Ken Wyatt

Transcription

>> Good evening, and welcome. My name is Simon Forrest. I'm a Whadjuk Nyungar man, and I'm the Director of the Centre for Aboriginal Studies here at Curtin University. And I'll be your emcee for this evening. I welcome you to the 2011 Rob Riley Memorial Lecture. This year's lecture, Breaking Through the Brown Glass Window will be delivered by Mr. Ken Wyatt, Federal Member for Hasluck. Before proceedings get underway, a few housekeeping matters. I ask everyone to check their mobile phones are turned off, and that includes me, I'll switch this off. [Pause] Please be aware of the emergency exits, where they're located around the room. Okay, I guess there's release doors and that sort of thing. And the toilets and bathrooms are located in the foyer on that side of the building. Mr. George Wally will lead this evening's Welcome to Country. Mr. Wally is the, is a community leader in Mandurah, and manager of the Nijaba Wangamaya Hill Centre in Mandurah. He is a West Australian Music Industry Award songwriter and musician, an educator of many years, and Eberson Heritage Consultant and Historian. I now invite Mr. Wally to welcome you to country [applause]. >> George Wally: Thank you Simon. I'm a [foreign word spoken] man and I'm very thankful and respectful to Rob Riley's family and I usually read from notes, well not read from notes, at different times, it depends on where I am and what I mean to do. I thought tonight I'd do a few notes, because of the occasion. And in welcoming you to the Rob Riley Memorial Lecture, I would like to express my absolute respect and gratitude that I was asked to do this tonight. In welcoming you here this evening, I would like to acknowledge the [foreign word spoken] people. Their family lineage to present and past leaders who shine in the face of adversity, and who led with great distinction the many generations before the British invasion here. And for generations since. I acknowledge those leaders who gave freely of the many years to serve our community and to stand up to the many injustices that confronted our people on a day to day basis. People like [foreign names spoken], to name a few, of those we learn about, and [foreign word spoken] and [foreign name spoken], who also had cultural obligations from the [foreign word spoken] to the [foreign word spoken] and our peoples. I would like to acknowledge these amazing ancestors, just as I want to acknowledge the leadership of this generation, and for those to follow. In my research documentation I've seen through public information where generations of oppression have produced many health issues and lack of opportunities today. In researching a person named George Winjan and his life, he lived from 1824 it's estimated to where he died in 1915, and if you think about a person's life over that time of 1824 and then we had the change, the great change from being a Numa society only to in a British society coming here, and a different culture. You can track a person's life. You can look at the different policies that were in place. You can look at the society pressures that were upon our people. And we, these days, are a product of a lot of health issues that come from that. I've lectured on this life, and even though it was quite an amazing way of putting a person's life up on a screen, it is also a way of looking at the lives of many of our ancestors and the things that we went through. I would hope that Rob would be proud of the efforts to find out and document the life of George Winjan, and in doing so, to document the past injustices directed towards Numa people. I want to acknowledge the life of Rob Riley, and his dedicated and well-documented efforts in fighting for our rights. I knew him as a person who always had a kind word to say. And as a person who would encourage people to stand up for our rights. And for the rights of our people. He was a good man, and his memory will always be associated with our standing efforts to serve his people, just like his ancestors did for our future generations. I look forward to listening to Ken, and his lecture, and how Rob Riley brought us all together on this place, at this place tonight. Thank you. [Applause] >> Thank you Simon, and thank you Mr. Wally for your Welcome to Country. I'm delighted to be here today representing the Vice Chancellor. To welcome you to Curtin, the 2011 Rob Riley Memorial Lecture, to be presented by Mr. Ken Wyatt. In welcoming you to campus today, I'd like to pay my respects to the indigenous members of our community, by acknowledging the [foreign word spoken] owners of this land. You are all special guests here today, but in particular, I'd like to welcome the Mayor of South Perth, James Best, who's been a steadfast supporter of Curtin. Welcome James. The annual Rob Riley Lecture is an important part of our annual calendar of events. As one of the many ways the university demonstrates its commitment to promoting an understanding of an indigenous culture and history. Curtin University is committed to providing educational opportunities to indigenous students, through both the Centre for Aboriginal Studies, and mainstream programs, committed to developing strategies to effect the increased participation of indigenous students and staff, and continuing our commitment to fostering partners, partnerships in indigenous research and development. The Centre was established 28 years ago and is recognised as a national leader in its field. It provides students with the skills and abilities they need to work in the community, and it actively promotes a positive sense of aboriginal identity, culture and heritage. Its courses cover indigenous health, community management and development, indigenous Australian studies, and indigenous education. And all are designed to provide culturally appropriate education and to create new ways of learning and working in an inclusive Australia. Curtin was the first university in Australia to have a statement of reconciliation and adopt a reconciliation action plan. Last year, Curtin was also the first university to sign the Australian Employment Covenant, pledging 13 indigenous job-seekers employment at Curtin over the next three years. Events such as the Rob Riley Memorial Lecture is just one way that Curtin promotes the importance of recognising indigenous culture, and it's importance to our community. Thank you all for attending this evening, and I wish you all will greatly enjoy this year's memorial lecture by Ken Wyatt. Thank you. [Applause] >> Thank you Professor Quinn. Certainly now this lecture tonight is in honour of Rob Riley. He was an indigenous statesman and leader of these people, whose untimely death was mourned throughout Australia. Inspired by his conviction that Australia had to confront its history of disposition of aboriginal people from their lands and all that has flowed from it. He worked tirelessly to advance social justice and reconciliation with non-indigenous Australians. Rob was Chairperson of the National Aboriginal Conference. Chief Executive Officer of the Aboriginal Legal Service, and was awarded the Human Rights Commission's Human Rights Medal, [inaudible] in 1996. The inaugural Rob Riley Memorial Lecture was held in 2004, and included the unveiling of a portrait of Rob, painted by indigenous artist, Julie Daly. Lectures have been held each year since 2004, featuring prominent indigenous speakers. As we said tonight's presenter of the Rob Riley Memorial Lecture is Mr. Ken Wyatt. Mr. Wyatt is the Federal Member for Hasluck nd the first indigenous Australian to be elected to the House of Representatives. He is the oldest child of Don and Mona Abdullah, who raised ten children. He grew up in Corrigin before moving to Perth to study and work. Mr. Wyatt graduated from Mount Lawley Teacher's College, and then worked as a primary school teacher before moving into leadership roles in education. In 1996, he was made member of the Order of Australia for Services to Aboriginal