Chapter 5: Business and our human rights in the Declaration

5.1 Introduction

The significant role of business to respect and support our human rights is increasingly being recognised. Although the protection of human rights remains the responsibility of government, business is realising that human rights are both relevant and fundamental to their operations. In many of the conversations I have had with business and community leaders across the country, there is a firm view that business can – and does – play a fundamental role in the realisation of human rights by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

‘Business’ is often described as multinational corporations operating in a global context.^[1] Following a decade of unprecedented growth in mining in Australia, some of our communities have experienced global extractive corporations mining their lands, territories and resources.

But business also has a strong day-to-day presence in the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Whether we live in Tennant Creek or Adelaide, we have regular interactions with business in our everyday lives. This occurs in many circumstances. We engage with business when we visit the bank, put petrol in our cars and buy food for our families. When we go to work – as employers or employees – we interact with business and those interactions bring human rights into play.

The enjoyment of human rights by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can be impacted both positively and negatively in our engagement with business. This applies to our daily interactions when buying goods and accessing services, and in our dealings with large multinational corporations.

The growing number of businesses that are owned and managed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people also means that business is increasingly becoming integrated within our communities. As demonstrated by the case study on Supply Nation in section 5.4, the growth of Indigenous businesses is providing immense opportunities for the creation of employment and economic development in our communities. Experience has shown us that our interactions with business can be a very different proposition to our dealings with governments. I talk here about the responsiveness and effectiveness of business and its ability to quickly bring about change within our communities. This is shown by the case study on the Bourke Indigenous Housing Project in section 5.4, which describes the positive outcomes that the Bourke Aboriginal community has achieved working in partnership with Lend Lease.

In this chapter, I explain the benefits to business from taking a human rights-based approach to their operations. I set out the international framework that governs business and human rights, and then consider a human rights-based approach to business’ engagement with Indigenous peoples. I also highlight the role that business can play in implementing our human rights as articulated in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (the Declaration).

Finally, the chapter presents five case studies in Australia that illustrate constructive outcomes for and improved relationships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and business that are consistent with our human rights in the Declaration.

5.2 Why take a human rights-based approach to business?

We know that the fundamental objective of business is to drive economic growth. Business – particularly business involved in developing substantial infrastructure, industrial projects and/or extractive industries – can have a significant impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their land. Whether this impact is positive or negative, however, depends on how businesses engage with the people affected by their activities.

We also know that economic development can provide immense opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in terms of addressing social and economic disadvantage.^[2] I believe that economic sustainability is critical to the future of our communities. But we need safe and healthy communities in order to create the best conditions for economic development. The underlying effects of colonisation and dispossession are still felt by many of our communities. So it is critical that economic development occurs in a way that supports and respects our culture and identity.^[3]

And business’ promotion of economic growth must be in a form that is sustainable and consistent with human rights if it is to enable our peoples to address this disadvantage. This means that when creating economic development opportunities, the application of a human rights approach will ensure that outcomes relating to health and well-being, employment, education and training are being addressed in order to overcome the distressing levels of disadvantage within our communities.^[4]

I want to qualify my expectations of business. Businesses can contribute to the economic and social development of our communities and must ensure that their engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples occurs in a way that respects and supports our human rights. However, this cannot in any way detract from the responsibility of governments to protect our human rights, and to address and reconcile the historical situation of disadvantage facing our peoples.

(a) The benefits to business of adopting a human rights-based approach

Business adopting a policy of respecting and supporting human rights is not simply about complying with international and domestic law or ‘doing the right thing’. While there are clear arguments for business to take a leading role in complying with human rights, there are also economic incentives for business to engage with human rights.

