As a community service project of the ‘Rotary Club of Alice Springs Mbantua’ I’m working on a project to link sponsors that cover the costs of the Kumon literacy program with early childhood aged Aboriginal recipients (and families) in Alice Springs.  Interviews for the first available scholarship will commence soon.

As this proceeds I am in the process of seeking more scholarship sponsors.  If you live in a capital city in Australia and know how to tap into capital relevant to improving literacy for Aboriginal people in a regional/remote part of our country then this could be your opportunity. 

For more information please visit www.earlychildhoodliteracy.wordpress.com

Recently I read The River of Doubt about President Theodore Roosevelt’s journey on an unmapped river in South America, also called the Roosevelt-Rondon Scientific Expedition.  A friend lent me the book.  It is a fascinating account and coming from the desert the detailed explanations of the river, the amazon environment and its adaptive nature was intriguing given the stark contrast to my own environment.

My friend who lent it to me said that Marechal Rondon, the Brazilian Military Officer who led the journey with Roosevelt, was a remarkable figure so prominent in the history of South America.  In that region his name is recognised extensively.  The book gives account after account of Rondon’s philosophy and approach towards the indigenous peoples; how he refused to support confrontation despite being in the face of danger and hostility; how his practice was to leave food and goods as gifts; how his discipline and honour and strong sense of nationalism was highly regarded.  My friend asks why we don’t have similiar figures recognised by our own Australian history?  

Judging by our own account of history during the 1800s it seems Rondon’s philosophy and approach would have been quite a departure from accepted opinion.  His was progressive in the sense of accepting pluralism but different from many established opinions (such as responding to hostility with strength and force).  The fact that Rondon received such widespread recognition accounts to the fact that this position and philosophy was recognised as central to the development of general identity and recognition in South America.  My friends question opens up important thoughtlines!

Previously I posted my response here to a fascinating debate concerning the internet and what it is doing to the human mind.  Professor Greenfield is an intriguing individual.  A few nights ago she was on Lateline again and gave another persuasive interview.  Of all the media and public debates I have observed recently this is by far one of the most interesting.

A letter in today’s Centralian Advocate:

It has been about 6 months since I quit alcohol. As a young adult my main reason was to send the right message to others in my generation.

I can confidently say that my challenge has been well worth it.  I never drank regularly, a weekend wind-down was always on the cards, but as more than 4 standard drinks on any single occasion is considered a health risk I was in the camp of many in the odd occasion of over-consumption.  Quitting alcohol meant that I could talk about it more and its place in our community.

If alcohol is consumed responsibly then this can be a good thing, it can be a good way to wind down and socialise.

Alcohol becomes a problem when relationships are harmed; when the amount of money spent dips too much into disposable income; when violence or abuse no matter how benign is dished out; when it is seen as an out to whatever personal or social problems persist. For some people the response to any of these experiences is to have another drink.

The problem self-generates.  For some, alcohol is a pitiless addiction.  For too many in my generation and younger alcohol and its misuse is a social contagion.  We egg each other on and poke fun at the hapless incidents. 

Abstaining from alcohol is not a solution for everybody.  I set myself this challenge to see what it was like.  Because alcohol was a weekly ritual it was difficult at first. My mind relied on its calming effects after a long week and mentally I had to adjust. Because I am a busy person it was easier for me to quash boredom without it (having boredom and no purpose is a big issue for many in Alice Springs).

Exercise helped me, as did a healthy addiction to coffee.  What I realised from quitting is that there is so much to life and its abundance that other interests can easily replace alcohol, so long as a kind of semi-dependency caused by years of use is overcome.  Without the after-effects my mind and body is better without it.

To others in my generation I hope these messages resonate.

Since my involvement with local government one of the most interesting experiences is media engagement. 

In a letter to the editor I submitted the words ‘As an urban Indigenous person’ and then proceeded to criticise the playing of the race card by a prominent Alice Springs person.  The newspaper changed the ‘as’ to ‘to’, completely changing the meaning and context of the letter.  My intention was to start where I’m coming and whilst I have no problem referring to my circumstances as ‘urban’ I certainly would not refer to others the same way because everyone has a different angle.  One word can change the whole context.    

