Chapter 2Current data
2.1On 28 June 2022, the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) aired an episode of The Feed program that examined the over-representation of First Nations women in Australia’s missing persons statistics (Figure 2.1).
Figure 2.1Missing persons in Australia, First Nations women
Source: SBS, 'Vanished', The Feed, 28 June 2022.
2.2Nearly four months later, on 24 October 2022, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) Four Corners program broadcast a similar episode, which examined the cases of three murdered First Nations women.
2.3Both the SBS and ABC highlighted an issue critical to this inquiry: the number of missing and murdered First Nations women and children in Australia.
2.4This chapter examines the key data, whether it accurately portrays the number of missing and murdered First Nations women and children in Australia, anddata improvement initiatives.
2.5While this data is essential to understanding the extent and prevalence of missing and murdered First Nations women and children, it cannot be considered in the abstract. As expressed by Ms Christine Robinson, Chief Executive Officer of the Wirringa Baiya Aboriginal Women’s Legal Centre:
…we [must] treat this issue with the dignity, respect and understanding that we are talking about individuals who have been mothers, daughters, sisters, aunts, nans, friends and colleagues. They are people and they should be treated and remembered as humans and people who played a significant part in different people's lives.
[My sister] was only 32 years old when she died.She was a proud Nyoongar woman, her totem was the bindi bindi, the butterfly. She was bright and beautiful, fun and caring, artistic and brave, strong and honest, she was one of the people closest to me in this whole entire world.
Key data and their source
2.6In Australia, the key data relevant to this inquiry is collected by state and territory governments, and used by data collection agencies. There is a wide range of data sources, the two most relevant being the Missing Persons data and the National Homicide Monitoring Program (NHMP).
Missing Persons data
2.7The Missing Persons data is collected by the states and territories, and coordinated by the National Missing Persons Coordination Centre (theNMPCC, anon‑operational arm of the Australian Federal Police (AFP)).
2.8The AFP advised that ‘it is difficult to determine accurate figures of missing First Nations women and children due to data collection inconsistencies across state and territory jurisdictions’.
2.9Mr Jason Kennedy, Commander Professional Standards at the AFP, explained that each jurisdiction has its own reporting systems, inconsistent procedures and unsearchable manual case file notes:
…in mid-2018 there was one agency that began only placing those missing more than seven days on their database; therefore, their 2018 data is not an accurate reflection of those reported missing in 2018...The way data was extracted in 2021 by one agency was different from what was undertaken in previous years…Another good example is one agency utilised one report per child to record and manage children in care that repeatedly go missing from their placement. The number of missing juveniles incidents is, therefore, significantly greater than the reports. One particular child had one report on the system but had gone missing on 80 occasions. Some agencies would report it as 80 and some agencies would report it as one.
2.10The National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) and the Attorney‑General’s Department (AGD) agreed that the Missing Persons data is of variable quality, with only four jurisdictions collecting data on Indigenous status prior to 2021 (Figure 2.2).
Figure 2.2Number of missing First Nations women and children by state/territory, 2019–2021
Source: AFP, answers to questions on notice, 29 September 2022 (received 21 October 2022), p. [3].
2.11Mr Scott Lee, Assistant Commissioner Specialist Protective Command at the AFP, said that ‘there are some challenges for [the AFP] in terms of how we collate that [inconsistent] data’. However, he noted the Police Consultative Group on Missing Persons, a forum that can facilitate data standardisation:
…we can look at the standardisation of the data and share experiences about what works and what is the most effective way for us to collect the data to make sure that we've got the best evidence base we can to inform some of this decision-making nationally. That's a really key forum for us, noting that there are still some challenges in terms of how we do that, and that's still very much an evolving space.
First Nations women and children in the Missing Persons data
2.12Submitters and witnesses also commented on the Missing Persons data. Rather than noting data inconsistencies, their arguments focussed on the high and disproportionate number of First Nations women and children captured in the data.
2.13Dr Amy McQuire, Sisters Inside and the Institute for Collaborative Race Research advised that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are more likely to go missing and less likely to be found: ‘20 per cent of currently missing women in Australia are Aboriginal women’.
2.14The Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service submitted that First Nations children and youth are over-represented in the out-of-home care system (approximately one in 18) and are ‘markedly overrepresented in reports of missing children. These children make up 53% of missing children reports’.