Evidence suggests that a commitment to human rights demonstrates good business practise. This includes:

• Enhancing a business’ reputation and improving employee morale, leading to higher motivation, productivity and retention of excellent employees. It can also lead to a reduction in potential costs such as recruitment and insurance.
• Operating as a point of difference for business. This can provide a competitive advantage as a business holds a stronger ‘licence to operate’ and has better access to new markets, consumers and investors.
• Developing a human rights policy can be an effective risk management tool for business. It provides an objective standard against which to assess social, economic and environmental impacts of business decisions, which can assist businesses to identify policy gaps and project-related risks.
• A human rights-based approach establishes a foundation for a more stable operating environment, which can contribute to sustainable development and outcomes.
• Human rights provide a framework to build relationships with communities, governments and other stakeholders resulting in fewer conflicts and disputes.^[5]

I discuss the economic and social benefits for business further in relation to the case studies in section 5.4 below.

5.3 An international framework for human rights and business

International standards and guidelines prescribe the corporate responsibility to support and to respect human rights. The United Nations has taken a leading role in developing initiatives to guide business on human rights, and international organisations such as the International Labour Organisation (ILO)^[6] and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)^[7] have also established human rights standards for business.

(a) The corporate responsibility to support and respect human rights

(i) United Nations Global Compact

The corporate responsibility to support and respect human rights is outlined in the United Nations Global Compact (Global Compact).^[8] The Global Compact encourages businesses to align their operations and strategies with ten principles to develop and implement sustainable practices and policies.

The human rights principles in the Global Compact are:

Principle 1: Businesses should support and respect the protection of internationally proclaimed human rights; and

Principle 2: make sure they are not complicit in human rights abuses.^[9]

These principles are reinforced by a further eight principles that address the areas of labour, environment and anti-corruption.

(ii) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (Guiding Principles) create a framework for implementing the United Nation’s objective to protect and respect human rights, and to provide remedies in situations where human rights are violated.^[10] The Guiding Principles, as endorsed by the Human Rights Council in June 2011, are regarded as the ‘authoritative global standard for addressing business-related human rights challenges.’^[11]

The Guiding Principles are founded on three ‘pillars’ of human rights that recognise:

(a) Governments’ existing obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and fundamental freedoms.^[12]

(b) Business enterprises’ requirement to comply with all applicable laws and to respect human rights.

(c) The requirement for rights and obligations to be matched to appropriate and effective remedies when human rights are breached.^[13]

This framework sets out the different but complementary responsibilities of governments and businesses:

Each pillar is an essential component in an inter-related and dynamic system of preventative and remedial measures: the State duty to protect because it lies at the very core of the international human rights regime; the corporate responsibility to respect because it is the basic expectation society has of business in relation to human rights; and access to remedy because even the most concerted efforts cannot prevent all abuse.^[14]

This means that the corporate responsibility to respect human rights ‘exists independently of States’ abilities and/or willingness to fulfil their own human rights obligations, and does not diminish those obligations.’^[15]

While the Guiding Principles do not create new international law obligations,^[16] they establish a regulatory system in which ‘public and private governance systems – corporate as well as civil – each come to add distinct value, compensate for one another’s weaknesses, and play mutually reinforcing roles...’.^[17] In this way, the responsibility for business to respect human rights is supported by the government’s duty in the Guiding Principles to ‘protect against human rights abuse within their territory and/or jurisdiction by third parties, including business enterprises’ and to ‘set out clearly that all business enterprises domiciled in their territory and/or jurisdiction respect human rights throughout their operations.’^[18]

The Guiding Principles provide welcome clarity around the responsibilities of business and the duties of governments to work in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities. I have spoken extensively in this Report about the interplay between rights, relationships and responsibilities. I believe that the Guiding Principles, when underpinned by full and proper consultation with our communities, will provide tremendous rewards for business, governments and our communities by establishing the processes that create sustainable development outcomes. I discuss the application of the Guiding Principles to business’ engagement with Indigenous peoples in section 5.3(c) below.

The foundational principles underpinning the corporate responsibility to respect human rights are outlined in Text Box 5.1. As noted above, operational principles guiding the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, and foundational and operational principles directing government’s duty to protect human rights and access to remedy comprise the remaining Guiding Principles.^[19]

 

These Guiding Principles highlight the far-reaching implications of business activities on human rights. In the introduction to this chapter, I talk about the daily presence of business in the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples – the Guiding Principles encourage all these diverse businesses to consider and address the impact of their activities on our human rights. As I have mentioned often in this Report, meaningful and effective consultation with Indigenous peoples is essential to respecting and supporting our human rights.

