Australian Indigenous Law Reporter
|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Australian Indigenous Law Reporter |
|
The Alternative Governing Structures Program (AGSP) is a program of the Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs in the Department of Families, Youth and Community Care, Queensland. The Program is the Queensland Government's long-term response to the identified need to examine the appropriateness of the system of community government presently in place in Queensland's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
A number of reports commissioned by governments in recent years, including those by the Parliamentary Committee of Public Accounts, the Legislation Review Committee and the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, have highlighted shortcomings in the existing model of community government and called for communities to be given the opportunity to develop more culturally appropriate governing structures to meet their unique needs and circumstances.
The Program is currently being implemented by the Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs throughout Queensland. Part I - Program Description and sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 of Part II - Funding Guidelines are reproduced below.
1.1 Purpose
The Alternative Governing Structures Program (AGSP) is an innovative initiative to facilitate greater self-determination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Queensland. The decisions which affect the lives of people living in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have historically been made by Government, with little input from the people concerned.
The purpose of the AGSP is to assist Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to develop decision-making structures and processes which will empower them to make important decisions about their futures themselves.
The primary focus of the Program is the use of community development planning processes to enable community members themselves to plan better ways of making decisions about their community's affairs and develop appropriate and effective decision-making models and processes.
The Program acknowledges that different solutions will be required to meet the differing needs and aspirations of different communities. For example, some Deed of Grant in Trust (DOGIT) communities may wish to build on and develop their existing decision-making structures, the community councils, or to consider developing alternative governing structures. Other communities may simply want to plan a structure or a process whereby they can have a greater input into the delivery of services to the community by Government departments, such as in the areas of health and education.
Communities which have no existing council may want to plan a form of community government for their community.
The Program is flexible enough to allow the direction and pace of change to be controlled by the community concerned. Funding will enable communities to plan new and innovative initiatives directed towards the long-term development of decision-making arrangements which will meet that community's unique conditions.
In taking this approach, the Government acknowledges the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to determine the direction of their own lives and the development of their communities. The Government is also expressing confidence in the knowledge and vision of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to plan for their futures if provided with resources and support.
The features of this Program and background information on its purpose are described in Part I of this document. Detailed guidelines covering the terms and conditions of funding are provided in Part II.
1.2 Objectives of the Program
1. To facilitate the planning of appropriate and effective decision-making structures or processes (including governing structures) for, and by, communities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Queensland.
2. To empower members of participating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities (both through the process of community-based planning and through the decision-making structures or processes which result) to:
' determine the direction of the future development of their communities generally; and
' have a greater input into service delivery by government agencies to their communities.
2.1 Focus on planning, and decision-making structures and processes
The central element of the Program is the provision of funding for communities to undertake community-based planning directed towards developing better structures or processes for the community to make decisions about its affairs. The Program focuses on the development of community decision-making processes and structures, not on the direct provision of services. For example, funding might be available for planning a committee to address alcohol problems on a community, but funding would not be available for building an alcohol rehabilitation centre or establishing an alcohol awareness campaign. Of course, once established, such a body could then plan a rehabilitation centre or awareness campaign, but it would have to seek funding from sources other than the AGSP.
Underpinning the Program is a Government commitment to support participating communities throughout the planning process. In addition to the grants provided under the Program, the Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (OATSIA) and, through it, other Government agencies, will be closely involved with communities in the planning process. This will ensure that proposals are developed in partnership with the relevant Government agencies and that outcomes are planned to co-ordinate with Government service delivery and program mechanisms.
The involvement of all the relevant Government agencies in the planning process will assist in the smooth implementation of plans for new decision-making structures and processes at the completion of planning.
The end result of the AGSP planning process will vary from community to community. Essentially, it will be a plan describing how the particular community wants to deal with or make decisions about important issues. Some possible outcomes are described in more detail in Part I, Section 8.2.
Implementation of the plan may require further consideration by the Government, including negotiation with a community about its proposals. At the completion of a project (or, if appropriate, the completion of one of the stages of a project) in a particular community, OATSIA will give priority consideration to community proposals which may require Government action and will put those proposals to Government for consideration.