Health, and he also received the Centenary Medal in 2001. Achieving a House of Representatives seat was an achievement out of reach for many indigenous Australians. And for Mr. Wyatt, is a chance to help shift the sands of time and open up new opportunities for indigenous Australians. Mr. Wyatt is also related to Ben Wyatt, in L.A., member for Victoria Park and the State Shadow Minister for Education. Ben Wyatt is a long-time friend of Curtin, but unfortunately is not able to be with us here today and sends his apologies. I now invite Ken Wyatt to deliver the 2011 Rob Riley Memorial Lecture, Breaking Through the Brown Glass Ceiling [applause]. >> Ken Wyatt: Can I commence by acknowledging Janey and Rob's family? Rob Riley was an inspiration to many of us, and in particular, I enjoyed the fellowship that I had with him, and some of the debates we had on a range of issues, but particularly education. I also want to commence by acknowledging the Whadjuk people of the Nyungar Nation, on whose land we meet. I acknowledge our elders, who in the past were the keepers of the [foreign word spoken] and the land around it, and our elders present tonight, whose wisdom and guidance keeps us alive in our culture and keeps it vibrant. It is, indeed, a tremendous privilege to present the 2011 annual Rob Riley Memorial Lecture tonight. Rob Riley epitomises to me someone who broke through many of the layers of the brown glass ceiling, by both is doggedness and his determination to achieve outcomes beyond that, that we often accepted. I believe that when Rob couched these words, "You can't be wrong if you fight, and if you don't stop fighting for justice, simply because those around you don't like it," he was expressing the critical aspect of thought that I want to share with you tonight. [Foreign name spoken], with [foreign words spoken] heritage was born in Bunbury, West Australia, where the mother was in Roelands Mission. As a young boy, I spent time in [foreign words spoken], and from 1959, in a rural community in West Australia. I have a strong passion for what I do, and a strong commitment to walking and working with others to achieve better outcomes and opportunities for indigenous Australians. In fact, for all Australians and Australian society. As a teenager, I loved the following song lyrics from the song, "Because I love you," by the Master's Apprentices. The song was released in 1970. In a sense, it became a personal anthem and a driver for my approach in the journey for being elected as a member at the House of Representatives, representing the state of Hasluck. And the words that always played in my mind, and still does when I hear this song, is "Do what you want to do. Be what you want to be." Because I think, in a sense, that encapsulates, for me, the potential and the possibility to do things that you dream of and that you aspire to. Our destiny is shaped by the choices we make, and the decisions that each of us in acting our career and social pathways. What is critical to bringing about success is our individual preparedness to challenge and overcome barriers, and deal with the setbacks to our dreams and aspirations. Importantly, the development of an ethos of working hard, commitment to your goals, persistence, and following through, brings success. I developed a strong belief in myself, my abilities, and my capacity to work toward my personal goals, whilst being inclusive about this. It doesn't matter if the interactions are positive or negative, they serve as a point of learning. Every interaction with another individual provides an avenue to acquire knowledge, information and experiences that enhance my repertoire of skills. These skills enable me to rise to the positions, influence, and demonstrate capabilities for the roles I've gained. I believe that all Australians need to be proud of their cultural heritage, because our culture is not a barrier to our destiny. Instead, the barrier is the tool kit of life that we have at our disposal to achieve our aspirations and overcome barriers. Three significant barriers that any individual has to contend with include the mindset, attitudes and prejudices of others, who can determine whether or not we succeed and whether the pathway that we choose will be either impeded, but I also believe, that given the right help to achieve our personal and professional aspirations is also equally important. Imagine two individuals who are mechanics in their own right, who find out that they have a problem with their current model car, or yours, given that you've taken it to their garage. One has a 500 piece tool kit that has every item and computer technology to analyse and problem solve, and thereby enabling them to identify the solution in repairing the vehicle. Their dressed in a uniform. They look appealing. Compare this to another mechanic who has a tool kit of 50 pieces, which limits their capacity to fully analyse the problem. But they have, because of their commensurate skills, have a sense of the problem. They know a possible solution, but don't have the right range of tools and equipment to repair the vehicle. They're wearing old blue overalls covered with oil stains. You observe the tool kits that both have, and based on what is seen on the surface, which is often the influencing factor that we use to formulate judgments and assumptions, and we base it on what we observe. We make a choice, which is based on the observation, and our perception frames the way that we consider both mechanics. And I believe that to be true of any individual that we interview or come in contact with. In the course of their aspirations, we make judgments. Yet, both mechanics completed their apprenticeships with distinction. They have the same knowledge, skills and competencies, and yet, without giving full consideration to their individual capability, we make a personal judgment. Equally, within the work place, we give advantage to individuals based on personal mind-sets, our disposition, and we champion their growth and progression. The mechanic who we form a negative view about based on observation and assumption is left at the level of employment, and their progression within the company is slowed. We do not champion their professional growth because we have fallen to negative mind-set about them. A simplistic analogy. But one that is often played out when we make assumptions about individuals based on gender, culture, and academic achievement. Our mind set, assumptions and prejudices is the most contributing factors to the concept of the glass ceiling syndrome. The phrase glass ceiling refers to an invisible barrier that prevents someone from achieving further success. It is most often heard in the context of women who cannot advance to the highest levels of power in the workplace. The glass ceiling is a way of describing whatever keeps women from achieving power and success equal to that of men. Equally, it is a glass ceiling which prevents culturally and linguistically diverse persons and minority groups from advancing to leadership positions, due to attitudinal or organisational bias within the work force. It is an invisible, but real barrier, through which the next stage or level of development can be seen, but cannot be reached by a section of qualified, capable and deserving employees. Such barriers exist due to implicit prejudices on the basis of age, ethnicity, political or religious affiliation and/or gender. And let me say that in recent times, our impressions of our ageing population has created the concept of ageism, whereby we think that an individual who is 50, 55 plus, has reached the end of their effective working life, and yet we are prepared to cast aside incredible corporate knowledge, a lifetime of experiences and skills, because we have a perception to do with age. Whilst the expression was developed to apply to the workplace in respect to gender, I would suggest that the glass ceiling is not confined to the work place, but equally applied in many