
Racism is pervasive in Australia. There are numerous and repeated surveys of the Australian population that identify that around 40-50% of Aboriginal people have experienced racism and for the broader community, that is around 30%.
Our societies have long used a system of laws to govern what is considered to be acceptable conduct. This is true for all societies from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Lore to the first laws in Europe, the origin of Australian law today. Laws can powerfully shift the behaviour of populations, for example with rapid changes to our behaviour during the first COVID-19 outbreaks, and much slower in tobacco control, taking place over a more than 50-year period.
There are various laws at the state, federal and international level that require non-discriminatory behaviour in all aspects of society. These are for example the Australian Racial Discrimination Act 1975, and the South Australian Equal Opportunity Act 1984. While these laws are critical, they are limited by being effective only in the extent that people are aware the laws exist, people have a degree of voluntary compliance with the law and for those that don’t comply, a system of enforcement. It is apparent in the experience of racism statistics alone that while these laws are necessary, they are not sufficient to reduce or eliminate racism.
Racism can be thought about in three dimensions: institutional (or systematic), interpersonal and internalised. In tackling racism, we need to think about each of these dimensions of racism, using the right tools to deal with each level. I suggest institutional racism is the most significant while also being the most difficult to reverse. Institutional racism is embedded in institutions. Most of us cannot see this racism and further it is accepted as “normal” from the dominant cultural narrative. This form of racism ensures that the dominant culture will be advantaged over others with less power, keeping relative disadvantage in status quo.
In being harder to identify, institutional racism is therefore harder to limit through enforcement of the legislation. In a review of the Racial Discrimination Act, a critical point made by Thornton is that the Racial Discrimination Act works through a complaints-based model regarding an act of racial discrimination. This is in contrast to the legislation being able to stop the subtle actions of many which sustain institutional racism and for which an act of racism is difficult to identify (see Forty years of the Racial Discrimination Act | Australian Human Rights Commission).
So what can we do about this? The SA Anti-racism strategy takes steps to plug the gaps that the legislation cannot, by its nature, fill. Knowledge about all levels of racism and understanding of our duty to provide a safe public sector and services to the community is the first step to voluntary compliance with the laws. The strategy also calls out the need for training in how to call out interpersonal racism where we see it, creating a culture of safety for everyone. It is further important that people who experience racism have a fair reporting process which includes those with lived experience of racism assessing the complaint and an understanding of all levels of racism. This is critical to enforcement of the legislation.
Importantly with institutional racism, the strategy outlines a range of policies, particularly related to human resources management, which will start to tackle bias in recruitment and management of staff. The innovative “racism critical appraisal tool” looks to develop a tool for use by Policy experts and leadership to identify signs of institutional racism in a systematic way across government. As a new approach this will need careful development and ongoing evaluation to ensure it is effective.
There are some other positive signs about shifts in society’s expectation of acceptable behaviour. The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency has set some clear rules that govern how health institutions and people within them should work, through the recently strengthened National Law. These clear rules can be enforced, sending a clear message to those who chose not to comply that it is an obligation, not a choice (see here for a recent example Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency - Doctor banned for discriminatory and offensive behaviour (ahpra.gov.au)).
Racial discrimination laws are not enough. Examining our institutions with a clear focus on identifying signs of racism is a priority, and building the evidence base for how to do this and how to make the system anti-racist is a challenge for us all.
Comments