2.15The Commissioner for Children and Young People (WA), Ms Jacqueline McGowan-Jones, said that, in Western Australia, First Nations children go missing for two reasons: there is no real commitment to finding them or ‘they've crossed borders and they're in out-of-home care, and one jurisdiction now doesn't know where they are’:
I recently met with Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women's Council about the children who are missing across the tri-state region, because that's a cultural block. The state and territory borders don't mean anything to that cultural block of families. So, if a child is at risk and an open case with child protection in Western Australia, and they go to South Australia, which might only be 100 kilometres across the border, the case might be closed, or they don't know the child's gone. What worries me about that is we make an assumption that they're with family, but that's not always the case and these children are at risk. They're in South Australia and then they go to the Northern Territory, and then South Australia closes the case. Yet the child is at risk. Again, we make assumptions that they've gone with family, and for most of them that is true. But children are missing from Balgo, Derby, across the Kimberley, across the Pilbara and across the tri‑state area and have been for over 30 or 40 years.
2.16Ms Anne Lenton, Director of Legal Services at Djirra, argued that there must be broader consideration of the cross-jurisdictional issues:
This includes when children disappear in circumstances where child protection has been previously involved, or where there's been significant family violence, but this information is only known by one state. Forexample, in our work we see people who use violence across the border to avoid service for warrants of arrest, with services having an apathetic response of, essentially: 'It's across the river. It's not my problem'.
2.17Victoria’s Commission for Children and Young People (CCYP) submitted that no-one really knows the full extent of the problem:
While Aboriginal children are over-represented in out of home care overall, the rate at which they are reported absent or missing from residential care is lower than for non-Aboriginal children. This gives rise to concerns that Aboriginal children going missing is under-reported.
2.18Ms Meena Singh, Commissioner for Aboriginal Children and Young People at the CCYP (Victoria), noted that most children are placed in unsupported kinship care arrangements but some of the most disturbing experiences arise from children being placed in residential care:
We see children and young people being exploited for sexual purposes by adults when they are away from these placements, and often this exploitation is for money or for drugs. They are exploited because they are vulnerable. They have significant unaddressed trauma, and they are looking for ways often to forget about their life experiences. In these experiences of sexual exploitation and also criminal exploitation, we see children and young people let down by systems and by adults in every way imaginable.
2.19The Queensland Family & Child Commission argued there are several system inadequacies when a child goes missing from out-of-home care, particularly in the areas of practice consistency, and data collection and sharing.
2.20Ms Seranie Gamble from the Department of Territory Families, Housing and Communities (NT) provided information about one department’s data system (the ‘care system’), which is separate but connected to other systems:
Across government there are different systems. If a child comes under the attention of the department, the care system captures that through a notification…The purpose of the care system is to try to have a system that can connect to the other systems across government so that if there was a need for an investigation into concerns raised about a child, there's a more streamlined way to access that information across those government systems, like through police databases, depending on what the issue is, tomake it a more efficient investigation or check on what's needed to check on the wellbeing of that child. That system has been enhanced to be able to do that more effectively.
2.21Ms Gamble noted that a significant amount of domestic, family and sexual violence (DFSV) data is not captured by the care system, as it involves people who might not be in that system and comprises data held by non-government agencies:
The non-government sector provides a significant amount of services and supports for victims-survivors. The alignment of the data capability outside of government isn't necessarily linked to the data systems that government holds. There are some—for example crisis accommodation and women's safe houses—that do align to a national reporting database about the types of people entering those services and accessing those services.
Quality Missing Persons data
2.22The AFP referenced the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) report titled Missing persons: who is at risk?. This report recognised the need for quality data to better inform national and jurisdictional trend data on missing persons:
Data quality relates to the comparability of data currently collected, specifically data definitions and jurisdictional variation in the range of data items recorded in different police systems. The NMPCC use a data collection form to collate rudimentary data on missing persons from state and territory police. Data collected for this study using the NMPCC form demonstrated some of the inconsistencies in the data recorded by state and territory police, which affected compilation of trend data and, critically, national data on key variables. It also affected the capacity for police services to provide different aggregations of data depending on the analysis required.
2.23The AFP noted that, following publication of the AIC report, a Missing Persons Minimum Dataset, including demographic information on the missing person, was developed by the NMPCC in conjunction with the Police Consultative Group on Missing Persons and the AIC.