other circumstances and locations where individuals hit invisible barriers that impede their progress. It dims their aspirational goals, but they persist. So where did the term glass ceiling come from? And I think it's important just to go back in the history of the glass ceiling because it has become a paradigm for which we often address issues of barriers but sometimes don't find the solutions. The term glass ceiling was used by two women at Hewlett-Packard in 1979. Katherine Lawrence and Mary Ann Schreiber, to describe that how while in the surface there seemed to be a clear path to promotion, in actuality, women seemed to have hit a point where they've seemed to be unable to progress beyond the point at which they'd reached. In 1984, the glass ceiling was used by Gay Bryant in her book, "The Working Woman Report," in which Bryant examined the status of women in the work place. Further, it was also used by Carol Heimenwicz and Timothy Schubert, in an article on the 24th of March, 1986 edition of the Wall Street Journal, to refer to invisible barriers that impeded the career advancement of women. The phrase was popularised by the media in the 80s, and in recent times, it was used by Senator Hilary Clinton in her concession speech when she withdrew from the 2008 Democratic Primaries, and I quote, "And although we weren't able to shatter the hardest and highest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you, it's got about 18 million cracks." The term glass ceiling was endorsed and used by the U.S. Department of Labor in 1991, in response to a study of nine Fortune 500 companies. The Federal Glass Ceiling Commission Study confirmed that women and minorities encountered considerable glass ceiling barriers in their careers. These barriers were experienced earlier in their professions than previously thought. I like the expression, a ceiling made of glass would be see-through. A woman can clearly see those above her that are more powerful. Instead of being able to achieve the same success, she is stopped by invisible forces that prevent her from rising further. Why? Because it conveys the notion of seeing what is. But you cannot go beyond to attain the higher levels available to the selected. The stop, do not enter message is clear, and unambiguous. You have reached your level within the organisation and you are not going beyond. Change is slowly evolving in Australia, although within the gender equalisation equation, I do not see, as a professional, nor as a Nyungar man, the representation of gender equity equally for all women. Within senior management structures of government agencies, statutory bodies, and in the private sector, there is a noticeable lack of culturally and linguistically diverse groups represented. This would be true of government corporate boards and government committees. They do not reflect the broader community demographic. This brings me to the concept of the brown glass ceiling, which I believe to be the layer that sits underneath the glass ceiling, that white, Anglo-Saxon women experience. The brown glass ceiling is like a two-way mirror, whereby you can see what is possible to achieve, and if we were equal and had similar opportunities to those above it, on the other side of the glass are the supervisors and managers who have a mind-set and expectation that aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people operate at less than the optimum level in comparison to non-indigenous peers. This is particularly noticeable wherein indigenous Australians working at equivalent positions in an organisation. There is sometimes a notion of black skills that are not transferable to an equivalent position, and like the mechanic, they are rarely given the opportunity to act at an equivalent organisational role, or act in a supervisory position above theirs. They are often overlooked. They are perceived to be highly capable of dealing with aboriginal issues, but not with organisations actual business. I know of managers in government agencies that are sent out in the field to deal with aboriginal communities and local issues. When their counterparts in the organisation never do this, but rely on staff in the field to resolve the issues. It's unique, but it's not uncommon. I believe the concept of a brown glass ceiling is not only confined to employment and economic fields where outcomes are poor, but at equally to other key areas, which have been included in the National Indigenous Reform Agreement, which forms the basis for a way in which Australia will deal with the levels of disadvantage and disparity within aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. The agreement clearly identifies the existence of a multi-layered set of brown glass ceilings which aboriginal children, adolescents and adults have to break through in order to achieve gains. Why do I believe this? And from the purist position seem to be stretching the boundaries of the concept and the intent of the glass ceiling? It is because the levels of challenge are immense, and very few make it to the glass ceiling, particularly our women. Men seem to be more likely to make it to leadership positions, and if we reflect on the number of men who hold leadership positions across government in key organisation, it far outweighs the number of women. Perhaps the term concrete ceiling is a more apt description, in that it describes the type of barrier minority women encounter. Caucasian women may face the glass ceiling in the work force, but are able to break through it from time to time. However, minority women's glass ceilings tend to be more solid and unyielding. This concrete ceiling is due to minority women facing both the issues of sexism and racism, which intensifies their obstruction in advancing within the labor market. The National Indigenous Reform Agreement articulates the challenge for all Australian government, not only look at the ceiling that is most critical in the pathway and journeys that have to be taken. Despite the concerted efforts of successive commonwealth state and territory governments to address indigenous disadvantage, there have been difficulties, and only modest improvements in outcomes in some areas, such as education and health. With other areas, are they remaining static or worsening? Even in those areas where there have been improvements, the outcomes for indigenous Australians remains far short of the outcomes for non-indigenous Australians. In December 2007, the Council of Australian Governments agreed to the National Indigenous Reform Agreement, partnership between all levels of government. It also provided links to those national agreements and national partnerships agreements across coag, which includes elements aimed at closing the gap in indigenous disadvantage. The National Indigenous Reform Agreement is the basis of the coag reform agenda. What I find interesting is that Coag recognises that individuals and communities should have the opportunity to benefit from the mainstream economy, real jobs, business opportunities, economic dependence and wealth creation. Ultimately, indigenous economic development is about providing indigenous people with the same opportunities as non-indigenous Australians. The economic group that creates - sorry, the economic growth that creates well-being for the non-indigenous population is primarily achieved through the activities of the private sector. This will not achieve this universally because education is a cornerstone for change, and is a pre-requisite for employment within our contemporary society. And for average [foreign word spoken] people, education is a brown glass ceiling. I was invited to write the foreword to the West Australian Aboriginal Chart Health Survey, Volume 3, the Educational Experiences of Aboriginal Children and Young People, which was officially launched on the 24th of March 2008. And I will quote directly from that foreword. "Education is the great engine of personal development. It is through