Election outcome: provisional thoughts on the implications for Indigenous affairs

As I write this, the outcome of the election remains uncertain. It is likely to be days, and potentially weeks until we see a new Government and ministry sworn in. Clearly, the devil will be in the detail, so it is perhaps unwise to even venture a view on what it is likely to mean for Indigenous issues in Australia.

However, I think there are some general conclusions which can be drawn.

Whichever party forms government, they will have a more challenging time obtaining senate support for their legislative agenda, and in particular, there is likely to be a bias towards more populist views in the Senate. A minority government or narrow majority, combined with a challenging Senate increases the odds considerably of circumstances arising which would lead to an early election in the coming term.

This adds a sharper partisan edge to the ideologically significant issues which divide the nation; indigenous issues fit within this category, particularly issues around recognition, treaty, and over-representation in the criminal justice system.

In relation to constitutional recognition, the desirability of substantive change, and indeed the increasing expectations of Indigenous Australians for such a change are increasingly significant elements in our national political dialogue. However the likelihood and political feasibility of substantive (as opposed to merely symbolic or semantic) change appears to have been receding over the last year, and the election outcome reflecting strongly polarised views across both the nation’s political elites and the community at large appear unlikely to reverse that trend.

If Malcolm Turnbull is able to muster a majority on the floor of the house and hence retain the Prime Ministership (as currently still seems most likely), he will have reduced authority, and will likely be required to grant an even greater say to conservative elements within his party (who tend to have strong views on key Indigenous issues such as constitutional recognition).

The Nationals relative influence within the Coalition appears to have been strengthened as the majority of seats lost by the Coalition are within the Liberal party room. The likelihood of Nigel Scullion retaining his current portfolio (or an equivalent Cabinet post) is thus strengthened.

However, we can expect a lift in the priority and profile which Labor allocates to Indigenous issues with two high profile and high calibre Indigenous MP entering Parliament: Linda Burney in Barton and Patrick Dodson as a Senator for WA. There are a number of other possible incoming Indigenous parliamentarians, notably Kado Muir who is a Nationals Senate candidate in WA. The result is that there will be a strong case for a Turnbull Government to consider appointing Ken Wyatt as Minister for Indigenous Affairs. He would immediately blunt the potential for Dodson and Burney to set the agenda on key Indigenous issues, and would also facilitate a shift in emphasis to Indigenous health issues (Wyatt’s background and strength).

If Bill Shorten is able, against the odds, to form a minority Government, he will face formidable obstacles in the Senate, and serious budget challenges. He would likely think very seriously about appointing Dodson or Burney as Indigenous affairs minister. They would in turn face huge expectations from the Indigenous community and their supporters, but would also confront a more sharply polarised community, and an Opposition with a rather more conservative bias on Indigenous issues than under Prime Minister Turnbull.

To date, under Shadow Spokesman Shayne Neumann,  Labor has appeared to hold back on a proactive Indigenous affairs agenda, in favour of a more restrained stance emphasising  ‘bipartisanship’ and a focus on the relatively abstract ‘motherhood’ of constitutional recognition.  This has facilitated an ongoing emphasis on their core messaging around health, education and fairness for the community as a whole.

This strategy is likely to come under increasing internal pressure over the coming term, and in the event Labor forms a minority Government will necessarily change. Perhaps the largest risk for a Labor Government (since Indigenous interests appear to expect more from Labor than the Coalition) will be in attempting to craft a specific proposal for constitutional recognition which simultaneously meets the legitimate Indigenous expectations for substantive change and avoids a negative campaign from conservative interests which sabotages its chance of success.

So whichever party forms Government, Indigenous issues are likely to increase in profile in the next parliament. However, a combination of increased profile and increased expectations will quickly hit the fiscal reality wall. What seems clear from the election campaign we have just had, and the external uncertainties which dominate much global financial policymaking, is that (notwithstanding Keynes insights into the appropriate role of government in stimulating overall demand) whoever takes the government benches in the next parliament will seek to work hard to cut government spending and reduce the budget deficit.

We are likely to see a further cross government effort to find savings, involving the early convening of the Expenditure Review Committee of Cabinet, or perhaps the creation of a specialist ad hoc committee of ministers; what the tabloids used to refer to as a ‘razor gang’. The Department of Finance will have a swathe of savings options, across every portfolio, and indigenous affairs will not be excluded. Austerity will be the name of the game; the only issue really is whether it is a ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ version. The only conceivable brake on this would be a view within the incoming Government that an early election will be necessary or desirable.

 My point, however, is that Indigenous interests are not well positioned to resist further budgetary cuts, as they lack the generalised political support in the community necessary to do so and their peak bodies are not influential on detailed policy issues being fought out within the interstices of government.

Consequently, the task of protecting Indigenous specific programs as well as mainstream programs which service large proportions of Indigenous citizens will largely fall to the minister, and those inside the government who take an interest in Indigenous issues. The current minister does not have a great record of protecting the Indigenous budget from cuts. If there is a new minister, he or she will face a major challenge, and may not have the experience or party networks to assemble and maintain the necessary coalition of support to successfully resist cuts.

To sum up, whichever party forms government, Indigenous issues are likely to attract a higher profile and increased expectations from Indigenous citizens in the next term of Government. The Indigenous budget (broadly defined) is likely to come under increased pressure. Substantive constitutional recognition is necessary yet highly unlikely, although there may be a chance of a purely semantic change. Such an approach however would likely increase Indigenous citizens’ sense of alienation, and in my view would likely be counter-productive in the long term. For what it’s worth, I have long held the view that the best opportunity for substantive recognition will be as an integral element of a move to a republic. But that is clearly some way off!

In the meantime, there are a range of important and very real policy challenges in Indigenous affairs which the next Government will need to address and manage. They require focus and attention if the nation is to make progress towards reconciliation, recognition and ending Indigenous disadvantage. In doing so, the incoming government would be wise to considerably ramp up proactive and constructive engagement with Indigenous Australia.