Multicultural Framework Review
As Australians we can be immensely proud of our long history of cultural diversity. For over 60,000 years, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have been practicing their cultures on this land with at least two hundred and fifty distinct language groups prior to colonisation. Contemporary multicultural Australia builds on this rich cultural heritage with newcomers bringing new skills, experiences, perspectives and knowledge that has enriched our social, political, economic and cultural life.
Multiculturalism as we know it now, was first pursued as a social policy in 1973 following the dismantling of the White Australia Policy and the growth of multicultural associations that formed to represent the interests of migrant communities. Last year the newly elected Albanese government announced its plans to undertake a review of the institutional and policy frameworks that support multiculturalism. Fifty years on from the Whitlam Government's declaration of a 'multicultural future', it is very timely to review how far we've come and to sit together to determine what we want our future story to be.
As this is a policy area that I think deeply about, I've taken some time to pull together some thoughts on the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the review. The scope of the review will will focus on the design and delivery of government services and programs, systemic barriers that prevent participation, and the way in which the Australian government works with community and other stakeholders to ensure we continue to build on our multicultural successes.
Reflections from a community development perspective
My reflections draw on my experience as a community development practitioner, working for the last twenty years to advance the principles of multiculturalism at a grassroots level. Over this time I have had the privilege of being part of many conversations as communities seek to negotiate tensions, build bridges, develop solutions to complex problems and exercise their basic rights to social, economic, political and cultural participation. In 2015 I was awarded a Churchill Fellowship which provided the opportunity to undertake research in Canada, the US and Europe on the role local governments play in facilitating the inclusion of newcomers. This submission is also informed by insights generated through this research.
Opportunities for strengthening the review
The intent to undertake this review is a step in the right direction and the government should be commended for its commitment to the process. It presents an opportunity for a collective re-shaping of our national narrative on multiculturalism and recognises the centrality of migration and cultural diversity to our sense of what it means to be Australian now and into the future.
There are some opportunities to strengthen the current Terms of Reference and I submit the following recommendations for consideration.
1.Undertake engagement with First Nations stakeholders and consider the intersections between multiculturalism and reconciliation agendas
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have, for the most part, been left out of conversations on multiculturalism. With government institutions and services taking on the role of welcoming newcomers, the traditional cultural practices of welcome have been replaced with the bureaucracy of immigration processes and a focus on the settlement needs of the individual.
Many newcomers consequently settle and build their lives in Australia with very little understanding of or relationships with Australia's first culture and its people. At a community level this can play out in localised tensions. Building relationships between First Nations communities and newcomers requires active work with local governments often leading the way in bringing communities together to build bridges and understanding.
Separating out conversations on multiculturalism and reconciliation risks each being seen in their own prism. With the intersections between multiculturalism and reconciliation fundamental to each others’ success it makes sense to look at the alignment between these two agendas and how they can better support each other.
It is not clear in the TOR whether the consultation process will include engagement with First Nations stakeholders. I believe engaging First Nations communities in a conversation on how we welcome newcomers and weave new cultures into the fabric of our society would be of significant value to the process and would demonstrate a respect for their role as traditional custodians of this land.
2. Consider terminology to ensure it supports the principles of multiculturalism
It is not clear whether the review will spend time looking at the language that frames the discourse of multiculturalism in Australia. There is an opportunity for the review to play an active role in influencing this through reviewing the terminology embedded in government policy to ensure is in line with strengthening the values of equity, inclusion and diversity. The consultation process could seek community views on the language they believe represents them best.
The language used by government to describe individuals and communities has a powerful ripple effect. Government embeds terminology in policy, services and funding programs, this language then becomes the language of the service system and the frame of reference that communities need to use to describe themselves in order to get their needs met. Words can be powerful drivers for inclusion and exclusion, for empowerment and disempowerment. As well as positioning people on the margins, language can dehumanize people, position them as 'other' and strip them of their agency. Language can be particularly problematic in the discourse of multiculturalism as we seek to find terms that categorise people to enable targeting of services and determinations of who does and doesn't have access.
In my community work the term culturally and linguistically diverse, commonly shortened to CaLD, has been the subject of much discussion. It is a term used across all tiers of government and often juxta-posed with the white English speaking 'mainstream', positioning people from non-English speaking background countries on the fringe of society. It reduces the rich diversity of individual and community experiences to a clunky acronym that is used to describe them through the prism of their 'otherness' rather than their 'Australian-ness'. In contemporary Australia where most people have a parent born overseas surely 'culturally and linguistically diverse' is a better descriptor for society as a whole?
