Advance Australia Fair: Social democratic and conservative politicians’ discourses concerning Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and their health 1972–2001
Introduction
That language has meaning beyond mere words is a key principle in diverse areas of scholarship, including sociology, social psychology, linguistics, politics, philosophy, education, journalism and history. A vast literature debates the nature of such meaning, and describes methods to examine and distil the significance of words used to construct and communicate ideas, ideologies and identity. Foucault (1970) and Althusser (1984) have been especially influential in expounding the idea that language and collective language—discourse—constructs identity, social environments and “subjectivity”, that is, the way an individual perceives themselves in their social environment.
Language is the key mechanism through which ideas and problems are characterised publicly. Elites such as politicians play a major role in the discursive reproduction of value systems and beliefs, such as about Indigenous or immigrant peoples (Carbo, 1997; Curthoys & Johnson, 1998; Reeves, 1983; van Dijk, 1997). In addition, social institutions and structures such as media, and education and health systems enact discursively concepts of “problem” and “solution”, including those concerning “Others” (Anderson, 1997; Langton, 1993; Ninnes, 2000; Said, 1995; Tuhiwai Smith, 1999). It is widely held that the way a problem is defined determines the way in which a solution is framed (Levin, 2005; Rochefort & Cobb, 1994).
Recognition that the language used in health has meaning and significance beyond its literal content has been examined, most famously by Foucault (1975). Iannantuono and Eyles (1997) analysed the text of a Canadian health policy statement and found that the policy was “a soup of assumptions that recreate[d] our picture of the world”. Concerning the discursive depiction of Indigenous peoples and their health, Tatz showed in 1972 that the text of reports of government departments characterised the health “problem” of Australia's Aboriginal Peoples and communicated the idea that blame resided with the Aboriginal people themselves. O’Neil, Reading, and Leader (1998) described how epidemiological research was used by the media to represent Aboriginal communities as sick and disorganised, and used to argue in a child custody case that a community was unfit to have the child live there. Thomas (2004) analysed doctors’ representations of Australia's Aboriginal Peoples published in medical journals between 1870 and1969 and found that while there was little evidence of maltreatment of research subjects by researchers, Aboriginal Peoples had been portrayed to their detriment as inevitably dying out, inferior, passive, powerless, and as victims.
The extent of health and social disadvantage experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples has been extensively documented (Anderson et al., 2006; Holmes, Stewart, Garrow, Anderson, & Thorpe, 2002; Trewin & Madden, 2005). Despite decades of policy, promise and programs since the first Australian Department of Aboriginal Affairs was established in December 1972, there appears to have been little or no improvement in key health, welfare and educational outcomes (Altman & Hunter, 2003; Collins & Lea, 1999; Freemantle et al., 2006; SCRGSP, 2005; Trewin & Madden, 2005). Explanations for the failure of improvement in health have identified gaps in health services (Anderson, 2002; Kunitz, 2001), past policies and administrative failure (Bartlett & Legge, 1994; Paradies & Cunningham, 2002), the impact of colonisation on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples (Anderson et al., 2006; Franklin & White, 1991) as well as still other putative factors such as a limited degree of social connectedness, and perceptions of control and mastery in the workplace and wider society (AIHW, 2003). Converse views have been offered also: a former senior politician asserted some 25 years after leaving the job that the continuing poor health status resulted from the abandonment of assimilationist policies central to government policy until the 1960s, and the subsequent introduction of policies of “Aboriginal separatism” (Howson, 1996).
While most explanations point to a failure of policy, there have been few examinations of policy, the policy process or of political decision-making for policy concerning the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. Given the potency of language to construct a policy “problem” and its associated solutions (Schneider & Ingram, 1993), we set out to characterise representations of, and beliefs about, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and their health communicated publicly by the most senior policy decision-makers in the country: the responsible politicians.
Using methods derived from the critical discourse analysis frameworks of van Dijk (1993), van Dijk (1994) and Fairclough (1995), the words, phrases, structures and content of public statements by Federal politicians responsible for the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples 1972–2001 were analysed to characterise the frames and discourses communicated by those politicians. Australians are governed by a Federal Government and six State and two Territory governments. Federal Ministers responsible for portfolio areas can be drawn from either of two Chambers of the Federal Parliament.
The wider project of which the research reported in this paper was a part examined the hypothesis that the statements of politicians communicated a view of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples which influenced the public policy environment and the scope of policy thinking—the “policy imagination”—and therefore health policy options of the time, which in turn prescribed the potential benefits or limitations of the policy itself.