2.24In addition to data quality, the NIAA and the AGD argued that there is ‘a strong need for research in the missing persons sector, with only a handful of research reports dedicated to the issue in Australia’. They noted the importance of this research to understand why people go missing, which enables the identification of preventative strategies and coordinated approaches, to reduce the incidence and impact of missing persons.
National Homicide Monitoring Program
2.25The NHMP collects data from state and territory police, as well as coronial records (autopsy, toxicology and coronial findings), which are reposited in the National Coronial Information System (NCIS). The program is coordinated by the AIC.
2.26The NHMP has data for murdered First Nations women and children from 1989–1990 to 2022–2023. Over this period, 476 women were recorded as victims of homicide (murder and manslaughter) and 158 children were recorded as victims of homicide (murder, manslaughter and infanticide).
2.27To place this data in context, First Nations women represented 16 per cent of all Australian women homicide victims (Figure 2.3), despite comprising between two to three per cent of the adult female population. Similarly, First Nations children represented 13 per cent of all child homicide victims.
Figure 2.3Number of female victims of homicide by Indigenous status, 1989–1990 to 2019–2020
Source: AIC, answers to questions on notice, 5 October 2022 (received 18 November 2022), pp. 27–28 and 33–34.
2.28The AIC noted that, from 2005–2006 to 2022–2023, First Nations women consistently experienced higher rates of murder than their non-Indigenous counterparts (three to 13 times higher). Similarly, the rates of murder were higher for First Nations children, compared with non-Indigenous children (onaverage three times higher).
2.29The AIC also advised that the rate of child homicide in Australia decreased by 53 per cent between 1989–90 to 2022–23. However, the rate for First Nations children varied greatly between from 2005–06 to 2022–23 and was higher most years compared to non‑Indigenous children.
2.30Change the Record and Djirra submitted that this disproportionate representation of First Nations women and children in the data, together with the policies, legislation and practices introduced at colonisation, should be recognised as genocide under Article II of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
2.31Dr Francesca Dominello, Scientia Associate Professor Kyllie Cripps and MsMaia Brauner commented that Australia’s denial of genocide ‘torments’ First Nations people and contrasts with Canada’s acceptance of its genocidal foundations:
Considering the similarity in the pattern of structural violence experienced by First Nations people in Australia, it is our submission that the finding of genocide in Canada makes it imperative to re-investigate the question of genocide in Australia…The National Inquiry in Canada has devised a model for understanding genocide which is in line with the Convention and attuned to Indigenous perspectives, particularly with respect to the gendered violence faced by Indigenous women and girls. We submit that this understanding be adopted as a starting point in understanding the violence First Nations women and children face in Australia. To continue to rely on Australian normative understandings of genocide is in violation of Australia’s international obligations under the Convention to prevent genocide. By adhering to these norms, the genocide of First Nations people continues to be sanctioned by Australian laws and policies.
2.32The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) referenced data from the National Mortality Database (2018–2022) to show that remote areas and socioeconomic groups affect the rate of homicide deaths for First Nations females, including in comparison to non-Indigenous females:
Indigenous females accounted for 6% of homicide deaths in Major cities (14of 249 deaths), compared with 27% of deaths in regional and remote areas (29 of 109 deaths) (excluding deaths where Indigenous status was unknown).
In Major cities, the rate of homicide deaths among Indigenous females was 3.3 times as high as for non-Indigenous females (1.7 compared with 0.5 per 100,000 population), while in regional and remote areas, the rate was 4.5 times as high (2.2 compared with 0.5 per 100,000 population) (based on crude rates).
2.33In relation to socioeconomic groups, the rate of deaths due to homicide was lower among those living in the highest socioeconomic areas, for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous females:
Indigenous females accounted for 4% of total female homicide deaths among those living in the middle and 2 highest socioeconomic quintiles combined (8 of 184 deaths), 15% of homicide deaths those living in the second lowest socioeconomic quintile (11 of 72 deaths), and 24% of homicide
deaths in the lowest quintile (24 of 102). The rate of homicide deaths among Indigenous females ranged between 2.3 and 4.3 times as high as for non-Indigenous females across socioeconomic groups.
Specific comment on the Northern Territory
2.34The NCIS provided data on reportable deaths for First Nations women and children, for the period 1 July 2000 to 31 December 2019. Nationally, 309 women and children died from assault (Figure 2.4), with the Northern Territory recording the highest number of assault-related deaths for women (88).