The TOR refers to consideration of international best practice. I submit that consideration is given to the global language used in this policy space and whether there are terms that we could adopt into our vernacular that present better alternatives to current ones. For example 'newcomer' is a term used widely across Canada by government and services to describe people in their first few years of settlement. I find this to be a useful alternative to the common practice of describing people by their migration status or mode of arrival. 'Newcomer' implies both membership of a community as well as the potential need for extra support - it is inclusive but also useful in targeting services. I have also recently adopted the term 'equity seeking communities' , another North American term that provides an empowering alternative to the deficit terminology of 'marginalized, disadvantaged or vulnerable communities' .
3. Take a broader lens in considering the effectiveness of government services
Service systems exist to help people get their needs met. We have systems that are designed to meet our needs for education, health care, child-care, meaningful employment, income support and the list could go on and on, A government that 'works for Multicultural Australia' requires service systems that meet the needs of all Australians. The TOR for the review states that the process will consider the effectiveness of the "services designed to support multicultural Australia". Whilst one would expect that the review consider the effectiveness of targeted multicultural services it would be a missed opportunity if the review starts and stops there.
There is a tendency in public policy for 'multiculturalism' to be viewed as a specialist area that lives within special departments or programs as opposed to a set of principles that should be embedded across all public service functions. In 2023 multicultural is 'mainstream' Australia and the principles of multiculturalism should be embedded across the way we do business, deliver services and develop communities.
There is an opportunity in the review to take a broader lens that considers the effectiveness and cultural responsiveness more broadly. Doing so will avoid the sense of separateness that arises when we remove choices from people to access mainstream services by failing to make them culturally responsive.
4. Ensure a focus on place and mechanisms that support local coordination
The lived reality of multiculturalism in Australia is local. Our sense of belonging is shaped by our experiences at a local level. It is informed by our interactions with the people in our neighbourhoods, our experiences with the local services and whether we feel welcome or not welcome in public spaces.
It stands to reason therefore that multiculturalism will be strengthened if we apply a place focus and consider the influence of local factors in shaping the challenges and opportunities associated with migration and cultural diversity.
As a community development practitioner I am a strong believer in the potential within communities to solve complex problems and drive positive social change. Government and services can leverage this potential through enabling, facilitating and resourcing localised community led solutions. Doing this effectively requires working together, in a place based context. It requires a coordinated and integrated approach across all tiers of government.
Most jurisdictions lack any localised coordinated approach to settlement planning or broader strategies that support multiculturalism. This leads to very disjointed approaches on the ground, duplication of services, wasted resources and missed opportunities for collaboration. Policy settings that focus on multicultural communities in isolation of the neighbourhoods they live in and the broader societal structure miss the opportunity to engage the broader community in driving dialogue and actions that enhance belonging, build connection and contribute to social cohesion.
The TOR indicates that the review will consider how services designed to support multicultural Australia "interact with state and local government settings". I submit that a place focus should be applied as a lens for the review process. The review should consider how the Australian government can work hand-in-hand with local governments, many of whom find themselves on the front-line of settlement and social cohesion work, often without the resources to support them. The consultation process should also reflect the diverse geography of multiculturalism ensuring that it picks up on the nuances of place.
5. Frame multiculturalism as a whole of community project
Multiculturalism is about all of us. We cannot truly leverage the benefits of our cultural diversity if we don't bring everyone on the journey. From the original custodians of this land, to newcomers and everyone in between, multiculturalism needs to consider how we all live well together and how our institutions respond to the changing needs and aspirations of our multicultural society.
The TOR for the review refers to ensuring a government that works for 'multicultural Australia'. It is not clear what this means. We have a history of a siloed approach to multicultural policy where the focus has been on how migrant communities can better integrate with 'broader society.' This approach leaves little room for dialogue at a whole of community level and places the locus of responsibly on migrant communities.
My view is that 'multiculturalism' should be framed as a whole of community project recognising that we all have a role to play in its success. I submit that the review take a whole of community focus to the community consultation process ensuring that it engages widely. Local governments could be an important conduit for this. As the closest tier of government to community they are connected with a broad range of stakeholders from sporting clubs, to arts groups, cultural associations, schools and local business communities.
The above represents my personal views. You can have your say too! The opportunity to provide feedback is open until Sunday the 19th March. More information can be found here.
