Questions and answers about racism

Information presented in the section below is from Face the Facts, a publication of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity commission. The full text is recommended for further information.

What is multiculturalism? 

Multiculturalism is a policy based on rights and responsibilities which has been endorsed by Australian governments for managing a unified nation which is culturally diverse. The policy replaces the previous official policy of assimilation. Overriding principles of multiculturalism are:

• loyalty to Australia;
• acceptance of the Australian system; and
• mutual respect.

Multiculturalism recognises the right of all Australians to enjoy their cultural heritage (including language and religion), and the right to equal treatment and opportunities for everyone, regardless of their backgrounds. Multiculturalism aims to ensure the maximum use of the skills and talents of all Australians to assist economic efficiency.

What are the current levels of immigration?

The analysis of migration usually focuses on the number of people arriving in Australia and the numbers emigrating are sometimes ignored. For example, 1994-95, 487 428 people immigrated, 26 948 left permanently: the net migration was 60 480. In 1997-98 most settlers came from New Zealand (19%), United Kingdom (11.9%), China (5.6%), South Africa (5.5%) and Hong Kong (4.1%).

What are the current levels of migration to Tasmania?

1996-97: 431 people migrated to Tasmania.

72 came from New Zealand; 69 from UK; 37 from Bosnia-Herzegovina; 18 from El Salvador; 24 from Africa; 13 from the Philippines and 15 from North America.

82 people immigrated under the refugee or special humanitarian programs. 1997-98: 369 people migrated to Tasmania. 63 came from Former Yugoslavia; 47 from United Kingdom; 53 from New Zealand; 16 from South Africa; and 15 from the Philippines.

108 people immigrated under the Refugee or Special Humanitarian programs.

Does immigration lead to higher unemployment? 

There is no evidence to show that immigration causes higher unemployment: all migrants are consumers and this creates demand which leads to employment for all Australians. Rates of unemployment are higher for recent arrivals than for those who have been in Australia for some time. Not all migrants intend to work or are of working age. (In 1995-96 of the 99 139 people who migrated to Australia, 47% were children or other dependents with no intention of receiving social security.)

Who are refugees? How do they differ from migrants? 

The international definition of a refugee is someone who has a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group, and has fled from her/ his country of origin. Refugees are forced to leave their country of origin. Tasmania has, proportionately, a higher percentage of refugees than other Australian states. Migrants choose to leave their country of origin. They are not entitled to social security benefits for a two year period.

Who is an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person?

Since the early 1980s the Federal Government has used a three point working definition to enable people to establish their eligibility for specific Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander programs. According to that definition an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person is someone who:

• is of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent;
• identifies himself or herself as an Aboriginal person or Torres Strait Islander; and
• is accepted as such by the Indigenous community in which he or she lives.

Each requirement must be satisfied. Physical appearance and lifestyle are irrelevant.

What is Reconciliation? 

Reconciliation aims to encourage co-operation and improve harmony between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

The process of reconciliation formally began as a result of the recommendations of the 1991 Report of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. The Federal Parliament unanimously supported the establishment of an independent body called the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation. The Council's role includes consulting the community on ways to improve relations between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people, education and developing strategies to encourage co-operation.

What does it mean when it is said that Aboriginal people were dispossessed? 

Dispossession refers primarily to loss of land. In the Mabo decision, the High Court stated that Indigenous people were dispossessed of their land parcel by parcel, to make way for expanding colonisation.

The resulting dislocation dispossessed Indigenous people of their cultures, languages and religions as well as their economic welfare and independence. Well into the 20th century, many policies and laws forced Aboriginal people to be segregated and they were denied fundamental human rights, including the right to vote and access to social welfare.

Large numbers of Aborigines were killed. It has been estimated that as many as 10 000 were killed in battle or murdered in northern Australia alone from the 1860s to the 1930s.

Were Aboriginal children forcibly removed from their families? 

Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families over a long period. From the very early days of British occupation Aboriginal children represented a potential source of labour to squatters and pastoralists and a target for the evangelising efforts of the churches. Government policy this century focused primarily on children of mixed race -those with lighter skins. They were liable to be removed for training in institutions as domestics or farm labourers. They were reared as if they were white in orphanages and children's homes, fostered or adopted by non-Aboriginal families. They were almost always taught to reject their Aboriginality and Aboriginal culture.

Removals on the basis of race continued into the 1970s. The legacy of forcible separation remains active in the lives of Aboriginal individuals and communities today. A national survey conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in 1994 revealed that 1 in every 10 Indigenous people aged over 25 had been removed from their families in childhood.

Are Indigenous people disadvantaged?

Health:
The life expectancy for Aboriginal people is 15-20 years less than the general population. Infant mortality is still more than 3 to 5 times higher than average.

Education:
Only 33% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children complete schooling compared to a national average of 77%. 2.2% of Indigenous people have tertiary degrees compared with 12.8% of all Australians.

Employment:
The unemployment rate is 38% for Indigenous people, compared with 8.7% for the general population.

Criminal Justice System:
Indigenous people are 17.3 times more likely to be arrested; 14.7 times more likely to be imprisoned; and 16.5 times more likely to die in custody than non-Indigenous Australians.

Other:
Only 28% of Aboriginal families own their own home compared to 67% of all Australian families.

Do Aboriginal people get higher unemployment benefits than other Australians?

Unemployed Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders, like other unemployed Australians, are entitled to Job Search or New Start Allowances at the same rates as other Australians.

Do Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people receive special treatment from the Government?

Aboriginal people do not receive higher social security benefits than other Australians. In the areas of education and housing, Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders have access to special benefits in recognition of the fact that they are the most economically and socially disadvantaged group in Australia today.

What is ATSIC? What does it do?

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) is a Commonwealth statutory authority which was established in March 1990. ATSIC aims to allow Indigenous Australians to be directly involved in the administration of their own affairs. It is an agency run by the elected representatives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

What did the Mabo decision say?

In what is commonly referred to as the Mabo decision, the High Court held that the common law of Australia recognises a form of native title to land. The Court rejected the doctrine that Australia was terra nullius (land belonging to no one) at the time of European Invasion. Pre-existing rights to land survived colonisation and still survive today in certain circumstances. Native title exists in accordance with the laws and customs of Indigenous people where those people have maintained their connection with the land and/ or waters, and where their title has not been extinguished by legislation.

Is my backyard safe from an Aboriginal land claim? 

In the Mabo decision, the High Court said that native title has been extinguished on all freehold land and certainly the vast majority of leasehold land. Thus, Aboriginal people cannot successfully claim land over which a freehold or non-pastoral leasehold interest has already been granted. Further, to be successful, the native title claimants must have continuously maintained their traditional association with the land claimed. Clearly, these conditions rule out any possibility that residential land could be successfully claimed under the native title legislation.

What did the High Court say in the Wik case? 

The Wik case relates to a claim of native title on land which included two pastoral leases, granted by the Queensland Government. The High Court said that native title can only be extinguished by a law or an act of the Government which shows a clear and plain intention to extinguish native title. The laws creating pastoral leases in Queensland did not reveal an intention to extinguish native title. The Court found that Queensland pastoral leases had been created to meet the needs of the emerging pastoral industry. The leases in question did not give the leaseholders a right to exclusive possession of the land. The granting of a pastoral lease did not necessarily extinguish native title. Native title could co-exist with the rights of the leaseholder.