Figure 2.4Number of assault-related deaths of women and children by Indigenous status and state/territory, 2000–2019
| | | | | | | | | |
|
Children | <4 | 16 | 10 | 21 | <4 | 0 | <4 | 15 | 66 |
Women | 0 | 34 | 88 | 45 | 13 | 0 | <4 | 61 | 243 |
|
Children | 4 | 145 | <4 | 93 | 27 | 10 | 65 | 49 | 396 |
Women | 17 | 372 | 10 | 194 | 61 | 32 | 274 | 127 | 1087 |
Source: NCIS, answers to questions on notice, 29 September 2022 (received 4 October 2022), Tables 3–6.
2.35Similarly, according to the NHMP, from 1989–1990 to 2022–2023, the Northern Territory recorded the highest number of First Nations women victims of homicide (147), followed next by Western Australia (123) and Queensland (114).
2.36The Northern Territory Women’s Legal Services (NTWLS) submitted:
30% of [murdered First Nations women] were recorded in the NT. In the same time period, 84% of all adult victims of murder in the NT were First Nations women, the highest percentage of any jurisdiction. Tragically, 76% of all children victims of murder in the NT in the same period were First Nations children; again, the largest proportion of any jurisdiction.
2.37Several submitters and witnesses commented on the high and disproportionate level of DFSV in the Territory. The Office of the Children’s Commissioner, Northern Territory noted that the rate is 18 times higher than in other jurisdictions. Further:
In the Northern Territory, 91% of sexual assault victims are Aboriginal women and girls, with 51% of these victims under 19 years of age. This aligns with the proportion of victims of DFSV who are Aboriginal, which was 89%. Of those victims of DFSV, Aboriginal women are 40 times more likely than non-Aboriginal women to be hospitalised for family-violence related assaults. In total, the rate of sexual assaults in the Northern Territory is almost 50% higher than the next highest jurisdiction.
2.38The North Australian Aboriginal Family Legal Service (NAAFLS) stated:
There were 5,733 victims of DFSV in the Northern Territory in 2021–the number has grown by more than 2,000 in three years. On a typical day in the Northern Territory there are 61 domestic violence incidents. Close to 90% of victims of DFSV related assaults in the Northern Territory are Aboriginal. This is despite the Aboriginal population making up only 27% of the total Northern Territory population.
2.39Ms Gamble from the Department of Territory Families, Housing and Communities (NT) advised that, since 2000, 94 Aboriginal women have been killed in the Territory as a result of domestic and family violence:
The domestic and family violence related homicide rate in the Northern Territory is seven times higher than the national average. The domestic and family violence related assault rate in the Northern Territory is four times higher than the national average. The sexual assault rate in the Northern Territory is 1.2 times higher than the national average.
2.40According to the Central Australian Aboriginal Congress, Alice Springs has some of the highest rates of family violence in the country:
In 2013, Aboriginal women were 3.6 times more likely to experience domestic-related assaults in Alice Springs than the rest of the NT. In 2007, prior to the introduction of the first significant alcohol supply measures, Alice Springs surgeon [redacted] went public with findings that suggested Alice Springs was the ‘stabbing capital of the world’: over a seven-year period (1998 to 2005) there were 1,550 stabbing injury admissions to Alice Springs Hospital, more than 200 a year, or more than one stabbing every two days. Just over half of the victims were women.
2.41Some submitters commented on the number of First Nations women killed due to intimate partner violence (IPV). Australian Lawyers for Human Rights submitted, for example:
According to the [AIC’s NHMP], during 2012-14, two in five Indigenous homicide victims were killed by a current or previous partner, compared with one in five non-Indigenous homicide victims…Over three-quarters of all female Indigenous victims compared with almost two-thirds of all female non-Indigenous victims were victims of domestic or family homicides. Data from the NHMP 1989–90 to 2011–12, also suggested that Indigenous women were less likely to be killed by a stranger than non-Indigenous women.
2.42The Victorian Aboriginal Child Care Agency and Domestic Violence NSW highlighted that more First Nations women are killed by IPV, compared to non‑Indigenous women. The latter submitted that, from 2000–2019, First Nations women accounted for 14 per cent of women killed by IPV in NSW, while comprising only 2.9 per cent of the state’s population.