2.2 The importance of community participation
The success of the program will depend on achieving maximum community participation in community planning projects. It is vital that each funded AGSP project involves as many community members as possible, so that plans which are developed have wide support and acceptance in the relevant community.
2.3 Community-based planning
The underlying process or methodology for the AGSP is community-based planning. Under this process, community members come together (often with the assistance of a facilitator) to discuss their needs and aspirations and to plan ways of achieving them.
The approach may involve a great deal of discussion and negotiation before agreement is reached by community members on the direction to be followed. This approach will ensure that community members themselves are responsible for the resulting plans for decision-making structures or processes.
The use of community-based planning provides the flexibility needed to achieve outcomes which meet the needs and aspirations of the communities involved. It enables community members to set the direction and pace of change themselves. For instance, they might wish to develop new decision-making arrangements for specific areas such as health or education, or to consider substantial modifications to existing community governments, or develop proposals for new governing structures.
The process of the AGSP will be as important as the outcomes. In supporting communities to plan initiatives, the AGSP process will help empower the community members involved. Participating community members will gain valuable experience in community-based planning, and specifically in how to collectively determine their goals and plan strategies for achieving them. The process will also encourage and support community self-reliance and create an opportunity for community members to take control of the direction of their lives.
3.1 Need for the Program
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Queensland are facing the legacy of past dispossession, dispersal and disadvantage.
Many communities consist of groups originally relocated from different parts of the State and, as a consequence, are a complex web of diverse cultural and social values, beliefs and relationships. Furthermore, the communities have suffered from a history of social and economic disadvantage and inadequate provision of essential services.
The local government structures presently in place in Deed of Grant in Trust (DOGIT) communities, on Mornington Island and in Aurukun, have encountered many difficulties in delivering local government services. Recent government reports have highlighted some of the problems with the current system.
' Ongoing accountability problems led to a report by the Queensland Parliamentary Committee of Public Accounts in 1991, entitled Financial Administration of Aboriginal and Island Councils Report 2: Effectiveness of Councils, Support for Councils, Training. The Report concluded that the problems were the result of the inappropriateness of the existing council structures in meeting the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
' It was recommended that the Government enter negotiations with each DOGIT community to determine 'the appropriate structure and constitution for a local authority representative Council in each community' (Recommendation 1).
' In 1990 the Government appointed the Legislation Review Committee to report on the legislation governing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Councils. The Committee comprised 5 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, 3 of whom were nominated by the Aboriginal Co-ordinating Council and the Island Co-ordinating Council, and 2 by the then Minister to represent the interests of the Aurukun and Mornington Shires and of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in urban and rural communities.
' In November 1991, the Committee published a report entitled Inquiry Into The Legislation Relating To The Management Of Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Communities in Queensland. One of the major findings of the report was that the 'local government' model established by the Community Services (Aborigines) Act 1984 and the Community Services (Torres Strait) Act 1984 was not always the most preferred community management structure.
The report recommended that residents should be allowed to choose the type and nature of governing arrangement which best meets the particular needs and aspirations of their community.
The Government has recognised the need to address the question of the appropriateness of the governing structures presently in place on DOGIT communities. Communities need the opportunity to consider governing or decision-making structures or processes which are culturally appropriate, which are more broadly representative of the members and groups in a community and which take into account existing indigenous authority and decision-making structures.
One of the greatest difficulties for current community councils is the demands on them to administer services and programs not normally associated with local government functions. Housing, justice, and economic development are examples of difficult functions which are often left to community councils. Improved community decision-making structures could assist councils to cope with these matters or devolve some of their functions. For example, committees of community members could assist council decision-making, or community structures could be set up to take over responsibilities which councils wished to delegate.