education that the daughter of a peasant can become a doctor. That the son of a mine worker can become the head of a mine. That the child of a farm worker can become the President of a great nation." These were the words added by Nelson Mandela at an important occasion. Of the numerous research reports into aboriginal education, there is none so profound as the West Australian Aboriginal Chart Health Survey. Improving the educational experiences of aboriginal children and young people. It provided confronting evidence that the benefits of education remained poorly realised by the vast majority of West Australian aboriginal children, and I doubt that this would be dissimilar in other jurisdictions. The more fundamental issue is the failure of the past 35 years by education providers to improve educational outcomes of the vast majority of aboriginal children. It is important to accept the reality that failure over the past 30 years to improve educational outcomes for the vast majority of aboriginal school children has affected three generations of aboriginal children and young people who are highly likely to have limited access to life-long learning, employment and economic opportunities. There has also been tacit acceptance of the non-achievement of education by aboriginal children and young people. The resultant acceptance of this lack of educational success has a cumulative effect. It is based on the belief that aboriginal children and young people will never reach their full potential. And if they fall behind, society, in society, then welfare will protect them. Their low level of educational success is accepted as a normative expectation. Not a great deal has changed. It has become acceptable for aboriginal children and young people to work at level, unless it becomes problematic, or the sociopolitical structures are pressured to bring about change. There is a moral obligation to address the needs of aboriginal children and young people to be successful and achieve the level of education attainment that builds social and human capital, and to be achievers in the Australian and global community. Education is recognised by OECD Member states as a fundamental key to wealth creation and competitiveness in a global information economy. Those societies which continue to invest in education, training and employment of their people have prospered and enjoy a high standard of living and access to resources, health, human and social capital, which builds upon individual and societal success. All Australian governments acknowledge that investing in education and training is essential to Australia's economic and social prosperity. It is about positioning our country to meet the new challenges and opportunities in international markets in a world without economic borders, the emerging new knowledge-based society, the pressures for change, global and international competitors, access to information and technology and new emerging clients. Just think of where aboriginal children who are not exiting the schooling system see it in the construct of the brown glass ceiling in education. Australia will require a flexible, well-educated, well-trained, high-performing work force to achieve and sustain these reforms. This will produce problems for the majority of aboriginal children and young people who continue to perform poorly with their education, because they will not access the opportunities which will flow for well-educated Australians. There is a growing demand for an educated, more highly-trained and more technically skilled work force. However, when I look at organisations, most aboriginal workers are at the lower and shrinking end of the employment market, and they're becoming part of a growing underclass. The question that arises for aboriginal children and young people is why are they excluded from the advantages of being an integral part of a vision in which Australia's global competitiveness and future depends on all Australians having the necessary education, training and learning ability, and is dependent upon the application of knowledge to support innovation, stimulate business development, and improve work force productivity to live productive and fulfilling lives. It is important for aboriginal children and young people to acquire and become proficient in standard Australian English, as well as to be taught to recognise the way in which language is used, contextualised and understood, and applied within a global and knowledge-based society in order to participate in Australia's economy. The task of developing appropriate resources and teaching aboriginal students to become more proficient in standard Australian English should be achievable. Over a period of 12 years, a student should be able to learn English when it is considered in his context, and I want you to think about this. English has 26 letters and only 44 sounds. It has an approximate total of 550,000 words, 2,000 words make up 90 percent of most speech, 400 words make up 65 percent of most writing, and there are only 70 main spelling combinations. Why then is it that at the end of 12 years of schooling, our children have not broken through the education brown glass ceiling? Graduation from the final year of secondary schooling provides measures of success, including completion of school, entry to university and higher education, access to [inaudible], apprenticeships, traineeships and employment and an income. Aboriginal young people who do not achieve secondary education and who do not acquire the basic skills of literacy and numeracy are unlikely to be competitive in the labor market. They will subsequently remain vulnerable to structural change within the labor market, government reform, and therefore, will be reliant on government income support. They will experience the brown glass ceiling throughout their life, unless they return to second chance education, or more correctly, further their educational pathways. Paula Groot and Sylvia Sonderberger make the point that the glass ceiling is one of the most controversial and motive aspects of employment in organisations, exhibiting the following features that are frequently thought to characterise the problem. Firstly there is a lower number of female employees in higher positions. Secondly, women have to work harder than men to obtain equivalent jobs. Thirdly, women are paid less than men when promoted, and some organisations are more female friendly than others. I would contend that indigeneity is an additional characteristic which adds the brown to the colour of the glass for aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It is the key ingredient of the brown glass ceiling. Whilst many will deny that this is a factor, it is a reality for aboriginal women, because in two areas that I've worked, education and health, aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women tend to be in significant numbers either as aboriginal health workers or aboriginal and island education offices, and they're sparse at the upper levels of the organisation. As human beings, we are ingenious in the way that we develop definitions for circumstances. In this instance, IREOs and IHWs experience the variation of the glass ceiling, which is the sticky floor. The sticky floor refers to women who are trapped in low-wage, low-mobility jobs in state and local government. I want to turn back to the United States of America's Glass Ceiling Commission, to further my point for the impact of the glass ceiling. The United States of America's Glass Ceiling Commission was established in 1991 to study the barriers and issues and make recommendations to eliminate the hindrances to the advancement of women and minorities to management and decision-making positions. It is the unseen, yet unbreachable barrier that keeps minorities and women from rising to the upper, outer realms of the corporate ladder, regardless of their qualifications and achievements. Breaking glass ceiling barriers in corporate America