APY Lands: youth workers and youth sheds

First posted on 30 January 2010 under APY Lands.
This article has been updated and archived.
Tags: infrastructure & youth

Summary

In 2004, the South Australian Government allocated $5.75 million over five years for youth and substance misuse programs on the APY Lands. This amount included funding for youth workers in seven APY communities, as well as money for fitting out six local youth centres, commonly referred to as ‘youth sheds’. At the end of the five-year period, further funding was allocated to these programs.[i]

In general, these programs have not recruited formally qualified youth workers. Instead, they have employed local Anangu and provided them with on-the-job training. The effectiveness of this approach has sometimes been questioned.[ii]

In 2009, the South Australian Government acknowledged difficulties in recruiting and retaining youth workers and noted that this had “resulted in a reduction in the number of youth sheds operating … on a regular basis.”[iii]

The Paper Trail

Introduction

For more than two decades, successive state governments have sought to understand and respond to substance abuse problems in South Australia’s remote Anangu communities.[iv] Much of this work has focused on diverting youth and children away from the practice of petrol sniffing and, more recently, from the increasing use of marijuana.[v] The employment of youth workers has been a key element of these efforts.

Aboriginal Youth Worker Training Scheme (1986)

In 1986, the South Australian Government’s “inter-departmental committee on petrol sniffing” developed an “Aboriginal Youth Worker Training Scheme.”[vi]

The committee hoped the scheme would “contribute greatly to stemming” the escalating problem of petrol sniffing and “provide an appropriate base for the formulation of a long-term solution.”[vii]

The main aims of the scheme were to improve “services to young people” and “develop the skills and abilities of Aboriginal people as youth workers.”[viii]

A “project outline” – from mid 1986 – indicates that the scheme was designed to train eight Anangu youth workers over a 12-month period, with the group of trainees being drawn from four APY communities (Amata, Iwantja, Kaltjiti and Pukatja).[ix]

In subsequent comments, the then State Minister of Health (Dr John Cornwall MP) said:

The [Anangu] communities have given us a strong message … They do not want temporary holiday programs. They want their own people trained as youth workers and for the programs to be [provided] on an ongoing basis … we must combat petrol sniffing at its source – boredom and aimlessness … [We must] give Aboriginal youth fulfilling recreational activities and real alternatives.[x]

Coronial Inquests (2002)

Sixteen years later, in 2002, the State Coroner conducted inquests into three deaths on the APY Lands. In the course of these inquests, the Coroner received considerable evidence on the difficulty of delivering and sustaining youth worker programs in Anangu communities.[xi]

The Coroner also heard that $300,000 had recently been allocated to the APY Lands for the employment of four youth workers and a coordinator.[xii] In his findings, the Coroner welcomed this development but emphasised the need for “complicating factors” to be addressed. He wrote:

There will, indeed, be recruitment problems if the housing issue is not resolved, and the short duration of the program might also deter applicants. Appropriate pay scales and a myriad of other issues will need to be addressed to support the project, rather than simply launching it and waiting for it to fail.[xiii]

Notwithstanding these concerns, on 6 September 2002, the Coroner formally recommended that the proposal to appoint the four youth workers – and a coordinator – “should be implemented forthwith.” At the same time, he called on the State Government to ensure that the number of staff appointed “is sufficient to meet the needs of all [APY] communities.”[xiv]

Community-based youth workers (2003+)

Between July 2003 and July 2004, youth workers were appointed to work in five APY communities (Iwantja, Kalka, Kaltjiti, Mimili and Pipalyatjara).[xv]

State Government funding for these positions was provided to local Anangu community councils which, in all but one case, appointed untrained community members to the positions.[xvi]

A program of accredited youth worker training commenced in May 2004.[xvii]

On 8 October 2004, the South Australian Government allocated funds to expand the APY Lands’ youth worker program.[xviii] Specifically, it allocated $2,307,500, over four years, to:

  • employ youth workers – “recruited locally” – in seven APY communities, and
  • “develop a range of community based activities” that “build skills, enhance self esteem and improve the overall health and well-being for youth and families affected by substance misuse,” particularly petrol sniffing.[xix]