When I was first elected a local journalist asked me about what it meant to have two Aboriginal Alderman.  I repeated the lines (because he kept on seeking a different response) that ‘I was proud to be associated with a Council with Alderman from a diverse range of identities and industries’.  I didn’t want to be drawn into a race-based analysis.  The next day my words were printed along the lines of being ‘proud to be’ on a Council with two Aboriginal Alderman and how this would make a big difference (it may have, but I didn’t want to be drawn on it).  This was my first direct experience.

Following my election as Deputy Mayor I held a lengthy interview where I said a core focus would be to argue for recognition of Local Government in the constitution that evokes Statehood (the document that formalises a new State for the NT).  I said that the new constitution can protect the interests of regions, and Local Government, because of its geographic spread, was one way to do this.  I said that the efforts of Local Government for recognition in the ‘national’ constitution was not worth the time or effort.  The media report said my ambition was for recognition of Local Government in the ‘national’ constitution.

Another interviewer asked me about my family heritage.  I told him the links.  He wasn’t familiar with those family names so I explained other families (more familiar names) who also branched from the original person.  I said that those more familiar names are not my direct family and not to use them but that I told him these things so that he could see how everything is linked.  He used the family names I asked him not to. 

On a completely different topic the following is a Stateline interview, my first foray into tv journalism: 

MELINDA JAMES: They’ve been described as racist, unconstitutional and even wacky. Alice Springs Town Council has proposed eighty four new by-laws that have stirred up angry public debate. The by-laws cover a range of issues including a prohibition on people sleeping in the dry Todd River bed, drinking alcohol in public and demonstrating without a permit.

Alice Springs Deputy Mayor John Rawnsley says the aim of the by-laws is to improve the town. I spoke with him earlier today.

MELINDA JAMES: John Rawnsley, welcome to Stateline.

JOHN RAWNSLEY – Deputy Mayor, Alice Springs: Hi Melinda, how are you?

MELINDA JAMES: It’s fair to say that these proposed by-laws have caused quite a stir in Alice Springs, isn’t it?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Oh look, it’s been twenty years since the by-laws have been revised. Recent changes to the local government act give local councils and shires more powers in relation to creating their own by-laws. This is a big project that were working on, previously we worked on by-laws in relation to trolleys and of course council’s got a lot of great initiatives such as the cash-for-cans scheme amongst one. But, you know, we encourage public discussion in relation to a wide range of issues and so we’ve taken the course of putting these draft by-laws out for public comment.

MELINDA JAMES: Well there’s certainly been lots of discussion, the main criticism seem to be how broad these by-laws are and the amount of discretionary power that will be afforded to council rangers under the new laws. Do you think they’re fair criticisms?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: We do have the draft by-laws out there, obviously there will be some policies that go into to give some clarity and detail in relation to how the by-laws are implemented and I think that they’re very crucial because when we did put out the draft by-laws they were very broad and they’ve attracted criticism for the wrong reasons and people have misinterpreted what a lot of the by-laws have meant and that’s created concerns in relation to our dialogue around trying to come up with a constructive and final product.

MELINDA JAMES: But is can be dangerous, can’t it, to have a law that’s so broad that it means council rangers have the discretion whether to actually prosecute people or issue fines to people?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Not if you have strong policies that go into support that. But obviously, you know, our modern Australian society has a range of different mechanisms to protect people’s interest.

MELINDA JAMES: Well, some of the by-laws do give rangers a lot of discretionary power and other powers for example to move people on if they even suspect someone of being about to break a by-law – the Police Association says rangers simply aren’t trained to handle the powers they’d be given under the law?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Look, the rangers were involved closely in drafting these by-laws and they’re trained in relation to what they did. In relation to exercising discretion they’ll exercise judgement in their own discretion for everybody’s safety in relation to implementing the by-laws and if we’re confident as aldermen that there’s measures to ensure individuals’ protection who are subject to the by-laws, then I think that’s a good thing.

MELINDA JAMES: Well, Alderman Jane Clark says a lot of the by-laws are outside normal council’s responsibilities, outside the normal purview of council, and isn’t she right in one sense – that rangers in some cases will be doing the job of police. For example isn’t it the job of police to tip out alcohol that’s seen being drunk in a restricted area?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Look, the rangers will exercise their discretion in relation to that but these by-laws aren’t dissimilar to many by-laws that are across the country and across the world and they’ve received criticism even though they are identical to many of those by-laws. We had a public meeting about the by-laws and it was put quite strongly that the rangers, even though they might have broad powers, their main job is there to assist people and they’re not going to implement by-laws in a way that’s going to be harsh or detrimental to individual circumstances.