will not result from any single act or event, rather it will be the culmination of a process involving people and organisations from all segments of our society. The commission went on to say that they found minorities and women as still constantly under-represented and under-utilised at the highest levels of corporate America. For example, 97 percent of senior managements of the Fortune 1,000 industrial, Fortune 500 companies are white. And 95 to 97 percent are male. In the Fortune 2,000 Industrial and Services Companies, only 5 percent of senior managers are women. And almost all of them are white. African American men with professional degrees earned 20 percent less than their non-African American counterparts, holding the same degrees, in the same job categories. But women and African Americans are not the only ones kept down by the glass ceiling. Only 0.4 percent of managers are Hispanic, although Hispanics make up 8 percent of America's work force. Asian and Pacific Islander Americans earn less than whites in comparable positions, and receive fewer promotions, despite having more formal education than any other group. Generally, the lack of educational opportunity drastically reduces the available pool of American Indian candidates, and Chief Executive Officers rarely consider them for management jobs. Would we mirror the same results in the workplace in Australia, if such a study was to be undertaken? I suspect that there would be strong correlations with the finding of the American Commission. The advent of reconciliation and adoption of the Reconciliation Action Plans have had an impact on the increase in the number of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people employed within government, business and the private sector. One of the major challenges that remains to be addressed is not only the number of staff employed, but the number at all levels of the organisation, including the senior executive and management levels. Certainly, when I reflect back on heath and the Health Department, the majority of the 280-odd staff that we had at that time were aboriginal health workers. There were three people in management positions, there were four in central office, and a director's position, that was identified. That was the extent across the level of the tiers of the Health Department of West Australia. If we were serious in breaking the brown glass ceiling, then those numbers would have been commensurately higher and not in identified position nor in aboriginal health, but across the continuum of all positions that are reflected in the makeup of a health department. In examining organisations, it would be interesting to identify the number of staff employed in respect to the gender mix. How many aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and men are in identified positions, that is aboriginality is a requirement versus the number in organisational positions? The number of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and men in the same position and level that they commenced employment at. The number of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and men in supervisory and management roles. And the number of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men and women within the senior executive service positions, including board membership. I think that we would see the pyramid of large numbers at the base, but very few at the top. The United States of America's Glass Ceiling Commission also stated the following, and I quote, "Discrimination, the glass ceiling in particular, remains another deep line of demarcation between those who prosper and those who are left behind. Affirmative action properly implemented does not mean imposing quotas, allowing preferential treatment or employing or promoting unqualified people. It means opening the system and casting a net wide to recruit, train and promote opportunities for advancement for people who contribute effectively to a corporation and consequently the nation's economy. The definition of Affirmative Action embodies efforts to increase the supply of qualified individuals of all ethnic groups and both genders having access to widely different ethnic, racial and social backgrounds, accelerates the quest for corporate excellence. One of our nation's greatest assets is our diversity. It is our strength." It is also Australia's strength. But we also have to take the step in removing the glass ceiling, and in particular, the brown glass ceiling. As commerce becomes more global and competitive, it is imperative that businesses engage the full potential of our labor force, which is increasingly composed of women and minorities from diverse backgrounds and cultures. I do not advocate the lowering of the bar for any field of work or endeavour, but suggest there are alternative methods to addressing the brown glass ceiling, and certainly to developing human capacity. Every individual that we ever come in contact with or interact with has their own unique qualities, competencies and skills. We need to expose aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff to opportunities that include acting in non-identified positions, appointed into acting positions at a higher level than theirs, and engage them in the process of the organisation's strategic business decisions. We did that during the shift to addressing the equalisation of gender balance within the work force. What I find interesting in aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs is if we do that, the first question that you get asked is how many trainingship positions will you give me to train aboriginal staff? And when we did the gender equalisation, that was never the question that was asked. The strategy were the ones that I outlined. They were inclusive, and they incorporated organisation's committee positions that existed, jobs that were real, into that equation. But support and driver for a new approach must be championed by the organisation's Chief Executive Officer, or line managers must be held to account in growing the capability and capacity of aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff, and acknowledge that for each successful employee who they engage in progression within the organisation. The brown glass ceiling can be chipped away progressively through this approach, as well as providing supported programs, such as head hunting individuals, mentoring, providing work place experiences, and giving the appropriate guidance. It's interesting that in the past, the common practice to take on new employees who commence their career on the shop floor was common. Training and mentoring was provided to develop them, shape them into the organisation's work force, expose them to a range of experiences that build on existing competencies and skills, and ultimately they progress from the factory floor into supervisory and management roles, and in some cases, they became the owner of the company. They were encouraged and provided with career advice within the company. In this environment, supervisors and management identified and, over time, encouraged employees into leadership and supervisory roles, fostering and building the skills needed. The United States of America's Glass Ceiling Commission identified characteristics of successful programs that if offered to indigenous Australians, could result in many of them breaking through the brown glass ceiling. And I want to share with you their suggestions. They suggested rotational and non-traditional job assignments that broaden the base of a candidate's experience and visibility. One of the key things that they said about visibility is if you put people into lower-level jobs where they are out of the sight and out of line of sight of management, then their progression rates are highly diminished, and significantly diminished. Whereas, if they are in sight, they get the opportunity to develop specific career path programs that identify objective performance skill and knowledge