The Government also allocated $3,445,000 – over five years – for substance misuse programs that would engage people with substance abuse problems “in a range of activities to improve self-esteem and community cohesion.”[xx]

In November 2004, the State Coroner conducted another series of inquests on the APY Lands. On that occasion, State Government witnesses advised the Coroner that:

  • youth workers has been appointed in six APY communities and that the remaining vacancy – in Pukatja – was expected to be filled later that month, and[xxi]
  • a formal review of the APY youth worker program had just commenced.[xxii]

Other evidence presented during the inquests highlighted significant problems and short-comings with the APY youth worker program, including a lack of coordination, training, support and supervision. For example, the NPY Women’s Council expressed concern that the youth workers had “received very little training and supervision” and appeared “to have little understanding or knowledge of the program.”[xxiii]

After weighing up all of the evidence presented to him, the Coroner concluded:

It is a great pity that, even after the 2002 inquests during which the failure of similar programs was considered, youth worker programs were set up on such an adhoc and unplanned basis, without regard to previous experience, and with insufficient training and supervision of the workers. It is to be hoped that the review of these programs will result in a more coordinated and professional youth worker program being established. It is also to be hoped that the review will enable the Department of Families and Communities to avoid the mistakes of the past being repeated again.[xxiv]

The Coroner handed down the findings of these inquests in March 2005. At that time, he formally recommended that the Department:

should consider, in the light of [its] review, how it might establish a properly structured, funded and coordinated youth worker program for the [APY] Lands.[xxv]

Review of APY Youth Development Program (2005)

The review of the APY Lands’ Youth Development Program was completed in early May 2005.[xxvi] It found that the program suffered from:

  • “inconsistent monitoring and reporting”
  • a “lack of sustained professional supervision”
  • a lack of “support on the ground in the APY Lands”
  • a high “turnover of youth worker staff”
  • difficulties in arranging training
  • a “lack of infrastructure necessary to operate the program.”[xxvii]

While the review reported – “on the positive side” – that the program had “provided employment for Anangu and a range of youth activities,” it noted that these activities had not been organised “in a constant, regular or sustained way.”[xxviii]

The review made a number of recommendations, including that:

  • the management of the existing youth and substance misuse programs should be combined,
  • a budget for the combined program should “be approved and [additional] funding sought”, and
  • three new management and coordination positions should be created to provide supervision, mentoring and assistance to the community-based Anangu youth workers.[xxix]

On 31 May 2005, the State Government reported that the new, combined program would be “fully funded and sustained at the levels recommended in the report” and that the process of recruiting staff for the three new positions was well underway.[xxx]

Parliamentary visit (May 2005)

A week after the review was completed, a State Parliamentary Committee visited Kalka, Amata and other communities on the western side of the APY Lands.[xxxi]

The visit provided Kalka community with an opportunity to highlight ongoing frustrations with the local youth worker program. In documents handed to the Committee, the community wrote:

We want Kalka people as youth workers working with our children and young people but they need more training and support, not just a visit from coordinators every few months – this doesn’t achieve anything. … Government expects the community to be able to divert young people from substance abuse and the most critical thing to do that is [to] create activities for them to participate in – we cannot do that if we have [nowhere] to house equipment and can’t provide a place for young people to ‘hang out’.[xxxii]

As part of the visit, the Parliamentary Committee was shown the Kalka “youth shed.” It “did not contain any furniture or equipment.”[xxxiii]

In Amata, problems with the youth worker program were also raised with the visiting parliamentarians. There, members of the local community council stated that:

  • Amata needed a full-time youth worker,
  • the government-funded position had not been filled, and
  • the council could not “appoint a person from outside of Amata to this position as the lack of any spare housing in the community meant that the person would have nowhere to live.”[xxxiv]

Youth worker training and positive outcomes (updated 10 August 2011)

From mid 2005 onwards, the State Government consolidated its efforts to recruit and retain youth workers and provide them with appropriate, accredited training.[xxxv]

This included contracting Relationships Australia (SA) to deliver “nationally recognised training in Certificate III, IV and Diploma of youth work.”[xxxvi]

In August 2006, the State Government noted that this training:

involved building the capacity of youth workers to respond to critical incidents involving mental illnesses and to support children and young people witnessing or experiencing violence.[xxxvii]