The Report of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC) stressed that organisations and structures developed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples themselves are central to self-determination because they have the acceptance of members of the community and are accountable to them (RCIADIC 1991, Vol.4, pp. 22-30). Recommendation 199 of the Report is that Governments recognise the diversity of organisational structures developed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
3.2 Queensland Government response to the need
Enhanced support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community councils
In the short term, the Government has sought to improve the capacity of the existing community councils to deliver local government services, manage council operations and assist in maintaining law and order. A comprehensive revision of the Community Services Acts (1984) to be introduced into the Parliament in 1997, which implements many recommendations of the reports mentioned above, seeks to improve the operation of the council system. The Government has also focussed on training to enhance the capacity of members of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to manage a community's affairs. Community control over law and order has been enhanced by assistance to the councils in developing by-laws.
These initiatives to strengthen the existing community councils are a recognition that the development of effective new governing or decision-making arrangements is a long-term proposition and that, regardless of the type of arrangements a community adopts, there will always be a need to deliver effective local government services.
Alternative Governing Structures Program (AGSP)
In the long term, the Government believes that the underlying causes of problems experienced by communities are best addressed by the empowerment of community members through decision-making structures and processes that reflect their particular circumstances and needs. To this end, the AGSP will assist communities themselves to plan decision-making structures and processes which will fit the varied cultural and social make-up and different aspirations of each community.
4.1 General
The AGSP potentially has application to Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander communities in any setting in Queensland. The need for appropriate and effective decision-making structures and processes is an issue for all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, whether they live in remote communities, rural towns or urban areas.
4.2 DOGIT communities, Mornington Island and Aurukun
The potential role of the AGSP in addressing the difficulties facing these communities has been described in Section 3 above. The Program will enable these communities to plan for decision-making structures and processes, both within and outside of the current Council structures.
Any successful community-based planning process will be a co-operative exercise involving the widest possible range of groups and individuals on a community. As the existing decision-making structure on DOGIT communities, community councils will have an important role in any AGSP planning process.
4.3 Non-DOGIT communities
The AGSP represents an important opportunity for communities which have no existing community council to consider their options for new decision-making or governing structures. There are a number of discrete Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities across Queensland which do not have a council and some of these communities have expressed their desire to develop a body to manage their community's affairs.
4.4 Urban and semi-urban communities
There are a number of communities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples living in urban areas or rural towns who have special needs in relation to the delivery of services and the maintenance of cultural integrity. The AGSP presents an opportunity for these communities to plan decision-making structures or processes which will empower them both to have a greater say in service delivery by government agencies to their community and more generally to make decisions about their community's future development. For example, an informal council or committee for an Aboriginal community in a rural town might provide a means for those people to communicate their wishes to the local Shire Council, or to advise Government departments about the way in which they want services delivered.
5.1 Promotion and awareness
To promote awareness of the AGSP, a Regional Officer from OATSIA (accompanied by a member of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Overview Committee or other community representative) will visit each community. The visits will be informal, involving discussions with a wide number of groups and individuals on the community (including the community council).
5.2 Deciding whether to, and who should, apply for funds
It is important that the process of planning for new decision-making structures or processes has wide community support.
Where members of a community show interest in the AGSP, they will be encouraged to organise an open meeting/workshop on their community so the issue can be considered further. Resources and assistance from OATSIA Regional Offices will be available to hold such meetings (there may need to be more than one meeting).
The objective of the workshop/meeting is to bring all the groups on the community together to decide whether there is enough interest to seek AGSP funding - in other words, whether there is enough interest in reviewing current decision-making structures in the community and in considering new structures or processes.
If the community decides it wants to explore and develop new decision-making structures and processes, the next step is to decide who should apply for funds and co-ordinate the planning process in general. The workshop participants might decide on an existing organisation to be the applicant (where it has wide support in the community), including the community council, or it might decide to form a special committee with representatives from all parts of the community and seek funding through a sponsor organisation. The organisation receiving the funding (either the applicant or the sponsor) must be incorporated (see Part II, Section 3.1).
5.3 Eligibility criteria
The eligibility criteria for applicants include requirements that:
(a) the applicant group has a significant degree of acceptance in the community;
(b) the applicant has (or has access to) the expertise to manage and develop the project; and
(c) the applicant has (or has access to) the financial management skills to administer the grant.
More details on specific eligibility criteria are contained in Part II, Section 3.