criteria for advancement. Part of that has to be the recognition of cultural skills that we bring. Employee-sponsored networks and affinity groups, access to specialised training, seminars and workshops to enhance skills, formal succession planning. Taking an individual from level to a path that will lead to promotion and progression. Formal mentoring programs that provide guidance to future executives within the corporate structure, and then building expertise and empowering people lacking role models and advisors throughout the community by making senior executives available to young adults who will be future business leaders within their company or society. I want to conclude by sharing aspects of my experience of breaking through the brown glass ceiling. And I want those of us who are over 50, and there are a few of us in this room, particularly indigenous or aboriginal people in here. Prior to 1972, we were covered by the Native Welfare Act. That act determined what we're able to do, the approval to travel, the approval to marry, and we developed a mind-set of having to seek permission to do many of the things that were part of our daily life. But we also lived in a period when we were deemed to meet special circumstances, different, and that included the aboriginal bar at hotels, in hospitals, the aboriginal wing of the hospital. And there wasn't a mixing. If you went to the cinema, the front row was for aboriginal people. It was a period in which we had our early years of schooling. But I think that we also had the opportunity and I hungered to acquire knowledge and information. I utilised opportunities for leadership, and worked to improve on what I had achieved. I developed an ethic to achieve, even though there were barriers, including overt racism. I learned from my failures, appreciated success, but I have retained the essence of who I am. And I don't intend ever changing that. When I was approached to nominate for the seat of Hasluck in 2003, I declined the offer because I had made a commitment to take up the offer of a position as the Director of Aboriginal Health in New South Wales Health. I needed a new challenge outside of my own community to enhance my existing life and work experiences, and to accept the daunting task of stepping outside of my level of comfort. At the time, I thought I'd thrown away any chance I ever had of standing for a seat in the Australian Parliament. I moved to New South Wales. And worked there for approximately four and a half years before returning home to Perth. I must admit that the journey was tremendous, because I learned to be - re-learned to be humble and to work with people. And to take away the notion that I had been a big fish in a small pond, and had learned to become the small fish in a big pond. And that experience gives you insights and understandings of challenges that you had forgotten as a leader. At the launch of a Mental Health Initiative in Fremantle, I was asked to nominate for the seat at Hasluck, which I initially declined. But when my colleague returned with two other members of the party, fifteen minutes later and cornered me, I indicated that I would give some thought to nominating. It seemed daunting, but I commenced the process of seeking information, meeting with people within the hierarchy of the party to sound them out, and ascertained what I needed to do in order to win pre-selection. I sought the counsel of trusted friends. And made my decision to nominate. I was made aware that there was a favoured son, who was a strong contender, and that there were a total of five nominations, including mine. I had to work diligently to gain political support prior to pre-selection, and then plan my approach to convincing 45 delegates that I was the right candidate to represent the Liberal Party in the election of the seat of Hasluck. If any of you have gone for an interview and you've had a panel of three or four people, for a job, it is daunting. When you stand before 45 people that you don't know, and you have to present your credentials in 12 minutes, and answer a series of questions off the floor, it is more daunting. And you have to have the confidence to say to yourself, because let me say, as aboriginal people, we always say "we." When we talk about ourselves, we never say "I." We say "we," because we have grown up in a community where it is "us" as a community. It is "we" as a people, or "we" as a family. And I had to change my thinking in the way that I saw myself. I sat in the same room as the candidates, and we met each other and got to know each other, and each time, I answered questions that they were asking in the conversations. I deliberately made sure that I said "I" in order to prepare myself. I stated from the outset that I was of aboriginal descent, so that they understood very clearly that I was proud of who I was, but I also wanted them to know that I was an aboriginal person. And then I put my case as to why I should be pre-selected. I won support, and following State Council's endorsement, I commenced campaigning. I established a campaign team, and establishing that team is absolutely paramount. I looked at what I had to do to fund-raise. People have this misconception that we are given money for a campaign. We're not. We have to raise every cent. And let me say that my campaign was in excess of $300,000 that I had to raise. And I had to raise and campaign within an 18-week period, so it was hard work. Establishing a campaign team was paramount, fund-raising and developing campaign strategies, analysing and planning became critical. Long days and hard work became the daily pattern. rising at 4:30 and often getting to bed at about 11:00. The most daunting task I had was knocking on the first ten doors. It's nerve-wracking, but you rapidly gain confidence and learn to sell who you are to people, accept polite rejection, develop ways to communicate with people who tell you what they think of you, your party, and the Australian political system. But you grow from that. And you don't allow that to become a barrier. As indigenous Australians, as indigenous Australians, we are always part of our community. So we always work together. And I found that as I knocked on each door, I grew in confidence, and started to strongly believe that I had the opportunity as a Nyungar person, to become a member of the House of Representatives. At no stage did I doubt my capability to fight an election, to campaign, and win. Because I called upon my experiences, my belief in myself, and the trust I had in the members of Team Hasluck. To me, no brown glass ceiling was going to prevent me from rising above my aspiration. My education, work experience and knowledge served me well. Most there were days when I doubted our headway over the 18 weeks of campaigning, I had no sense of ever giving up. The words of Dan Dierdorf sum up how I took on this challenge. You go for it. All the stops are out. Caution to the wind, and you are battling with everything that you have. That's the real fun of the game. When in the seat of Hasluck, no matter how small the margin, and the margin is only 948 votes, it is one straight, one long straight in my electorate. The win was sweet, because I held my own as an equal against a formidable opponent, who was the incumbent member, with an impressive record. When I stood in the chamber as the 1,093rd member of the House of Representatives, and delivered my first speech as an equal, I felt an incredible sense of having broken through the brown glass ceiling. I felt a great sense of personal pride, but equally a stronger pride that I was a Nyungar from West Australia standing in that chamber, and wearing the Bucca given to me by elders at my shoulder [foreign word spoken] was equally more rewarding in that when I look back on it now, it clearly shows that our cultural identity is not a barrier, and that we do and can transcend brown glass ceilings. I knew at that point that we can achieve our aspirations