By 2008, topics covered in the youth worker training included:

program planning, crisis management, sports and recreational skills, mental health first aid (depression, suicide, and psychosis), youth development and applying for funding.[xxxviii]

The push to improve training and support for Anangu youth workers, coincided with the roll-out of Opal fuel. Together, these and other efforts led to a dramatic decline in the incidence of petrol sniffing. In three years, the estimated number of petrol sniffers on the APY Lands fell from around 200 to less than 40.[xxxix]

On 26 February 2008, the State Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation (Hon Jay Weatherill MP) attributed this “dramatic decrease in petrol sniffing” to:

the introduction of Opal Fuel, harsher penalties for trafficking in petrol, extra police and youth workers, a mobile outreach service and more activities for young people.[xl]

Ongoing funding for the delivery of this accredited youth worker training ended on 1 July 2011.[xli]

As of 8 August 2011, Relationships Australia (SA) was continuing to provide limited training in three Anangu communities (Pukatja, Mimili and Amata). At that time, the organisation expected to be able to deliver this training until the end of 2011. [xlii]

Mullighan Inquiry

In April 2008, the Mullighan Inquiry considered the youth worker program as part of its examination of strategies designed to prevent child sexual abuse on the APY Lands.[xliii] The Inquiry noted that APY youth workers:

  • had “been trained to recognise signs of sexual abuse”, and
  • had “developed the capacity to respond to critical incidents involving mental illness and to support children and young persons witnessing or experiencing violence.”[xliv]

The Inquiry formally recommended (Recommendation 3) that the APY youth worker programs should:

  • “continue to receive sufficient funding and, where possible, … be expanded”,
  • be regularly monitored to determine [its] effectiveness, and
  • be regularly reviewed to “to determine if, and how, [it] may be improved or better coordinated to reduce the incidence of child sexual abuse on the Lands.”[xlv]

In July 2008, the South Australian Government expressed its support for this recommendation and indicated that the APY youth worker program – and other key initiatives – would “be maintained.”[xlvi]

Perennial questions and recruitment concerns

Notwithstanding continued efforts to improve the training of youth workers, broader questions about aspects of the APY Lands Youth Worker program have sometimes been raised.

In November 2005, the NPY Women’s Council highlighted some of its concerns in a written submission to a Senate Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities. The Council wrote:

The practice … of giving over the employment of youth workers to often dysfunctional community councils [which lack the] … capacity to support and supervise staff is a model destined to fail… Youth work is not baby-sitting and should not be treated as such, particularly in dysfunctional communities …

Youth workers need to be suitably qualified or skilled, possess no relevant criminal history, be properly paid, housed, supervised and supported. There is no dirt cheap or easy way around this, and there needs to be established an employment agency of sorts to enable proper recruitment.[xlvii]

The Law Council of South Australia and others witnesses raised similar concerns in oral evidence to the same Inquiry.[xlviii]

In June 2006, the Senate Inquiry called on State and Federal Governments to “provide long-term funding” and “strong agency support” in the delivery of community-based programs in remote Aboriginal communities.[xlix]

Two months later, the South Australian Government reported that it was now more heavily involved “in assisting communities to recruit youth workers”, and noted:

Vacancies are now advertised and [departmental] staff sit on interview panels.[l]

From 2008, more substantial changes were introduced as part of the “overall restructure of the management of the youth programs.” This included:

  • ending the practice of having community councils employ youth workers and,
  • employing the youth workers as State public servants.[li]

Greater government candour about the difficulties faced in delivering youth worker programs on the APY Lands has accompanied these changes.

In mid March 2009, the South Australian Government reported that:

  • inconsistent “supervision and support” at the community level had “contributed to inconsistent program delivery”,
  • the retention of youth workers had “proved difficult”,
  • youth workers would be “engaged on a casual basis” in 2009/10, and
  • the Department for Families and Communities was planning to “trial the management of a small-scale youth recreational program” out of APY Family Centres as a way of introducing “an increased level of management and accountability” and providing youth workers “with daily supervision and additional support”.[lii]

Despite these efforts, six months later, in September 2009, the Government reported that:

difficulties in recruiting youth workers has resulted in a reduction in the number of youth sheds operating … on a regular basis.[liii]

The Paper Tracker understands that as of the end of January 2010, five of the youth sheds on the APY Lands were opening more regularly but that some of the youth worker positions had not been filled.