MELINDA JAMES: Do you really think a $130 fine for begging will be an effective deterrent?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Look, we’ll come together as a council and consider those kinds of arguments. Just on that one, the cultural protocols are strong in relation to stopping people begging and so I think that came about in relation to formalising that particular by-law. Where I work I’ve had countless people come to me with their bank card and with their pin number, people who I haven’t met in my life, but they’ve come to me and asked if I can go get money out of their account because they’re concerned about people harassing them. So I think that if we actually have the word begging or some other word I think the spirit of the by-laws in relation to dealing with some of those circumstances, the spirit is there for aldermen to support and we want to try to come up with something that is effective.

MELINDA JAMES: The town-wide ban on camping – we’ve just heard on the program about the dire lack of public housing and emergency accommodation in Darwin and the situation in Alice Springs is, I understand it, even worse with a five year waiting list for public housing – some people have no choice but to camp in Alice Springs don’t they?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Yeah, we understand that. That by-law has been in place for 20 years, it’s not changed, the only change is in relation to the times to make it more efficient in terms of implementation, and because that by-law hasn’t been changed in its substance, rangers will continue their practice and we understand the dire accommodation needs and so they won’t be implemented to the full force that the capacity is there to do. But council has been a strong advocate of the need for short-term accommodation in Alice Springs and we’ll continue to advocate that and we’ll continue to support approach where rangers take a compassionate approach to implementing and encouraging an outcome.

MELINDA JAMES: And, just finally John Rawnsley, one of the by-laws that has probably received the most opposition from the public and been called draconian and a restriction of free speech is the by-law that prevents people from putting up banners or posters, even on private property if that can be viewed from public space. Why the need for that?

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Yeah again, you know these by-laws have to be considered with the policies that go in to support them and the policies will give clarity in relation to what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. But obviously we’re mindful of the different kinds of criticisms and we’ll come together as a council to come up with a final outcome and a final product but there’s certainly not going to be implemented in a way that is against commonsense and what we all believe to be common values.

MELINDA JAMES: John Rawnsley, thank you very much for your time.

JOHN RAWNSLEY: Thank you Melinda.

Seedless watermelon’s were not available at Coles so we purchased watermelon with seeds.  The kids were amazed as they hadn’t seen it before.  ‘What’s that…wwoaaaaah’ (with beady eyes) was the response. 

More memorable moments over the fold.

Aaliyah received a new plastic phone as a gift.  Her Nanna also bought her nappies for her new baby doll, ‘Lulu’.  She was so excited.  She opened the packet and asked me ‘Daddy, can you put her nappy on?’.  ‘No’, I replied, ‘why can’t you’.  ‘Noooooo, I’m talking on the phone YOU do it Daddy’.

Nathanael said to me one day that he wouldn’t lose any teeth.  I told him he would (he’s 6 and some of his friends at school are losing teeth and he hasn’t yet).  I said ‘when you do you put it in a jar and the tooth fairy will come’.  He told me ‘I want $100′, and I said ‘$100 is a lot of money’.  He said ‘No, $10′000 is a lot of money, I want $100′. 

Aaliyah had to wash her hands and wanted me to put on the sink tap.  I started the shower and asked her to wash her hands in the shower with soap.  She said ‘but there’s no soap’ in a raised voice.  I replied ‘Yes there is, look!, and pointed at the basin.  She looked and answered her own question ‘Is Water Soap?  No’.

My first printed opinion piece was published in the NT News as a follow up to my commitment to quit alcohol for one year.  I was grateful for the opportunity.  The piece suggests three policy ideas concerning alcohol in Alice Springs.

Over the fold is a pdf version of my original submission and a scan of the News piece.

The following is my original submission:

As the first from the Generation Y (those born 1980-1995) to be elected to a municipal Council in the Territory I was honoured in March this year to be elected Deputy Mayor of Alice Springs. My generation lives within a specific set of circumstances and I am obliged to advocate reform with this in mind. In my new role my first decision was to quit alcohol for one year.

My main motivation is to set an example. If the National Health and Medical Research Council recommends no more than 4 standard drinks on any single occasion then excessive alcohol consumption in the Territory is commonplace. Too often we leave the task of finding solutions to policy makers without realising that it is also us who can build a social and cultural intolerance of alcohol misuse.