and dreams and our culture is not a barrier, but something that we should be proud of. We are the descendants of the Nyungar people, who are a living culture that has continuously prevailed in Western Australia for over 40,000 years. And in the role that I have, I want to make a difference for others as the member of Hasluck. Many of us have transcended the brown glass ceiling, and many more will follow. I want us to always remember, and I will always remember, do what you want to do. And be who you want to be. Because if you have that as a simple anthem, it gives you the capacity to rise to challenges, to believe that there is no barrier, that the bollerocks of life can be gone around, and that will never prevent you from aspiring to the things that you wish to achieve. Setbacks will be there. But let me tell you that the journey that I took through those front doors down to my seat, and in sitting each day in that Parliament, reminds me that I hope to see, in the future, other aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's sitting in that house in their own right as equals. And I suppose in closing the challenge for me now is to marry the expectations of our nations of people, my constituents, and party obligations, and let me tell you the expectations of our own people is extremely strong. The calls that those men and I have on us, nationally, and at the state and local level, is always significant. My staff balance the demands on my time. But let me say that I also want to remind people that the brown glass ceiling is there. But we have to collectively, as a society, break down those ceilings and barriers that prevent people taking the pathways into the next two decades into the future, and into our global economy. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Ken Wyatt: Thanks and I'll take a couple questions, I just wanted to mention a couple of things. One, I mentioned diversity in Australia, it's the world's second most culturally diverse nation. We have a very significant role to play, I think, in terms of how we deal and work with other peoples. If Hilary Clinton can't smash through a glass window or glass ceiling, I don't know who can then. But I started to think about if we're below the glass window, and it's very hard to try and smash it, you know, we've got to smash it. And when you're below it, it's very hard. For those above, I think it's relatively easy, so for those above have got a responsibility. But I think those above, for the last 20 years, and some moves are afoot, they're dropping pebbles, making much of an effort to break that glass ceiling. So we've got some time, to take some questions. There will be a couple of people. As it's being recorded, your questions will need to be addressed into a microphone, and there's going to be a couple of people walking around with mics, so if you raise your hand, if you've got a question, and I'll direct the microphone to that person and you can ask a question. >> I am [inaudible], and I was, Ken, very impressed with what you were saying earlier about that you don't want to - when it comes to education - you don't want to leave certain people out, and that everyone all learn, aboriginal people especially should have that opportunity to participate in the work force and participation and so on, and in 1999, I met a Nyungar woman, and she became an aboriginal trainee at the place where I worked, the Perth Magistrate's Courts, and she encountered a lot of opposition there, and if it wasn't for some of her elders, she would not have finished that final year. She was under a lot of pressure to, to give up. And in meeting her and her family, I have also seen that in the Belmont River [inaudible] Redcliffe, [foreign word spoken], Hamilton Hill, there are those aboriginal families that they have very poor households, and the children will be lucky to get to school, and when they get home, they often have not had places to do homework, and parents that are on drugs or in prison and things like that, and they've also come from families that have often been part of stolen generations and so forth, so here in 2011, there's still some work left to do. How do you think you can include these people so that they get anywhere near the brown glass ceiling. Thank you. >> Ken Wyatt: One of the challenges that all leaders have is to play the role of advocacy. To identify with the challenges still are, the thing that staggers me is that the data that is available through every single collection point in government agencies and that form part of the council of Australian government's national reporting, clearly shows that there are considerable gaps still. One of the challenges that we have is to work as a community in addressing this. It is also about the leadership being cohesive in a vision that encompasses every family. At the moment, the close in the gap strategy does not encompass every aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander family. They're regionally located, they have particular specificity around them, and on that alone, then we will not reach those families. Part of a strategy that I want to lay within my electorate is to work with aboriginal elders and leaders to target and identify, because I suspect if we look at a typical bell curve across the 800,000 aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, one quarter will not need that level of intervention, because they will be employed and in roles such as Simon and I, but there will also be the second quartile who are propelling upwards, and who are becoming successful in generating a wealth base. It is the bottom two quartiles that we should focus on. Realistically, we should better case manage every aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander family in that bottom quartile, and in the second, and in the third quartile. So I think we have to think about how we do that. The other point I wanted to make earlier is that we need to empower people to be equals in the solutions that are developed, because too often what happens is the solutions are imposed by well-meaning people within government agencies. And certainly, the person you're referring to that you work with, has seen the [inaudible] end and certainly use my position as a leader prior to entering parliament to also helping circumstances, so each of us that hold senior positions have to chip away at the brown glass ceiling at the top to reach those that are under it. >> Ken, I'm Denny Ford. Quick, just want to comment. First I just want to say [inaudible] and what you've achieved, and I know that when you got in this, "Oh, I know that bloke!" It was good. What my query, well more of a comment for myself, we've heard like assimilation, integration, [inaudible], all these kinds of phases of, you know, policy direction, for me, I'm personally a bit confused at where we are now, we have, you know, had that reconciliation process, we've had the intervention, the apology, the [inaudible] issues, so this is a real Twilight Zone for me around what kind of phase we're in right now. Do you have any comments here of that? >> Ken Wyatt: I prefer that we throw away the tags, that we look at what the opportunities are that we create. Because if we take the driving of this, and we stop being passive recipients of policies and programs, but become reactive in shaping them, and determining how they should be delivered, then that is the way to go. Each of those ism tags, I think we've just got to [inaudible] and become much more proactive in saying there are services that governments offer. We shouldn't talk about mainstream services, because they're not mainstream, they're government services, all of it, so this now, what we have to do is optimise how opportunities with them, when we do that we will make a difference. >> Clem Rutney [clears throat]. You talk about the glass ceiling, but I, it's something that I think that the glass ceiling is clouded by the middle rung of Caucasian males that are