive legalityand complexity, onerous reporting provisions, failure to acknowledge organisationsintellectual property. Indigenous organisations wherever possible should be thedecision makers or at a minimum have primary input into funding decisions.Other human rightsAustralia has ratified many international conventions which establish humanrights standards to which Australia is required to conform. Indigenous people inAustralia have increasingly looked to international conventions to offer protectionfrom discrimination and promotion of human rights (Dodson 1993).A number of submissions called on the Inquiry to consider and incorporate theprovisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC)which was ratified by Australia in 1990. The Aboriginal Legal Service of WA notedthat the Convention imposes an obligation on governments to protect the family unit,the interest of children growing up in a family where possible and the right ofindividuals to a family life. ‘Children, like adults, have rights to freedom fromarbitrary interference with family life, freedom from arbitrary detention, liberty of theperson and freedom of choice of residence’ (submission 127 page 359).Article 3.1 of CROC states that ‘in all actions concerning children, whetherundertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law,administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be aprimary consideration’. CROC envisages that it will normally be in the child’s ‘best