Comment from the Commonwealth government and AIC
2.43The NIAA and the AGD described the NHMP as ‘Australia’s only national system with the capacity to monitor homicide incidents, victims and offenders and facilitate detailed analysis of homicide types and trends’.
2.44Dr Rick Brown, Deputy Director of the AIC, said that the data in the NHMP is probably ‘pretty good’ where there is a known homicide incident. However, it becomes more complicated where there is a ‘missing’ murder case:
It does vary from state to state as to whether it'd be classified and included [as a homicide]…South Australia is the only [jurisdiction] that would provide data on cases of 'missing' and would classify them as homicides in the data…[T]he South Australian perspective is purely because there is legislation that requires that classification of 'missing and presumed murdered'…[T]hat legislative requirement doesn't exist anywhere else…[Elsewhere] really doesn’t pick up those cases of individuals that are missing—maybe long-term missing—and murdered but don't make their way into the collection.
2.45The NIAA and the AGD foreshadowed the release of a new intimate partner homicide dashboard:
The dashboard will provide accurate, verified and closer to real-time data with cumulative, quarterly updates on incidents of intimate partner homicide. This will allow police, governments and policymakers a better understanding of the scale and detail of violence and drive action to end gender-based violence.
2.46On 26 June 2024, the Commonwealth government announced the release of the dashboard, which states that, from 1 July 1989 to 31 March 2024, there have been 1700 female victims of intimate partner homicide.
Data – the complete picture
2.47Ms Dixie Link-Gordon, Program Coordinator with the NSW Aboriginal Women’s Advisory Network, provided a personal illustration of how official information can be incorrectly recorded and misleading:
I grew up with the oral story of my own grandmother repeatedly telling me, 'Never let a man hit you. My father killed my mother.’ My sister went back and did our history and looked at our records. She said, `Oh, no. Great gran died having a baby.' She didn't. What do I believe—what has been written by the hospital or my grandmother's story of her? I know what I believe. Ithink it has to change. How our abuse is recorded has to change…That whole narrative of how our stories are written as Aboriginal women has to change. It will start with us and our truth telling.
2.48Many submitters and witnesses raised concerns about what is not shown in the Missing Persons data and the NHMP. Thissection of the report outlines two issues: under-reporting of First Nations status and the barriers to reporting.
Under-reporting of First Nations status
2.49The Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service commented on inconsistencies in the Missing Persons data, with its submission highlighting the non-recording of Indigenous status as a common concern:
Data across the jurisdictions is inconsistent. Rates of missing peoples differ across states and territories and there is no singular qualified source of data available that provides a true representation of the number of First Nations women and children who are missing or murdered. Further, only some jurisdictions record whether a missing person is Indigenous. In Victoria, 71% of people missing are listed as ‘unknown Indigenous status’. There are also no consistent data records on First Nations children who go missing from out-of-home care.
2.50Ms McGowan-Jones stated that Aboriginality is ‘hugely under-recorded’ for two reasons: people are ‘not shown how to ask that question in a way that is likely to get a response’, and ‘many of our people will not identify because of racism’.
2.51Dr Fadwa Al-Yaman, Group Head of Indigenous Groups at the AIHW, said that, 10 years ago, the AIHW developed best practice guidelines for collecting Indigenous status information in key datasets. She noted the importance of asking the question in a non‑confrontational manner and at the right time. Dr Al-Yaman emphasised that responses should always be voluntary.
2.52The NIAA and the AGD acknowledged that there are ‘gaps and deficiencies’ with the quality and availability of data on violence affecting First Nations people. AGD representative Ms Esther Bogaart reiterated that the AFP and the AIC rely on state and territory information.
2.53AIC representative Dr Bricknell advised that the AIC will not report Indigeneity unless both police and the NCIS ‘cross-refer’. However, she noted that the NCIS does not report Indigenous status if its sources are contradictory.
Barriers to reporting violence
2.54Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS) estimated that up to 90 per cent of violence against First Nations women is undisclosed and therefore not reported:
This underreporting is driven by a myriad of factors, including distrust of the police and legal systems, fears of repercussions from community, cultural norms and the availability and appropriateness of services.
2.55Multiple submitters and witnesses agreed that First Nations women do not trust the police and legal systems, due to a history of government policies, legislation and practices that have resulted in, among other things, victim-blaming, incarceration and child protection interventions.