Practical initiatives that businesses can undertake to act consistently with the Guiding Principles in relation to Indigenous peoples and our lands are discussed in section 5.3(c) below.

(iii) Other international standards on business and human rights

A snapshot of international standards that support the requirement for business to respect and support human rights is set out in Text Box 5.2. Many of these standards have recently been updated to be consistent with the Guiding Principles. This demonstrates the global authority of the Guiding Principles.

 

(b) International human rights – business and Indigenous peoples

I have talked about how business provides opportunities for Indigenous peoples in terms of economic and social development, employment and the protection of culture. In section 5.4 below, I present case studies that highlight some of the positive outcomes that can occur when businesses undertake activities in a way that supports and respects the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia.

Nonetheless, we know that there are still instances where Indigenous peoples remain vulnerable to negative human rights impacts from business activities. For example, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) recently observed that:

Indigenous peoples, as social groups with identities that are distinct from mainstream groups in national societies, are often among the most marginalized and vulnerable segments of the population. In many cases, their economic, social, and legal status limits their capacity to defend their rights to, and interests in, lands and natural and cultural resources, and may restrict their ability to participate in and benefit from development.^[29]

The Human Rights Council established a Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises (Working Group on Human Rights and Business) in 2011 to, amongst other matters, promote the implementation of the Guiding Principles.^[30]

A report released by the Working Group in August 2013 confirmed that Indigenous peoples are ‘among the groups most severely affected by the activities of the extractive sector, the agro-industrial and the energy sectors.’^[31] The nature of these adverse effects on Indigenous peoples’ human rights:

...range from impacts on indigenous peoples’ right to maintain their chosen traditional way of life, with their distinct cultural identity; to discrimination in employment and accessing goods and services (including financial services); access to land and security of land tenure; to displacement through forced or economic resettlement and associated serious abuses of civil and political rights, including impacts on human rights defenders, right to life and bodily integrity.^[32]

The report also highlighted specific groups of Indigenous peoples that are especially ‘vulnerable to human rights abuses connected to business activities and...excluded from agreement processes and other consultations that irrevocably influence their lives.’^[33] These groups include Indigenous women, children, older persons, young people, people with disabilities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.^[34]

This report is extremely worrying and further confirms the need for business to actively support and respect our human rights. Businesses can promote and advance the human rights of Indigenous peoples through their core operations, strategic social investments and philanthropy, advocacy and public policy engagement, and partnership and collective action.^[35] These actions enable businesses to:

...create opportunities for Indigenous peoples to participate in, and benefit from project related activities that may help them fulfil their aspiration for economic and social development. Furthermore, Indigenous peoples may play a role in sustainable development by promoting and managing activities and enterprises as partners in development.^[36]

Effective engagement is critical to supporting and respecting the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. This is particularly the case when our communities have to navigate their way through complex processes with an unequal power dynamic. In the Social Justice Report 2011, I said that ‘the way our communities operate will always be shaped and informed by external influences. These influences can either empower and support our communities or undermine them.’^[37]

A key principle of the Declaration is participation in decision-making, underpinned by free, prior and informed consent and good faith. The right to participate in decision-making is critical to our communities determining our priorities for development, owning the solutions to the challenges we face and improving our quality of life.^[38] Our communities also need to be able to talk to business on an equal footing in order to minimise power imbalances. As I said in the Social Justice Report 2011:

The principle of free, prior and informed consent should guide both the internal and external culture of decision-making. It should be used by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to improve their own internal decision-making processes so that they are representative [and] inclusive.

Free, prior and informed consent should also be used by governments and other parties to guide their engagements with our communities and to inform subsequent monitoring and evaluation of these processes.^[39]

The following section explains how the Guiding Principles provide a human rights framework for business’ engagement with Indigenous peoples.