Section snippets
Identifying the extracts for analysis
The period under study, 2 December 1972–9 November 2001, marks the start and end of a discrete period in the Federal administration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, during which an administrative structure dedicated to managing and being the principal source of advice to government about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs was separate from other government departments. The Australian Department of Aboriginal Affairs was established in December 1972; the Aboriginal
Results
Of the 30 senior politicians (Prime Ministers and responsible Ministers who held office during the study period) extracts for 25 politicians were analysed, including for five PMs across the four administrations that governed during the study period. Two Labor administrations (social democrat; December 1972–November 1975 led by PM Whitlam and March 1983–March 1996 led by PMs Hawke and Keating) alternated with two Liberal Party/National Party Coalition administrations (conservative; December
Discussion
The language used in the public statements of Australian Federal politicians responsible for the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples 1972–2001 was characterised by four dominant discourses. These discourses concerned the capacity and competence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander individuals and communities to act to improve community and individual health status; who controlled and who was responsible for health improvement; the causes of and solutions to the “problem”
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the contribution of the Principal Advisor to this research, Kerry Arabena, the men and women consulted during the development of the research, and the anonymous reviewers. This work was undertaken while Rosemary Aldrich was a National Health and Medical Research Scholar in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health at The University of New South Wales, Sydney Australia.
References (60)
- et al.
Indigenous health in Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific
The Lancet
(2006) - et al.
Patterns, trends, and increasing disparities in mortality for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal infants born in Western Australia, 1980–2001: Population database study
The Lancet
(2006) - et al.
Our health and theirs: Forced migration, othering and public health
Social Science & Medicine
(2006) - et al.
Researching Aboriginal health: Experience from a study of urban young people's health and well-being
Social Science & Medicine
(2002) - et al.
Meanings in policy: A textual analysis of Canada's “achieving health for all” document
Social Science & Medicine
(1997) - et al.
Placing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mortality in an international context
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
(2002) - AIHW. (2003). The health and welfare of Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Canberra: Australian...
Essays on ideology
(1984)- Altman, J., & Hunter, B. (2003). Monitoring ‘practical’ reconciliation: Evidence from the reconciliation decade...
I, the ‘hybrid’ Aborigine: Film and representation
Australian Aboriginal Studies
(1997)
The truth about Indigenous health policy
Arena Magazine
Beyond the maze: Proposals for more effective administration of Aboriginal health programs
Citizens plus: Aboriginal peoples and the Canadian State
Who are they? The rhetoric of institutional policies toward the Indigenous populations of postrevolutionary Mexico
Trachoma report, Press statement, in “Aboriginal Health” MICAH collection, Parliamentary Library
Learning lessons: An independent review of Indigenous eduation in the Northern Territory
Articulating the future and the past: Gender, race and globalisation in one nation discourse
Hecate
Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language
Reframing public policy
The history and politics of Aboriginal health
The order of discourse
The birth of the clinic: An archaeology of medical perception (Translated from French first published 1963)
Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience
Minister advances efforts to improve Aboriginal and Islander health, Media release, in “Aboriginal Health” MICAH collection, Parliamentary Library
“The future of Indigenous health care—the union of body and soul” Bancroft Oration, Queensland Branch, Australian Medical Association, “Aboriginal Health” MICAH collection, Parliamentary Library
“A better future for Indigenous Australians” Budget Statement, “Aboriginal Health” MICAH collection, Parliamentary Library
Lunch address on the Tiwi Islands; transcript of the Prime Minister the Hon John Howard MP, Speech, MICAH collection, Parliamentary Library
Foreword
Cited by (22)
Holding no-one back: The Nutrition Equity Framework in theory and practice
2022, Global Food SecurityCitation Excerpt :For example, a ‘deficit discourse’ can result in framing target groups as deficient, lacking or as failures, thereby perpetuating further discrimination and marginalization. Such discourse, for example, harmfully framed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia as irresponsible and incompetent at managing their health, with an underlying frame of ‘otherness’ (Aldrich et al., 2007). Similarly, while we draw on the work that has taken place under the Sustainable Development Goals' slogan of ‘leave no-one behind’, our analysis questions the understandings that ‘being left behind’ are somehow the result of benign neglect on the part of national governments and international policy.
Methodological tensions for non-Indigenous people in Indigenous research: A critique of critical discourse analysis in the Australian context
2022, Social Sciences and Humanities OpenExamining the construction and representation of drugs as a policy problem in Australia's national drug strategy documents 1985-2010
2014, International Journal of Drug PolicyCitation Excerpt :A critical approach to discourse analysis takes the position that policy documents, for example, are not simply objective government publications (Young & McGrath, 2011) but rather texts which contain contested meanings and values, privileging certain positions, whilst silencing others. The critical discourse analysis approach has been used previously to examine policy documents and political discourse (e.g. Aldrich et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2009; Taylor, 2007; Young & McGrath, 2011), whilst aspects of Bacchi's approach have recently been applied to drug policy in an examination of amphetamine-type stimulant policy in Australia (Fraser & Moore, 2011). Our approach was informed by critical discourse analysis theory and the first two of Bacchi's (2009) six questions for policy analysis: (i) what's the problem represented to be in a specific policy and (ii) what presuppositions or assumptions underlie this representation of the problem?
Invisible injuries: Patient harms we hear about when we take the time to ask
2018, Medical Journal of AustraliaEngaging Remote Aboriginal Communities in COVID-19 Public Health Messaging via Crowdsourcing
2022, Frontiers in Public Health