2.56According to Antoinette Braybrook, Chief Executive Officer of Change the Record:
Family violence is the single biggest driver of Aboriginal child removal, with 88% of Aboriginal children in care having experienced family violence. Weneed to see a transformation in how the system supports Aboriginal mothers experiencing family violence as a fundamental starting point in intervening earlier to keep our children safe in their family’s care...[B]oth mum and children are victims of family violence—kids aren’t collateral damage to violence against mum; and mums aren’t to blame for the violence they endure.
2.57The Law Reform and Social Justice Research Hub at the Australian National University submitted that Australia’s tough-on-crime approach to violence against women also impacts First Nations women’s willingness to report:
The criminal justice system is how we demonstrate that society takes something seriously, but when read alongside First Nations communities’ historical and present experiences with the criminal justice system, it is understandable that women see reporting as a last-resort measure…[The current approach suggests that the solution to violence] necessitates the separation of women and their children from violent (male) partners. Asystem that forces women to separate from First Nations men bears stark and no doubt traumatising resemblance to colonial welfare policies that separated First Nations children from their families. The fact that First Nations men have been disproportionately killed whilst in custody and incarcerated, for which no police officer has ever been held accountable, further erodes the confidence that First Nations women and their communities have in Australia’s justice system.
2.58Other submitters highlighted that First Nations women fear for their safety should they report a DFSV incident to the police, especially in small remote communities. The Queensland Indigenous Family Violence Legal Service (QIFVLS) noted, for example, ‘fear of payback by the offender’s family, stigmatisation or ostracization from the community’.
2.59Similarly, the NAFLS submitted that there is ‘community hesitation’ to report violence to police where the perpetrator is related or known to everyone in the community:
…they are in “small, interconnected and isolated communities where anonymity cannot be maintained”. There is a fear that reporting will lead to an escalation of violence or that when the perpetrator is released from prison or a rehabilitative program, he will return vengeful. This hesitation has meant that some Aboriginal women have developed a high tolerance toward violence. There is a deep mistrust of police held by many Aboriginal victim‑survivors, to the point that they will fail to report violence and/or refuse to make a statement to police because they do not believe that the police will protect them.
2.60The North Queensland Women’s Legal Service submitted that family and community influence can also impact the maintenance and prosecution of complaints (also see Chapter 3):
Many times we have heard from First Nations women who wish to give evidence in criminal matters being intimidated, harassed and/or threatened by the other party’s family members outside of court and when arriving at court. Bail conditions may prohibit the perpetrator from contact with the victim, but do not preclude the perpetrator's family and supporters from victim blaming and shaming, blaming the victim for the involvement of the police and courts, and intimidating the victim and attempting to pressure them to withdrawing complaints.
2.61In addition to historical interactions (see Chapter 3), some submitters and witnesses noted contemporary concerns with police as a key reason for the under-reporting of violence against First Nations women and children. The QIFVLS, for example, submitted that there is an entrenched culture within the Queensland Police Service (QPS) which treats complaints from Indigenous women with disregard:
Queensland's history is marked by, among other things, the state's historical use of the police as an agent of colonisation…Entrenched cultures within the QPS have historically, and to the present day, shaped the way some police officers respond to acts of violence, particularly family violence and sexual violence, in indigenous communities. QIFVLS routinely receives reports from women that even when they have found the courage to report abuse, it has been overlooked or not taken seriously.
2.62Chapters 3 and 4 discuss in greater detail institutional (police, prosecutors and coroners) responses to the violence experienced by First Nations women and children.
Comment from the Commonwealth government
2.63The NIAA and the AGD recognised that the under-reporting of violence against First Nations women and children exacerbates data gaps, which they acknowledged do exist:
There are data gaps that prevent a complete understanding of the experiences of First Nations women and children. Improving the quality of Indigenous identification across all relevant data sets continues to be a priority in order to provide more complete information about family and domestic violence amongst First Nations Australians.
2.64AGD representative Ms Alana Fraser, Assistant Secretary of the Criminal Justice Reform Taskforce, affirmed that there are ongoing efforts to improve the data relevant to murdered and missing First Nations women and children (see ‘Data improvement initiatives’ in the following section).
2.65Mr Ben Burdon, Group Manager of Social Policy and Programs at the NIAA, agreed that, with time, there will be better data available to inform policy and program evaluations:
…our processes are maturing and we have a better sense of the types of data we need to inform the decisions we need to make to improve against the measures under Closing the Gap, to make genuine improvements against the targets. But that data doesn't appear overnight...[O]nce you have a collection of datasets over time you can start to see the trend analysis and make better-informed decisions against that data.