(continued over the fold)

My second motivation is to send the right message. Excessive consumption is detrimental to personal health. It takes time away from other obligations such as work, family and community life. Too much disposable income in the Territory is spent to fuel excessive consumption and this reduces the ability of families to exercise choice, build assets and participate in the broader economy. Whilst abstinence is not the sole solution I advocate at 28 I want to send a positive message to others in my generation.

My third motivation is to promote discussion open to more innovative and creative ideas. In the political arena the issue of excessive alcohol consumption is not a high priority partly because too many politicians and too many community leaders engage in this very activity.

In the contest of ideas the camps of public opinion appear divided along the lines of either furthering or eliminating alcohol supply restrictions, and little else. The nominal Left resist measures that apply only to certain groups of people. The nominal Right resist measures that apply to everyone and not just the problem drinkers. Racial undertones masked as either political correctness or subtle racism divides our population. Such thinking obstructs long overdue reform.

In my opinion the issue to confront is not just political courage but a deeper understanding as to the factors that motivate alcohol misuse.

For individuals alcohol is an out. Responsible drinking is a way to wind down. For too many Territorians alcohol is a sorry excuse to escape social, emotional or any other personal challenges of life. As Territorians the issue that we have is that this sorry excuse extends to too many people.

The late Swedish Professor Nils Bejerot was of the view that substance misuse (including alcohol) is a social contagion that spreads across a population if five conditions are present. That is, just as the common cold requires the conditions of cooler temperatures and close interaction between people the incidence of substance misuse and its reach within a population requires five social conditions. They are (and not in order): the behaviour of those in the immediate environment; a permissive social ideology; boredom; availability of the substance, and; availability of money to purchase the substance. In the Territory commentators refer to the ‘rivers of grog’ and these rivers flow in circumstances where the above conditions flourish.

For policy makers these conditions provide a tangible path forward. If all of our efforts, resources and political will were put towards this path then the social ills of alcohol misuse would be greatly reduced.

In my stance as Deputy Mayor the most useful condition to explore is the second: a social ideology that permits alcohol misuse. This condition is relevant because significant amounts of alcohol are consumed in public and restricted space within the Alice Springs municipal area (and many other urban centres in the Territory). Such misuse is linked to homelessness and life circumstances that would lead any person to alcohol misuse, but this does not mean we should accept it.

In my view Local Government in the Territory, including individual Councils and Shires, do not have access to the resources or tools necessary to bring about a desired solution. In my mind there must be a partnership across all levels of government.

Consider these three ideas.

First, in Alice Springs take-away customers are required to furnish valid photo ID with every alcohol purchase so as to deny those prohibited from purchasing alcohol as a result of a court decision. This net could be cast wider to include people who have infringed a By-Law (such as drinking in a public space). This would go some way towards sending the right message that By-Law infringement is not acceptable.

Second, around $1.5 million is spent annually by governments towards public and town camp Patrols in Alice Springs. We recognise that matters such as drinking in public and restricted space are not matters that must be dealt with solely by police resources. At present there is no link between these Patrols and an overturning of a social ideology permissive of alcohol misuse. Linking Patrols to By-Law enforcement, even in partnership with Police, would go some way towards focusing limited resources of government.

Third, there is widespread recognition that the 50% blanket welfare quarantining as part of the intervention has led to less money being spent on grog and more on positive products that benefit families. Putting in place a policy where authorised traditional owners could selectively quarantine the remaining 50% cash amount in certain circumstances and in a culturally supported model would go some way towards rebuilding social and cultural norms of authority. Many recognise that individual cash payments undermine communal obligations.

These three ideas require further detail yet what they represent is change and a move towards addressing the conditions that lead to widespread alcohol misuse.

Recently I was driving through a town camp in Alice Springs with two senior women from the western deserts of Central Australia. They shook their head in sorrow at the numbers of young people drinking. I was told with a sad tone how this did not happen with their generation. I asked, ‘what do you think needs to be done?’, and was told that these youth ‘should be picked up and taken back home’.

There was a lengthy pause and I was told that they needed to learn culture so that they could pass it on to the younger generation. There was a sense of hopelessness at how these conditions could be tolerated.