6.1 Application
The applicant group nominated at the workshop does the groundwork of developing the project proposal and preparing the application. Regional officers of OATSIA are available to assist in this process. Liaison with other Government agencies and community organisations may also be necessary. The application is lodged with the OATSIA Regional Office (see addresses at Part II, Section 7).
6.2 Assessment by OATSIA
OATSIA assesses all applications to determine:
(a) whether the applicant group meets the eligibility criteria (see Part I, Section 5.3); and
(b) whether the proposed project meets the objectives of the Program (see Part I, Section 1.2).
Refer to Part II (AGSP Funding Guidelines) for more information.
7.1 Planning
The applicant group will co-ordinate the planning process in its community. The process used is not dictated by the Government. It is up to the community to devise a process which includes all the relevant interests in the community. Planning might be facilitated through community workshops, surveys, consultations or any other appropriate means.
The applicant group might conduct the planning itself, or it might decide to engage outside consultants. Where a consultant is to be engaged, they should be acceptable to the community as well as meeting Government criteria as to expertise and qualifications. This will be considered by OATSIA at the time the application is assessed.
7.2 Timeframe
The planning process in a community may take some time, depending on the scale of the project which a community has undertaken. The AGSP is a long-term, developmental program which recognises that there are no quick or easy solutions to the issues which face Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
Where a project takes more than one year, continuation of funding in subsequent years will be dependent on the grantee meeting the grant terms and conditions in each year and on the availability of funds. The length of time that might be required for a project should be discussed with OATSIA officers at the application stage. This will assist OATSIA to plan possible future funding requirements.
7.3 Involvement of other relevant parties
It is crucial that any external organisations or bodies affected by planning in a community are involved in the planning process. Relevant parties might include State and Federal government agencies, ATSIC, shire councils, local authorities, land councils, and other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and authorities.
OATSIA Regional Offices will assist in liaison with relevant parties outside the community, particularly government agencies. One method may be to convene 'local working parties' for each planning project with representatives from relevant bodies.
Involving relevant government agencies and other organisations in community-based planning is a means of ensuring that planning outcomes have their support. This will make the next stage, the implementation of AGSP plans, easier to achieve.
7.4 Role of OATSIA
OATSIA has primary responsibility for administration of the Alternative Governing Structures Program.
Regional Offices of OATSIA will play a key role in the AGSP process by:
(a) providing relevant information to interested communities and organisations (including a resource kit);
(b) assisting communities to develop AGSP proposals, including the facilitation of community discussion on the issue;
(c) assisting grantees with community-based planning activities, where requested;
(d) assisting communities with liaison and communication with relevant external parties such as government agencies, local authorities and community organisations (see Part I, Section 7.3);
(e) assessing grant applications, drawing up service agreements, monitoring expenditure and acquittal of grant funds; and
(f) co-ordinating and liaising with other Government agencies in relation to implementation of AGSP outcomes.
See also Part II, Section 2.1 'Departmental Responsibilities'.
8.1 Plan for governing or decision-making structure or process
As indicated earlier, the final outcome of the AGSP planning process on a community will be a plan for a better way to make decisions about key issues affecting the community. These plans might deal only with a decision-making structure or process for specific matters such as health, education or housing, or they might propose a new form of governing structure for the community as a whole.
8.2 Examples of possible outcomes
The Government does not wish to pre-empt, or to limit, the range of proposed decision-making structures or processes which will arise out of planning under the AGSP. The strength of the AGSP is its flexibility and the lack of a pre-determined outcome for any community.
It will be up to each community using the AGSP to develop their own ideas and plans on what will work for them.
Some examples of possible outcomes from planning under the AGSP are provided below to assist communities in understanding the Program. The examples should not be seen as exclusive.
' A plan to set up special committees of community members to advise a community council on particular issues such as housing, health, or education. Implementation might require negotiation with the Government for amendments to legislation, or the community might be able to implement such a plan informally.
' A constitution for a proposed new governing body for a community with no existing council. The community would then negotiate implementation of the plan with the Government, possibly through the passing of new legislation.