Departmental advice (2010)

On 21 April 2010, the Paper Tracker asked the Department for Families and Communities for some detailed information on the delivery of youth programs on the APY Lands.[liv]

Click here to read a copy of our request (file size: 260KB)

In a reply dated 16 July 2010, the Department advised that:

  • youth sheds and youth services have been established in six APY communities (namely Amata, Kalka, Kaltjiti, Mimili, Pipalyatjara and Pukatja);
  • local Anangu are employed “as youth shed workers on a part time basis,”
  • “recruiting and retaining local Anangu in the youth worker positions has been an ongoing challenge for the Department,”
  • the youth sheds “are not purpose built [facilities] but converted for use from existing, unused community buildings,”
  • the opening times for the sheds are not fixed, and
  • the Department aims to have the sheds “open during Friday and Saturday evenings, and on weekends.”[lv]

The Department noted that sometimes the youth sheds are not open because:

  • “workers are not available to staff them and supervise activities”,
  • other community and cultural activities have precedence, and
  • “on occasion, break-ins and/or vandalism” render the sheds “unsafe or unstable.”[lvi]

The Department also noted that it was continuing discussions with Iwantja Community Council about the possibility of establishing a youth shed in that community.[lvii]

Click here to read a copy of the Department’s full advice (file size: 387KB)

In mid November 2010, the Paper Tracker asked the State Department for Families and Communities for an update on the operations of youth sheds in APY communities.[lviii]

In reply, the Department advised the Paper Tracker that:

  • the Amata youth shed had been closed for eight months – from April to December 2010 – “due to [a] lack of suitably trained staff to supervise” activities,
  • “a dedicated Youth Program Officer for Amata community” had recently been appointed, and
  • the Officer had moved into the community on 6 December 2010 and re-opened the youth shed.[lix]

As of 13 December 2010, youth sheds were operating in Amata, Mimili, Pipalyatjara and Pukatja but were closed in Kalka and Kaltjiti.[lx] The Department noted that:

  • the Kalka youth shed was closed “due to a recent severe episode of vandalism” that had “caused significant damage to the structure” of the building,
  • “almost all of the equipment” that had been in the youth shed had been “broken and is now unusable,”
  • the local community had “been advised of the temporary closure and the reasons for this,”
  • while the Kalka shed was closed, young people from that community would be transported to Pipalyatjara “when they wish to access the youth shed there,”
  • the Kaltjiti youth shed was not operating due to a lack of staff,
  • the Department was “looking at options for providing a program in this community,” and
  • the NPY Women’s Council would deliver a two-week school holiday program in Kaltjiti in December 2010/January 2011.[lxi]

The Paper Tracker understands that the Kaltjiti and Kalka youth sheds reopened in April and June 2011, respectively.[lxii]

Departmental advice (2011)

On 25 February 2011, the South Australian Department for Families and Communities advised a State Parliamentary Committee that:

  • more than $1.8 million had been expended “on the APY youth program” during the 2007-08 financial year; and
  • the budget for this program for the 2011-12 financial year is $1,532,980.[lxiii]

The Department added:

The higher expenditure in 2007-08 [was] associated with the involvement of older youth in a specific, diversionary event.[lxiv]

Anangu youth workers’ newsletter (updated 10 August 2011)

From December 2005 onwards, the “developing skills and knowledge” of APY youth workers were highlighted in a series of newsletters. As well as documenting the youth workers’ achievements, the Yangupala Kungkawara! newsletter promoted “positive images of young people” across the APY Lands.[lxv]

In all, nineteen issues of the Yangupala Kungkawara! newsletter were published. The final issue was released in August 2011.[lxvi]

Copies of each issue of Yangupala Kungkawara! are available online

This article has been archived and will no longer be updated. It will, however, remain accessible online as a source of background information for anyone wishing to undertake further research on this issue. Information included in the article was current at the time it was archived. Keep in mind, however, that Ministerial changes and names of departments, among other things, may have since changed.