(c) Applying the Guiding Principles to business’ engagement with Indigenous peoples

The Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples (Special Rapporteur), Professor James Anaya, has affirmed that the Guiding Principles should be applied to Indigenous peoples with due regard to the relevant international laws and standards, and that to do otherwise would:

be contrary to the injunction, found among the Guiding Principles’ introductory paragraphs, that they should be applied in a ‘non-discriminatory manner’, with particular attention to the rights and needs of groups that are vulnerable or marginalised.^[40]

This approach has also been proposed by the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.^[41]

The mandate to apply the Guiding Principles in a non-discriminatory manner requires businesses to respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples as set out in the Declaration.^[42] This is affirmed in the report by the Working Group on Human Rights and Business, which notes that:

...business enterprises may need to consider additional standards, such as UNDRIP [United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples] and ILO Convention 169 [Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries], where they may have an adverse impact on the rights of individuals, both men and women, belonging to specific groups or populations that require particular attention, such as indigenous peoples.^[43]

It is important to remember that equality requires an acknowledgement of cultural difference and recognition that historical discrimination has continuing negative impacts. Accommodating and accounting for this difference can create true equality. In chapter 3, I refer to the second preambular paragraph of the Declaration, which states:

Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such.^[44]

I discuss extensively what this paragraph means for governments in chapter 3. But many of the points I make about governments are also relevant to business. I believe that if we are to achieve circumstances of equality, structures must be reoriented to account for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ difference. In line with the Guiding Principles, business should acknowledge these differences in policies to accommodate the priorities and incorporate the internal decision-making processes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

In the Social Justice Report 2012, I referred to the Declaration as ‘a remedial instrument that offers a blueprint to improving the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.’^[45] As such, the Declaration guides how business should engage with Indigenous peoples.

Because the Declaration sets out the rights of Indigenous peoples and the responsibilities of governments, but does not specifically articulate the obligations of business to respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples, the Global Compact is currently drafting a Business Reference Guide on the Declaration: see Text Box 5.3.

 

I have previously outlined the elements of Guiding Principle 15 which state that business should address a number of issues when their activities impact on Indigenous peoples and their lands and territories. I discuss these requirements in greater detail below.

(i) Policy commitment to respect human rights (Guidance Principle 15(a))

When business enterprises undertake operations on or near the lands and territories of Indigenous peoples, the Special Rapporteur states that the corporate responsibility to respect human rights must recognise the ‘basic rights’ of Indigenous peoples, including:

...the existence of indigenous peoples and...their own social and political structures; indigenous possession and use of land, territory and natural resources; exercise by the State of its duty to consult indigenous peoples in relation to activities that might affect them, and the related responsibility of business; impact studies and mitigation measures; and benefit sharing with indigenous peoples.^[47]

The report by the Working Group on Human Rights and Business provides practical suggestions that set out how businesses can embed its policy commitment to respect human rights into its business policies and procedures: see Text Box 5.4.

 

The case studies in section 5.4 also describe how businesses in Australia are using Reconciliation Action Plans (RAPs) to commit to targets that promote cultural awareness, employment and reconciliation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples – policies and practices that support and respect our human rights.

(ii) Human rights due-diligence process (Guiding Principle 15(b))

Guiding Principles 15(b) and 17–21 provide for businesses to implement a human rights due-diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their impacts on human rights.^[52]

The Special Rapporteur notes that the exercise of human rights due-diligence for activities on Indigenous land means that businesses need to consider the context of their business activities and whether the activities are likely to adversely impact on the human rights of Indigenous peoples.^[53]

This approach requires businesses to recognise that generic social, environmental and/or economic impact assessments may not identify the potential human rights impacts of their activities on Indigenous peoples. Consequently, businesses need to ensure that impact assessment processes are evidence-based and study the effects of their activities on all members of the Indigenous community.^[54] Businesses must also ensure that the vulnerable members of our communities – our women, children and elders – are supported to participate in these processes.