in the public sector and places of middle management. How do you think, how do you think that we can break through that? Because that, I think, is where the main stumbling block for both men or for women, but also for aboriginal people, for getting through to that glass ceiling. >> Ken Wyatt: I like what women did. Women kept the conscious voice, bubbling away, making inroads, and when they made the inroads, they celebrated. We don't do that. And to take away the cloudiness of the glass, we have to have a clear vision of what we want to achieve, and then help those to achieve it. That's why I always liked what the Inuits have done, where they determined, within their community, the skill mix that they needed, they needed lawyers, teachers, etc. And actually our [inaudible] Educational Committee in the late 1980s decided they needed 2,000 teachers, but I'm sorry, 2,000 teachers by 1990. We got that, we exceeded that, we got 2,700. So we built the capacity of individuals to either go into teaching, or many became public servants, and started to influence the reform agenda. The trouble is, we have, excuse me, we haven't pushed it far enough. And I think in that sense the mandating approach will not work. It has to be by people movements, and people movements are much more powerful because they hold others up to scrutiny. They also challenge collectively. And in one sense, what I'm saying is we haven't done that. And yet we've had some great leaders over the years, I think of Charlie Perkins, who I learned a lot from. Others like John Moriarty, there are others, Clem, that you'd be aware of, who've influenced some of your thinking. They have, but we've never done it collectively, and at some point, most certainly intend within the sphere of the work I do within the Parliament, to continually raise this as an issue. >> Eldon Carter. Just a quick question, Ken, about the new First People's Congress, which is coming up, starting, beginning fairly shortly. How do you see yourself in the context of that new organisation? >> Ken Wyatt: I see my role as fundamentally that of a member of the House of Representatives, and representing an electorate. But my interface with them will depend on issues as they arise, because I am attending the first dinner, both myself and Linda Burney, who have been invited, to address the Congress as well. And in my discussions with Sam Jeffries, Tom Kalma and others, the discussions have been around how do we relate, are you prepared to look at some of the issues we have so that you can advocate them within the party processes, and equally Warren Mundine within the Labor Party Movement is doing the same, so by being, and I made a comment many years ago, that if you want change, and you want sustainable change, you've got to be on the inside to influence those who control. If you're on the inside, then you have some hope of changing things. When you're outside and look, let me say I'm glad I'm out of the bureaucracy, because I'm not constrained by the line management process, and I'm not constrained by the fact I'm limited in what I can say. I now have the opportunity to be much more proactive, and much more challenging, and that's the freedom that I'm enjoying. But certainly, I'm enjoying the freedom of our democracy by being in a House that makes many of the decision that impact on our lives daily. >> My name is Charles Missey. Mr. Wyatt, I am from the [inaudible], I'm a student with Centre for Aboriginal Studies. And my concern is the, it's about the intervention in the northern territory for a start. You'll see we have the [inaudible] denigrating the northern territory [inaudible] Act. Now, as an aboriginal person, you understand the value of the land and the culture. And yet, we find that the [inaudible] government is also taking that stand regarding doing away with the land rights. We do not doubt that the teams in the long-term, and it seems to me that as a single situation as will take place in the Torres Strait, because only two weeks ago one of our representatives of [foreign word spoken], Mr. Warren Inch, did make a statement regarding the sale of Turtle and [inaudible] meat. He alleged that someone from the Torres Strait and from Papa New Guinea, they were selling the flesh on the mainland of the [inaudible]. Whether that's true or not, I don't know, but I don't think so because one of our, one of my friends did make a big challenge with Mr. Inch, and saying look, if you make a statement like that, please back it up. And name the persons. But he also said that it seemed that he doesn't understand the culture of the people when he said that you know you make these statements, but you threaten to bring the sea serpent, and the Greenpeace movement into the Torres Strait to do away with our cultural rights and practices within our own waters. It seems as if here again, there's a agenda to do away with our land rights and our sea rights. Now as an aboriginal person, I do believe you understand the importance of these concepts, that it would be good if you could have some input into this. And question the motives of Mr. Inch, and I would encourage you to look into that, because it's a very -- >> I don't want to interrupt, but could you get to a question for Ken? >> Charles: Yeah. Could you look into that? It's a very delicate situation for us, and Mr. Inch, because he is saying that there is something that we've done, and we know that it's not true. >> Ken Wyatt: Well two things, firstly on the intervention. The intervention occurred as a result of a report, a very good friend of mine was the co-chair of that, and I had a discussion with her and said surely you would have realised that when you produce that report that governments would have had to have acted on that because we cannot, as a society, accept the abuse of children, but was the issue, was the way in which the process was implemented. It was a reaction that saw a number of agencies follow through with the desires of government. In that process, got it wrong. One agency that I will acknowledge who did get it right, and I believe that they were probably best practice in the process, and that was the Department of Health and Ageing, who, when they went into the territory, met with AMSANT which was the peak organisation of the community controlled health sector, with the northern territory health unit, and [foreign name spoken] who at the time was the director, was part of that, and I met with community people as well and worked out and worked on solutions. What they also made very clear was that they were not going to interfere with the Community Controlled Health Services in the delivery of services, but would use medical people brought into the territory under the intervention program to work alongside of them. So there was a parallel approach, and certainly, I'm aware from my colleagues in that arena that health was much more accepting of the fact of having equal partners. Some of the others didn't. And there are some issues that have been continued, and yes it goes back to a point that I made earlier, that if we want change, then the people we're expecting change to occur to have to be equal partners in developing the solutions. In terms of your second part, I know Warren Inch in the short time I've been in the House. I have met many of the aboriginal groups that have come down, because he has delegations and deputations from the Torres Strait Islands, all from his electorate. He calls me, and I'm introduced to them. I will talk to Warren about the issue you raise, but I know that he works very closely with aboriginal people. But how closely he works with Torres Strait Islanders, I can't give you an answer for, but I will certainly give the undertaking that I will follow up on that comment to Warren. >> Um, thanks Ken for sharing your thoughts and your wisdom with us this evening, you're presenting the 2011 Rob Riley Memorial Lecture, and please accept this token of our appreciation [applause]. [ Music ]