[i] See: Mazel, J. 11 November 2004, Statement to Coroner, paragraphs 73 and 75 (Exhibit C10). Also: Department of the Premier and Cabinet, 2004. “Taskforce funded projects on the APY Lands,” document tabled at a public meeting of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia, on 1 December 2004. For information on the decision to continuing funding these and other programs after the initial five year period click here.

[ii] See, for example, Gillick, V (NPY Women’s Council). Statement to Coroner, p9 (Exhibit C13. Also: Paddy, M (Pitjantjatjara Homelands Council Inc). 11 May 2005. Letter and attachments presented to the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia, during its visit to Kalka community. See also: Parliament of South Australia. Also: Ngaanyatjara Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women’s Council. 4 November 2005, “Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee, Parliament of Australia, Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities,” Submission 15, p5. Also: Charles, C. 16 May 2006. Transcript of evidence presented to Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee’s Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities, p24. Also: Reynolds, K. 16 May 2006, Transcript of evidence presented to Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee’s Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities, p67-69.

[iii] Government of South Australia. September 2009, Department for Families and Communities: Annual Report 2008-09, p67.

[iv] See, for example: William, J. 25 June 1986, “Inter-departmental committee petrol sniffing policy paper,” Government of South Australia, p1-2. Also: Abbott, R. 8 November 1979, Hansard, House of Assembly, Parliament of South Australia, p881-882; and Edwards, B. 2001, “Facing the real problems: substance abuse in Aboriginal communities,” unpublished paper.

[v] For example, in 1985 the Federal Government provided over $80,000 to combat petrol sniffing in Mimili, Pukatja and Pipalyatjara through the provision of “extra-curricular programs” for children and youth (see: Parson, B. 6 April 1985, “Petrol Sniffing Targeted,” The Advertiser).

[vi] William, J. 25 June 1986, “Inter-departmental committee petrol sniffing policy paper,” Government of South Australia, p3.

[vii] William, J. 25 June 1986, “Inter-departmental committee petrol sniffing policy paper,” Government of South Australia, p3.

[viii] William, J. 25 June 1986, “Inter-departmental committee petrol sniffing policy paper,” Government of South Australia, Attachment 1, p1.

[ix] William, J. 25 June 1986, “Inter-departmental committee petrol sniffing policy paper,” Government of South Australia, Attachment 1, p1.

[x] Tilbrook, K. 10 July 1986, “Funds call to combat petrol sniffing,” The Advertiser.

[xi] See: Chivell, C. 6 September 2002, Findings of Inquest into the death of Kunmanara Thompson, Section 10.5.

[xii] Chivell, C. 6 September 2002, Findings of Inquest into the death of Kunmanara Thompson, Section 9.17.

[xiii] Chivell, C. 6 September 2002, Findings of Inquest into the death of Kunmanara Thompson, Section 10.13.

[xiv] Chivell, C. 6 September 2002, Findings of Inquest into the death of Kunmanara Thompson, Section 13.8.1.

[xv] Department for Families and Communities. 4 May 2005. “Review and Program Audit of the Youth Development Program on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara Lands,” p8-10.

[xvi] Department for Families and Communities. 4 May 2005. “Review and Program Audit of the Youth Development Program on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara Lands,” p5-10. Note: in some communities, a number of people shared the position. For example, four people were appointed to job-share the youth worker position in Kalka.

[xvii] This training was provided by a non-government training provider (Relationships Australia). See: Dixon, B. 17 November 2004. Statement to Coroner, p13 (Exhibit C9).

[xviii] Mazel, J. 11 November 2004, Statement to Coroner, paragraph 73 (Exhibit C10).

[xix] See: Mazel, J. 11 November 2004, Statement to Coroner, paragraphs 73 and 75 (Exhibit C10). Also: Department of the Premier and Cabinet, 2004. “Taskforce funded projects on the APY Lands,” document tabled at a public meeting of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia, on 1 December 2004.

[xx] See: Mazel, J. 11 November 2004, Statement to Coroner, paragraphs 73 and 75 (Exhibit C10). Also: Department of the Premier and Cabinet, 2004. “Taskforce funded projects on the APY Lands,” document tabled at a public meeting of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia, on 1 December 2004.