' A plan for a Council of Elders to have an input in decision-making by a community council. Implementation of this would probably be a matter of amending the community councils legislation.
' A plan to change the structure of an existing community council to make it representative of all the families on a community. Implementation of this plan would require negotiation with the Government to amend legislation.
' A plan for a community authority or committee as a means to make decisions about a particular issue such as health, education or housing. This committee might perform a function delegated by a community council (if it is a DOGIT community), or it might exercise functions devolved by government agencies. On the other hand, it might be an advisory body to allow community input into government decision-making. Implementation might require negotiations with the relevant department.
' A plan for an informal committee or council for an urban or rural Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community to have an input into service delivery to the community by the Shire Council, local authorities or State or Federal government departments. Implementing this plan might require negotiation with the State Government or other funding sources for a grant to establish and run the committee.
' Planning at Aurukun, which began in 1993, has resulted in changes to the way the Department of Education provides schooling to the children of Aurukun and its outstations, the establishment of a representative organisation for managing outstation development, and the passing of legislation to create a council of elders to decide on alcohol laws in the community.
8.3 Government implementation
As indicated in Section 2.1, once a plan has been developed, the relevant community and OATSIA will commence negotiations with appropriate agencies or levels of Government on the best means of implementing the plan.
8.4 Follow-up funding
AGSP funds are provided primarily for the planning phase of the development of decision-making structures and processes - that is, funding is for the development of plans. If further funding is needed for the actual implementation of the plans, this will need to be sought from other relevant State or Federal Government agencies or programs, or be considered as part of the Government's decision on the overall proposal put forward by a community. OATSIA officers may be able to facilitate the process of gaining funds for implementation by assisting communities to liaise and negotiate with relevant Government agencies.
Where a consultant is needed to facilitate this process of negotiation with Government agencies for implementation of a plan, a funding application under the AGSP may be considered. Follow-up funding under the AGSP will not be provided for infrastructure or service delivery projects identified in the plan.
Alternative Governing Structures Program
...
...
3.2 Principles for assessment of applicants
Preference will be given to applicants who satisfy the following principles to a greater extent:
' there should be a significant degree of acceptance within the community that the applicant is the appropriate body to undertake or facilitate planning for community decision-making structures or processes;
' the applicant should possess (or have access to) the necessary expertise to successfully carry out the project; and
' the applicant should have (or have access to) the necessary financial skills to properly administer the grant.
3.3 Eligible projects
Generally, to be eligible for funding under the AGSP, proposed projects must be consistent with the objectives and underlying principles of the Program as described in Part I, Sections 1 and 2.
Where a consultant is to be engaged for a project, the following criteria must be satisfied:
' the consultant must be acceptable to the community; and
' the consultant must have suitable qualifications/expertise/experience to perform the task required.
Projects which are not eligible include:
' projects which have a primary focus on providing a particular service or providing infrastructure, rather than developing community decision-making structures or processes.
Applicants will be expected to show that they have explored other possible funding sources (State/Commonwealth/ATSIC Programs) and that there is no more appropriate funding source available.
3.4 Eligible costs
Activities or purposes for which funding may be approved under the AGSP include:
' engagement of a consultant or employee to co-ordinate or assist the planning process;
' reasonable administration costs associated with the project (e.g. postage, stationery, telephone);
' costs associated with holding workshops, consultations or other activities associated with the planning process (e.g. venue hire, catering, travel, accommodation);
' preparation of reports or other necessary documentation; and
' bookkeeping, financial management costs.
Applications must be accompanied by a budget which identifies the cost components of the grant assistance sought. Individual items, including those listed above, must be approved in writing by the Department.
Budget items which are not eligible for funding include:
' capital infrastructure;
' the direct provision of a service; and
' meeting fees.
...
A copy of the report can be obtained from the Senior Policy Co-ordinator, Law, Justice and Culture Section, Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, GPO Box 806, Brisbane, Qld 4001 or by telephone on (07) 3224 2866 or facsimile (07) 3404 3572.
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AUIndigLawRpr/1996/100.html