2.66Ms Fraser advised that the Justice Policy Partnership (JPP), which includes the responsible state and territory governments, has identified foundational activity around data as an area for action. Although identified as part of the 2021–22 work plan, the department did not indicate any timeframes for completion.
Data improvement initiatives
2.67The NIAA and the AGD acknowledged that ‘effective data collection and use of data is required to guide meaningful decision-making and evidence-based policy development’. Their submission outlined government-led initiatives and commitments to improve data collection, and facilitate and support better data sharing and linkages.
2.68As recognised in the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022–2032, building a strong evidence base is central to ending violence against women and children:
Our ability to provide quality responses to victim-survivors, hold perpetrators accountable and keep women and children safe is predicated on addressing data gaps and building strong data-sharing mechanisms.
Data collection
2.69The National Agreement on Closing the Gap (the National Agreement) committed Commonwealth, state and territory governments to establish a data development plan, which was finalised in August 2022 (the Data Development Plan 2022–2030, the DDP):
The DDP outlines and prioritises the data development actions under each target of the National Agreement. It is intended to facilitate a richer array of high-quality data sources attached to all targets over the life of the National Agreement.
2.70For Target 13 (see Chapter 1 at paragraph 1.40), the DDP gave high priority to developing a data item for ‘consistency in identification, capturing and counting procedures between different data sets across jurisdictions’, to be delivered 2022–2024.
2.71On 7 November 2023, the Minister for Social Services (the minister), the Hon Amanda Rishworth MP, announced, as part of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Action Plan 2023–2025, a $15 million investment in First Nations-led research on domestic, family and sexual violence:
The $15 million research investment will be delivered over five years and aims to develop a data set that can show a national picture for First Nations women and children, whilst being nuanced for community differences and embedding culturally sensitive data collection and reporting practices.
2.72The minister acknowledged that current data collection is not sufficient to measure progress in respect of Target 13 and she stated that the funded measure will incorporate Indigenous data sovereignty principles. These principles were supported by submitters such as Change the Record, Djirra and the Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service.
2.73The NIAA and the AGD highlighted Priority Reform 4 of the National Agreement (Shared Access to Data and Information at a Regional Level), with the following outcome:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have access to, and the capability to use, locally-relevant data and information to set and monitor the implementation of efforts to close the gap, their priorities and drive their own development.
2.74The NIAA and the AGD submitted:
The measure addresses the need for community-led projects to assess [DFSV] in a culturally safe and sensitive manner. Research projects under this measure will consider information beyond prevalence statistics to provide insights into the causes of different types of violence experienced.
Successful projects will provide both the community and government with guidance to build appropriate prevention, early intervention, response, and recovery and healing efforts to reduce prevalence of violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children.
2.75The National Agreement also committed the Productivity Commission (PC) to developing and maintaining a publicly accessible dashboard comprising data and associated supporting materials to inform the reporting on progress under the agreement (the Closing the Gap Information Repository).
2.76Consistent with the minister’s comment (see paragraph 2.72), the Closing the Gap Information Repository cannot yet report progress on Priority Reform 4 or Target 13 of the National Agreement.
Data sharing and linkages
2.77The NIAA and the AGD submitted that the Commonwealth government facilitates and supports interjurisdictional data sharing: ‘data should be shared as [a] default, where appropriate, between government agencies, non‑government organisations and community organisations for collaborative purposes’.
2.78The NIAA and AGD again noted Priority Reform 4 of the National Agreement and advised that the Commonwealth government has partnered with First Nations organisations to ‘support data access and use by First Nations communities, and strategies to make data more transparent’.
2.79Data sharing was explicitly endorsed by theNgaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women’s Council, which provides services to A
angu (Aboriginal) women across a tri‑state region:
The women we service are not bound by state borders and the lack of information sharing between states and territories creates a gap in information for the safety of women.
2.80Similar comments were made by Ms McGowan-Jones in respect of First Nations children in out-of-home care (see paragraph 2.15).
2.81NIAA representative, Mr Burdon, recognised that government ‘can always be better informed. The NIAA and the AGD stated that they and certain data collection agencies are currently working on data linkage projects.