[xxi] Mazel, J. 11 November 2004, Statement to Coroner, paragraphs 23 and 24 (Exhibit C10). It appears this advice was not completely accurate as no youth worker was employed in Amata at that time (Department for Families and Communities. 4 May 2005. “Review and Program Audit of the Youth Development Program on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara Lands,” p9).

[xxii] Kay, P. November 2004, Transcript of evidence given at Coronial Inquiry, p685. See also: Mazel, J. 24 November 2004, Transcript of evidence given at Coronial Inquiry, p191.

[xxiii] Gillick, V (NPY Women’s Council). Statement to Coroner, p9 (Exhibit C13).

[xxiv] Chivell, W. 14 March 2005. Findings of inquests into the deaths of Kunmanara Ward, Kunmanara Ken, Kunmanara Ryan and Kunmanara Cooper, Executive Summary, Point 29.

[xxv] Chivell, W. 14 March 2005. Findings of inquests into the deaths of Kunmanara Ward, Kunmanara Ken, Kunmanara Ryan and Kunmanara Cooper, Section 13.4, Recommendation 12.

[xxvi] Mazel, J. 31 May 2005, Letter to Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia, p3 and Attachment G.

[xxvii] Department for Families and Communities. 4 May 2005. “Review and Program Audit of the Youth Development Program on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara Lands,” p2.

[xxviii] Department for Families and Communities. 4 May 2005. “Review and Program Audit of the Youth Development Program on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara Lands,” p2.

[xxix] Department for Families and Communities. 4 May 2005. “Review and Program Audit of the Youth Development Program on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara Lands,” p2-3.

[xxx] Mazel, J. 31 May 2005, Letter to Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia, p3-4.

[xxxi] For an account of this visit see: Parliament of South Australia. 2005, Annual Report of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee 2004/2005, PP235, p30-46.

[xxxii] Paddy, M (Pitjantjatjara Homelands Council Inc). 11 May 2005. Letter and attachments presented to the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia, during its visit to Kalka community. See also: Parliament of South Australia. 2005, Annual Report of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee 2004/2005, PP235, p35.

[xxxiii] Parliament of South Australia. 2005, Annual Report of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee 2004/2005, PP235, p35.

[xxxiv] Parliament of South Australia. 2005, Annual Report of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee 2004/2005, PP235, p42.

[xxxv] For example, in December 2005, the South Australian Government reported that youth workers were now employed in six of the seven communities and that it was assisting the community without a youth worker – Kaltjiti – in its recruitment efforts. The Government also reported that a “youth coordinator” provided “daily support and on-the-job training to the community youth workers” (Department of the Premier and Cabinet (SA), December 2005, “Progress on the APY Lands,” report, p2).

[xxxvi] The delivery of this accredited training commenced in May 2004 (See: Dixon, B. 17 November 2004. Statement to Coroner, p13 (Exhibit C9).) See also: Vardon, S (DFC).  20 October 2006. Letter and attachments provided to the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, Parliament of South Australia.

[xxxvii] Department of the Premier and Cabinet (SA), August 2006, “Progress on the APY Lands,” report, p3.

[xxxviii] Department of the Premier and Cabinet (SA), October 2008, “Progress on the Lands: Update on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands,” report, p7

[xxxix] See: Government of South Australia, February 2006, “Submission from the Government of South Australia to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee Inquiry into Petrol Sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities,” Submission 29A, p1. Also: Weatherll, J. 26 February 2008, “Dramatic decrease in petrol sniffing on the APY Lands,” News Release.

[xl] Weatherll, J. 26 February 2008, “Dramatic decrease in petrol sniffing on the APY Lands,” News Release.

[xli] Lockwood, D (Relationships Australia SA). 8 August 2011. Email to J. Nicholls.

[xlii] On 8 August 2011, Relationships Australia (SA) advised the Paper Tracker  that “funding for accredited youth worker training” – delivered by the organisation – had “ended in July 2011. However, [Relationships Australia (SA)] are using under spent funds [from the State Department of Families and Communities] to continue providing limited accredited youth worker training until December 2011.  The training will be delivered in Pukatja, Mimili and Amata only, as [Relationships Australia (SA)] is funded to visit these communities through a separate [federally] funded parenting program.” (Lockwood, D. 8 August 2011. Email to J. Nicholls).

