to the relationship map. In the past this was a rigorous system ensur<strong>in</strong>g correct management and ownership ofland, family relationships and responsibilities, cultural ma<strong>in</strong>tenance and transmission.Once disenfranchisement from country impacted upon people, Anparn<strong>in</strong>tja was dim<strong>in</strong>ished. It has alwayscont<strong>in</strong>ued to exist, but as has often been the case where there is no cultural equivalent, the concept rema<strong>in</strong>edhidden. Anparn<strong>in</strong>tja is still the underly<strong>in</strong>g fabric by which Arrarnta can navigate the land, relationships,responsibilities and k<strong>in</strong>ships.Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta members represent the community at the <strong>in</strong>terface with Federal and Territory Governments, theShire and other agencies. Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta ideally consists of members of all the family groups at Ntaria, which is alsorepresentative of the structure of Anparn<strong>in</strong>tja, although this is not overtly stated. Although Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta acts likea board of management <strong>in</strong> provid<strong>in</strong>g advice to the government agencies represented at the community, they arenot constituted and membership is voluntary and fluid. Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta ‘is the ma<strong>in</strong> way Ntaria consults andnegotiates with government on the Local Implementation Plan’ (Commonwealth of Australia 2010 p. 8). In theArrarnta sense, while Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta is an <strong>in</strong>troduced entity it is underp<strong>in</strong>ned by the fabric of Arandic culture. Mostgovernment and agency staff <strong>in</strong>teract<strong>in</strong>g with Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta do not know very much about how the k<strong>in</strong>shipsystems <strong>in</strong>fluence work, lifestyle, liv<strong>in</strong>g arrangements and areas with<strong>in</strong> the community boundaries.There are overlaps between Anparn<strong>in</strong>tja and the capacity of the community to engage <strong>in</strong> governance andleadership. It is the <strong>in</strong>tention of the Federal Government to promote stronger local governance but there is littleawareness from those new to the Arrarnta cultures that the two systems impact one another. To Arrarnta andsome people familiar with this system, it is clear that the <strong>in</strong>troduced structures of governance and leadership donot represent the same authority or mean<strong>in</strong>g that Anparn<strong>in</strong>tja represents. Some PAR about the contemporary<strong>in</strong>fluences of these two systems was identified as a useful extension of local community research, with benefits toall LIP priority areas.4.5.2 Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta, Governance and LeadershipWhile there are no formal mechanisms def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the impact of the Local Reference Group (LRG) on Government oragency decision mak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> RSD, Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta represents the only s<strong>in</strong>gle access po<strong>in</strong>t for agencies to a communityadvisory group. In his November 2011 review (OCGRIS 2011b) for the Federal Government, Mr Brian Gleeson, theCoord<strong>in</strong>ator General, announced that strengthen<strong>in</strong>g community governance is a priority. In a presentation to theInstitute of Public Adm<strong>in</strong>istration Australia (WA) <strong>in</strong> November 2011 (OCGRIS 2011c), he said that the coord<strong>in</strong>atedRSD reflects progress such as: ‘greater recognition that new ways of work<strong>in</strong>g are required, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g enhancedengagement and ownership by communities <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g the agenda of change and hence recognition of the needto support community capacity development’.Currently, LRGs such as Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta depend on ROC and FaHCSIA staff to provide the adm<strong>in</strong>istration, plann<strong>in</strong>gand coord<strong>in</strong>ation of the meet<strong>in</strong>gs and of bus<strong>in</strong>ess aris<strong>in</strong>g from them. While community <strong>in</strong>put is sought andrecorded at the Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta meet<strong>in</strong>gs, government is not obliged to accept that direction or advice from WurlaNy<strong>in</strong>ta.In the event that their direction or advice is not taken, the only recourse an LRG has is to write letters to the Boardof Management represent<strong>in</strong>g the ROC, Shire and Governments. Fail<strong>in</strong>g satisfaction from the Board, they canescalate the issue through request<strong>in</strong>g meet<strong>in</strong>gs with government officers and adm<strong>in</strong>istrators. The Board ofManagement that oversees the coord<strong>in</strong>ation of RSD LIP actions has no LRG representatives on it.4.5.3 Compet<strong>in</strong>g prioritiesThe table below shows the key events dur<strong>in</strong>g the period of the research. Significant events <strong>in</strong> the community<strong>in</strong>clude school holidays, the summer break, cultural bus<strong>in</strong>ess and significant government policy decisions affect<strong>in</strong>ggovernance and change to fundamental services such as Centrel<strong>in</strong>k, CDEP, MacDonnell Shire and the NorthernTerritory Emergency Response.56 <strong>F<strong>in</strong>al</strong> <strong>Report</strong>: <strong>Strengthen<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Community</strong> <strong>Research</strong> <strong>in</strong> Remote Service Delivery at Ntaria
From November 2011 to March 2012 a significant number of changes and consultations for changes that affectedthe community were scheduled to occur, yet this is the time of year when cultural bus<strong>in</strong>ess, summer holidays andthe Christmas break are significant <strong>in</strong>fluencers on local activity. Traditionally, many of the service delivery staffwork<strong>in</strong>g at Ntaria from elsewhere leave the community for extended breaks, and locally, travel and activity isrestricted by cultural bus<strong>in</strong>ess.This table <strong>in</strong>dicates some of the significant events across the calendar s<strong>in</strong>ce 2007 and <strong>in</strong>cludes some of theplann<strong>in</strong>g for 2012 that affected Ntaria and other remote Aborig<strong>in</strong>al communities <strong>in</strong> the Northern Territory. Thetable shows the levels of consultation, decision mak<strong>in</strong>g and participation that is requested of Wurla Ny<strong>in</strong>ta and thewider community dur<strong>in</strong>g the 2011–2012 summer period and highlights the overlap of cultural bus<strong>in</strong>essresponsibilities, high mobility for community residents and restricted availability for government bus<strong>in</strong>essdemands.<strong>F<strong>in</strong>al</strong> <strong>Report</strong>: <strong>Strengthen<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Community</strong> <strong>Research</strong> <strong>in</strong> Remote Service Delivery at Ntaria 57
Change language