Response to the Fifth Report of the Coordinator-General for Remote Indigenous Services
RESPONSE TO THE FIFTH REPORT OF THE COORDINATOR-GENERAL FOR REMOTE INDIGENOUS SERVICES
Background
The Coordinator-General for Remote Indigenous Services (CGRIS) presented his fifth statutory report
to the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, theHon.JennyMacklinMP, on 27 April 2012.
The CGRIS has developed a new approach to bi-annual reporting consistent with the requirements under the Coordinator-General for Remote Indigenous Services Act 2009. This new approach involved the development of a brief update report early in the year with a more substantial report later in the year. The fifth report of the CGRIS is the first report provided in accordance with this new approach.
There are no formal recommendations in the fifth report of the CGRIS. The report identifies four
key issues relating to implementation of selected outputs of the National Partnership Agreement
on Remote Service Delivery (RSD NPA); outlines an approach to analyse and monitor the progress
of Local Implementation Plans through actions to address key services and infrastructure gaps; provides an update on measuring progress at the community level; and highlights key jurisdictional issues.
In keeping with the reporting approach outlined by the CGRIS for the fifth report, this response provides brief comments in relation to the key issues relating to the delivery of outputs raised in the report.
The Working Group on Indigenous Reform (WGIR) notes that a comprehensive implementation status update on the outputs of the RSD NPA will be included in the 2012 Remote Service Delivery Annual Report to the Council of Australian Governments.
The WGIR also notes the key jurisdictional issues raised by the CGRIS in the fifth report. These issues mostly concern operational matters relevant to each jurisdiction. The Parties will work with the CGRIS
to continue to address these issues and progress will be monitored by the jurisdictional Boards of Management (or equivalent).
The fifth report also comments on the approach the CGRIS intends to take in relation to: the analysis and monitoring of the progress of Local Implementation Plans through actions to address key services and infrastructure gaps; and, measuring progress at the community level. The WGIR notes these comments.
Response
Issue One: Output 17(b) and related elements 19(e), 21(d) and 21(k)
One of the key purposes of the baseline mapping exercise was to establish a reference point from which progress could be assessed. I commend the Northern Territory Board of Management for committing
to a jurisdictionally appropriate replication of this mapping exercise, and I would like to see a similar approach in other jurisdictions. I am also concerned that the evaluation framework has been delayed and that a formative evaluation to assess the ongoing implementation of the model
is yet to be completed. I will be looking for substantial progress in this area in coming months.
Comment on Issue One
The baseline mapping reports are the most comprehensive, cross government collection of Indigenous community level information and data ever produced in Australia. The Commonwealth
Department of Families, Housing Community Services and Indigenous Affairs does not intend
to replicate the whole baseline mapping exercise. However, the Department will be up-dating elements of the baseline mapping including measuring progress against indicators identified in baseline mapping as part of the final evaluation of the RSD NPA. Each Board of Management (or equivalent) will also consider up-dating aspects of the baseline mapping specific to its jurisdiction.
Issue Two: Output 17(c)
Five Local Implementation Plans remain unsigned, including two in the Northern Territory and three
of the Cape York communities in Queensland. While actions are being progressed in these communities, it is still critical for all parties to sign up if they are to be held accountable for their commitments in Local Implementation Plans and I will continue to push for the last five plans
to be signed off. I recognise that in Queensland and the Northern Territory the Boards of Management are progressing and monitoring significant commitments agreed to and the Regional Operations Centres continue to engage with the community (and Shires where relevant) to secure agreement.
Comment on Issue Two
Governments are working to deliver the full range of services and programs to the five communities that have not yet signed Local Implementation Plans. This includes delivering on actions agreed
in LocalImplementationPlans with communities, even where formal sign off has not occurred. Governments will continue to engage with communities and key stakeholders to achieve agreement
to Local Implementation Plans.
Issue Three: Output 17(d)
While there is good progress in some areas in developing the new ways of working required
by the service delivery principles, I remain concerned that insufficient systematic effort is being applied in this area, particularly in relation to developing the capacity of government staff to work in partnership in a community development approach.
Comment on Issue Three
Consistent with the WGIR response to the 4th report of the CGRIS, each jurisdictional
Board of Management (or equivalent) will endorse an approach for coordinating the cultural training
of government staff working in priority communities. The particular approach adopted in each jurisdiction may vary.
All key agencies will ensure that staff working in priority communities will receive appropriate cultural competency training. Training for staff working in other Indigenous-related areas will be determined
by agencies and mandated on the basis of need.
An APS-wide Engagement Framework was released in May 2011 to guide the way government agencies engage with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. This includes considering
how to incorporate such engagement in each agencies core business and other activities. Engagement workshops are being held to enhance the engagement skills of all Regional Operations Centre staff (Commonwealth, State, Local and relevant NGOs). The workshops are tailored with input from the Regional Operation Centres to ensure that the focus and case studies used are appropriate to local circumstances.
A Local Community Awareness Program has been developed for Regional Operations Centres to explore the cultural and community imperatives required for effective engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. The Program is being rolled-out over 2012.
Issue Three: Output 17(f) and related elements 25, 26, 28 and 29
A clear statement of expenditure in each community is a requirement of the National Partnership and they are now well overdue. While I recognise this is not a straightforward endeavour, governments need to give this the urgent attention required to complete this important task.
Comment on Issue Three
The statements of expenditure are currently being considered by Governments. The publication of this information, including timing, will be decided by COAG. The Commonwealth will continue to report on Remote Service Delivery expenditure through the Remote Service Delivery Annual Reports to COAG.
1