(iii) Grievance mechanisms (Guiding Principle 15(c))

Guiding Principle 15(c) articulates that businesses should develop processes that will enable the remediation of any adverse human rights impacts. This means that where a business identifies that they have ‘caused or contributed to adverse impacts on indigenous peoples, they should provide for or cooperate in the remediation of those impacts through legitimate processes.’^[55]

The history of dispossession that Indigenous people have faced has often been exacerbated by business projects and activities.^[56] This historical situation has an on-going impact on Indigenous peoples, who continue to suffer from power imbalances in their interactions with business.^[57]

Consequently, business must understand that there is a need to ‘address the legacy of past wrongs inflicted on indigenous communities as a result of business activities.’^[58] While past grievances can create ‘additional challenges in seeking to address potential adverse impacts going forward’, addressing these issues and ‘developing an understanding of any continued impacts can be an important aspect of building a relationship with indigenous communities.’^[59]

The report by the Working Group on Human Rights and Business notes that, consistent with the recognition of Indigenous peoples’ laws and customs in the Declaration, ‘business enterprises should consider identifying adequate and culturally and gender appropriate remedy mechanisms, as an integral part of any contractual relationship with indigenous peoples.’^[60]

The report also identifies good business practices to address the grievances of Indigenous peoples: see Text Box 5.5.

 

These practices reflect the importance of building real relationships between business and Indigenous peoples – relationships that acknowledge past grievances and recognise that transparent and consultative processes are necessary to ensure that future engagement is consistent with our human rights.

(d) Extractive industries and the rights of Indigenous peoples

The Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples has observed that the extraction and development of natural resources on or near the lands and territories of Indigenous peoples is ‘one of the foremost concerns of indigenous peoples worldwide, and possibly also the most pervasive source of challenges to the full exercise of their [human] rights.’^[62]

He has also noted that a lack of awareness of the rights of Indigenous peoples by extractive business causes ‘serious situations of dispossession, environmental contamination, forced displacement and permanent damage to the culture, spirituality and traditional knowledge of indigenous people.’^[63]

Because of these concerns, the Special Rapporteur has studied the rights of Indigenous peoples in relation to extractive industries. As part of this study, the Special Rapporteur attended a Roundtable on Indigenous Peoples and Extractive Industries in Australia in August 2012: see Text Box 5.6.

 

In his latest and final report to the Human Rights Council, the Special Rapporteur asserts that the interests of extractive industries and Indigenous peoples are not necessarily opposed and that the extraction of natural resources from Indigenous territories can occur in ways that are beneficial to Indigenous peoples and respectful of their rights.^[65] In particular, he suggests that opportunities for Indigenous peoples to develop and extract natural resources themselves enables Indigenous peoples to exercise their self-determination.^[66]

Given the extensive resources required to develop and extract natural resources, however, it is a more usual occurrence for businesses – often large multinational corporations – to undertake extractive projects on Indigenous lands and territories. Recognising this, the Special Rapporteur sets out the following conditions for business enterprises to obtain and sustain the agreement of Indigenous peoples for extractive projects to operate on their lands:

• extractive businesses should undertake due diligence to identify Indigenous groups that may be affected by the project, their rights in and around the project area, and potential/actual impacts on those rights^[67]
• extractive businesses should ensure fair and adequate consultation and negotiation procedures with Indigenous peoples in relation to a project^[68]
• agreements with Indigenous peoples that permit extractive projects on their lands must occur with the full respect of their ‘rights in relation to the affected lands and resources, and provide for equitable distribution of the benefits of the projects within a framework of genuine partnership.’^[69]

These conditions are consistent with the practices set out in section 5.3(c) above in relation to businesses acting in accordance with the Guiding Principles when their projects affect Indigenous peoples and their lands.

In line with the Special Rapporteur’s study on extractive industries and the rights of Indigenous peoples, Professor Megan Davis, a member of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII), submitted a study to the UNPFII in May 2013.^[70] This study examined the impact of the recent mining boom on Indigenous communities in Australia. Key outcomes from the study are summarised in Text Box 5.7.