This encounter reminded me of the change between generations. It was a soft yet powerful voice hidden from the toil of media and the political exchange between individuals removed from the plight that affects so many Territorians.

original submission – opinion piece

NT News_Sat 6 June 2009

On another note, a number of contacts in the Territory have referred me to Chris Raine’s blog Hello Sunday Morning - an interesting read on the topic of binge drinking.

In social policy there are no absolutes.  Broad labels such as self-determination, mutual responsibility, etc. describe broad policies subject to an integrated and complex web of forces, powers and circumstances.  Certain labels might be ideal in theory but in practice fall short.  Some may describe in a broad sense a set of policies but in fact lack the substance for an accurate description.  An unfortunate aspect of the political market is that such circumstances lead to a postering for position rather than an articulation of policies and how they can be improved.  By its very nature politics is continually at risk of becoming an equation between different interpretations and positions rather than a collective articulation of ways forward.

An example of a convuluted term is ’self-determination’.  The opposite is seen as ‘mainstreaming’.  Both describe the tension between the way Aboriginal identity is integrated into the broader and more dominant parts of society and the way it is protected as a distinct and seperate position.  One train of thought, put to me recently by an Aboriginal person strong in traditional culture, is that Aboriginal people exercise self-determination through retaining their identity: language, relationships, etc, and nothing else.  I am told that ‘this is self-determination’, meaning not some formal policy construct.  Contrast this with the policy label of ’self-determination’ which was, in effect, the creation of thousands of corporate structures providing services exclusively accessed by Aboriginal people.  The two interpretations of ’self-determination’ are quite stark. 

I put that the original ideal of self-determination occurs where pluralism is valued and where pluralism finds balance.  Pluralism is the value of more than one.  A minority is able to live with a distinct identity concurrent to the influence of a more dominant arrangement if those distinct identities find full expression, both in the way it is protected and the way it connects.  If people are able to retain self-determination in the limited interpretation of ‘language, culture, relationships’, as opposed to the ’corporate structures’ paradigm then there must be the political, social and economic space to do so.  Where there is paucity in our policy analysis is how these intersect with the formal and informal aspect of society, and how formal policies and different markets (economic, political ,social) determine the intersection. 

The reason why pluralism is so important is because the value of identity is central. 

Because contemporary policy and its approach to indigenous affairs assumes two orders (Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal) it fails to accommodate the fragmentation and social capital that bonds indigenous groups.  It fails to account the importance of this and its changing nature, and how these relationships can be accommodated in formal policy.  Commentators often talk about the provision of individual welfare (non-work payments) as a crucial plank that undermined collective responsibility.  Pluralism is important because it allows flexibility in terms of space between identity and the formal constructs of policy.  If individual welfare undermined collective responsibility then pluralism is relevant where it might integrate control and authority over how welfare is distributed into the indigenous identity normative order.  For example, in the 1960s/70s formal policy on the basis of ‘equality’ allowed indigenous entitlement to all welfare policies that applied to everyone.  If welfare payments were at the discretion of indigenous governance arrangements then principles of reciprocity (the need to work and the need to work within a frame of collective responsibility) would have been enshrined.

Last night I was elected to Deputy Mayor of Alice Springs Town Council.  (Recently it’s been difficult to find the time to post).  Media release from Council attached.

astc-media-release_welcome_to_deputy_mayor_john_rawnsley

Someone once said that there was once a time where a person could acquire all the knowledge of the world.  That is because the world at that stage was limited, confined to a certain number of relationships, views, interactions, known precedence.  At this stage of globalisation and human development there is an abundance of information. 

This interview on the 7:30 report about screen culture offers intriguing insight into the way technology is changing our behaviour and interactions.  As someone from the Generation Y I feel I can identify with this subject.  During my teenage years I played video games and on occasions for lengthy periods of time.  Even today sometimes when I dream the sensations of playing games occurs.  In dreams, though, I can usually understand the fact that I am dreaming of a role that is not a reality in the dream itself, as if whilst I sleep I understand that it is just a dream but that a further unreal experience adapted from a game is super-imposed.  Such experiences in my lifetime and the experiences shared by so many others conjures reasons why films such as the first Matrix was so popular.

Returning to the subject, when I consider the changes between generations and the vast differences in how we interact, how we analyse and absorb information, how we exchange ideas, knowledge and experiences and how we identify and relate to role models I find how different each generation is.  In some ways technology has simply replaced the old mediums that existed.  The blogging community might work collectively the same way as previous generations did, at least in terms of mobilising and shaping political and intellectual thought.