She asked for the facts, then ignored them

Vicki Gillick, co-ordinator of the Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (NPY) Women's Council appeared on ABC TV's Lateline, speaking of a "slow form of genocide" and suggesting that unilateral welfare quarantining should be maintained. Subsequently, Donna Ah Chee, from Central Australian Aboriginal Congress went public with her view that as a default position, compulsory income quarantining should be imposed on all welfare recipients across the country.

As the shockwaves from the Government's response reverberate, Professor Jon Altman from the ANU asks reasonably enough for the Minister to provide evidence to substantiate her departure from the Review Board's recommendations.

But Macklin has offered only anecdotes and assertions. "I have indicated many times that the evidence shows that many women and children in particular are benefiting from income management" she said, without tabling any hard data. Why the public ought to accept this version of events in preference to the review board's conclusion that people who do not wish to participate should be free to opt out is unclear.

From day one of the Emergency Response, perceptions of the degree of support for the Intervention among Indigenous Territorians have been distorted by the "Hermannsburg effect". The former Lutheran mission, an hour's easy drive on bitumen to the west of Alice Springs, is a stronghold of support for the policy. Local Labor MP, Alison Anderson - who hales from this part of the Territory - is a fine, grassroots politician with every right to express her opinion. But views from this quarter have dominated the national media. The equally valid but significantly different opinions of people living in surrounding communities like Yuendumu, Mutitjulu and Titjikala have received little prominence. It is a gross distortion of the truth to suggest that there is overwhelming support for the Intervention among Indigenous Territorians.

The publication of extracts from an earlier draft of the report much more critical of the Intervention than the final document add an overlay of intrigue to the process. Chair Peter Yu responded with a terse three-line media release noting that "the Report which has been published is the report of the independent review board". The media release might have gone on to say that in the normal course of events early drafts may differ quite significantly from the final product. It could have also added that contact between the review team and the minister's office, is not of itself evidence of anything sinister.

The Review Board report offered a chance for the Rudd Government to undo some of the damage caused by the ruthless and indiscriminate nature of the Howard government's policy. But the Minister's response to the Review Board's report is remarkable for its head-shaking cynicism. For her to spin the Government's response as being one of basic agreement with the substance of the review team's findings is utterly misleading.

The NT's Anti-discrimination Commissioner, Tony Fitzgerald, made a written submission to the Review proposing that "the NTER in its present form be scrapped, and transformed from a quick-fix, law and order plan into a range of long-term initiatives aimed at overcoming remote Indigenous disadvantage and raising Indigenous quality of life." He makes a compelling case, which is supported in no small measure by the review's findings.

The Rudd Government may well regard their response to the NTER Review Board as some kind of pragmatic paternalism. They should be aware that a fair chunk of the Aboriginal population of the Northern Territory may well see it as a gross betrayal of trust.