[xliii] Mullighan, E. April 2008, Children on Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands: Commission of Inquiry – a report into sexual abuse, p125-p131.

[xliv] Mullighan, E. April 2008, Children on Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands: Commission of Inquiry – a report into sexual abuse, p101 & p129.

[xlv] Mullighan, E. April 2008, Children on Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands: Commission of Inquiry – a report into sexual abuse, p131.

[xlvi] Government of South Australia, July 2008, “Response by the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation to the ‘Children on Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands Commission of Inquiry: A report into sexual abuse’,” [p4]

[xlvii] Ngaanyatjara Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women’s Council. 4 November 2005, “Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee, Parliament of Australia, Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities,” Submission 15, p5.

[xlviii] Charles, C. 16 May 2006. Transcript of evidence presented to Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee’s Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities, p24. See also: Reynolds, K. 16 May 2006, Transcript of evidence presented to Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee’s Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities, p67-69.

[xlix] Senate Community Affairs Committee. June 2006, Beyond petrol sniffing: renewing hope for Indigenous communities, report of the Inquiry into petrol sniffing in remote Aboriginal communities, Parliament of Australia, pxx (Recommendation 14).

[l] Department of the Premier and Cabinet (SA), August 2006, “Progress on the APY Lands,” report, p2.

[li] Government of South Australia. August 2008. Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Committee’s Inquiry into petrol sniffing and substance abuse in Central Australia, p10. Also: Government of South Australia. March 2009, “Senate Select Committee on Regional and Remote Indigenous Communities, SA Government Response to Questions on Notice,” p2-3.

[lii] Government of South Australia. March 2009, “Senate Select Committee on Regional and Remote Indigenous Communities, SA Government Response to Questions on Notice,” p2-3.

[liii] Government of South Australia. September 2009, Department for Families and Communities: Annual Report 2008-09, p67.

[liv] McDonald, P. 21 April 2010. Letter to J. Mazel (DFC).

[lv] Mazel, J (DFC). 16 July 2010. Letter to Rev P. McDonald.

[lvi] Mazel, J (DFC). 16 July 2010. Letter to Rev P. McDonald.

[lvii] Mazel, J (DFC). 16 July 2010. Letter to Rev P. McDonald.

[lviii] Nicholls, J. 16 November 2010. Email to D. Schomburgk (DFC). Also: Nicholls, J. 19 November 2010. Email to D. Schomburgk (DFC).

[lix] Schomburgk, D (DFC). 18 November 2010. Email to J. Nicholls. Also: Schomburgk, D (DFC). 13 December 2010. Email to J. Nicholls.

[lx] Schomburgk, D (DFC). 13 December 2010. Email to J. Nicholls.

[lxi] Schomburgk, D (DFC). 13 December 2010. Email to J. Nicholls.

[lxii] Government of South Australia. July 2011. Yangupala Kungkawara! Issue 19, pages 2 and 13.

[lxiii] The exact amount expended in 2007-08 was $1,819,087 (see: Mazel, J (DFC). 25 February 2011. “Minute forming Enclosure to the Hon R Lucas MLC, Chairperson, Legislative Council – Budget and Finance Committee”, p19-20).

[lxiv] Mazel, J (DFC). 25 February 2011. “Minute forming Enclosure to the Hon R Lucas MLC, Chairperson, Legislative Council – Budget and Finance Committee”, p20.

[lxv] Australian Institute of Social Relations. 2010, “Yangupala Kungkawara!”, webpage. Available at: http://socialrelations.edu.au/Institute/MenuBar/ResearchResources/APYNewsletter.aspx. Accessed 8 August 2011.

[lxvi] Australian Institute of Social Relations. 2010, “Yangupala Kungkawara!”, webpage. Available at: http://socialrelations.edu.au/Institute/MenuBar/ResearchResources/APYNewsletter.aspx. Accessed 8 August 2011.  See also: Weston, M (Relationships Australia SA). 4 August 2011. Email to J. Nicholls.

The Paper Tracker works hard to provide accurate and up-to-date information. We will correct any inaccurate information as soon as it is brought to our attention. Please contact us if you have additional information or can provide us with an update.