 

Historically, where Indigenous peoples have had concerns about the activities of businesses – particularly extractive businesses – impacting on their lands, there have been few mechanisms for redress following adverse impacts on their human rights. This situation has begun to change over the past few years. There seems to be gathering momentum from the articulation of our rights in the Declaration, the work of the Special Rapporteur and the implementation of the Guiding Principles – all of which highlight the beneficial outcomes and improved relationships that occur when businesses ensure their operations support and respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples. As shown in this section, this growing awareness at the international level is being translated into practical guidance on what business needs to do to support and respect human rights.

I discuss the application of these practices in Australia in the following section.

5.4 Business and the Declaration in practice in Australia

I have spoken extensively in previous chapters about the work that my office and the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples (Congress) is currently undertaking on the National Declaration Strategy. Over the next 12 months, we will be conducting Declaration Dialogues with our communities and organisations, all levels of government, businesses and NGOs to discuss the key principles in the Declaration. It is my hope that we will reach common understandings of the principles, how they may look in action and what we need to do to make them work. Business will be a key player in those discussions and in the development of the National Declaration Strategy.

The international framework for business to support and respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples is increasingly becoming embedded in the activities of businesses in Australia. Indeed, as shown in the case studies below, there are a growing number of businesses who are engaging actively with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in ways that support and respect the key principles in the Declaration:

• self-determination
• participation in decision-making, good faith, and free, prior and informed consent
• respect for and protection of culture
• non-discrimination and equality.

The following five case studies illustrate business activities that support and respect our rights in the Declaration. In some cases, the link between business operations and our rights in the Declaration is clear; businesses such as Rio Tinto and KPMG Australia set out in their policies and procedures how their operations support and respect the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Other organisations – while not explicitly linking their activities to our human rights in the Declaration – are nonetheless creating outcomes that support and respect the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

For example, by supporting the growth of Indigenous businesses, Supply Nation is also building our capacity for self-determination and our pursuit of economic, social and cultural development as established in Article 3 of the Declaration. And businesses such as Lend Lease and Westpac are actively working in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities in a manner that is consistent with Article 18 of the Declaration.

(a) Supply Nation – promoting self-determination through economic development

Supply Nation is a model that promotes our right to self-determination, to develop our economic and social development priorities, and to have them administered by our own institutions consistent with Articles 3 and 23 of the Declaration. Economic and social development does not necessarily mean profit as an outcome; in some instances, outcomes will come in the form of sustainability, community and cultural development or entrepreneurial activity.

The vision of Supply Nation is to create a vibrant and prosperous Indigenous business sector in Australia by embedding Indigenous businesses into the supply chain of Australian companies and government agencies. Supply Nation provides a direct business-to-business purchasing link between large corporations, government agencies and Indigenous owned businesses. This enables the integration of Indigenous businesses into the supply chain of private sector corporations and government agencies.^[76]

Supplier diversity is a proactive procurement approach taken by government bodies and large companies that are genuinely committed to providing a level playing field for minority suppliers. In the Australian context, the aim of supplier diversity is to increase opportunities for Indigenous owned businesses to supply their goods and services to large public and private sector organisations. Supplier diversity offers under represented businesses the same opportunities to compete for the supply of quality goods and services as other qualified suppliers.^[77]

Supplier diversity not only provides the opportunities for contracts and projects to benefit the Indigenous businesses involved; it also creates an environment to develop role models for current and future generations in the business sector. I am encouraged that this approach will inspire Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to go into business, which in turn will provide employment opportunities in our communities.^[78]

Supply Nation provides an essential link between purchasers and sellers by:

• Engaging Australia’s largest government, non-government enterprises, universities and not-for-profit organisations as members to buy goods and services from certified Indigenous businesses.
• Providing members with access to Supply Nation Certified Indigenous businesses when making buying decisions.
• Assisting members to adapt their procurement processes to include Indigenous suppliers.
• Acting as a thought leader and driver for supplier diversity in Australia.^[79]

(i) Background – Supply Nation

Supply Nation (formally known as the Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council) is a not-for-profit company that launched a three year pilot phase in September 2009 through a funding agreement with then Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR).^[80]

In 2012 Supply Nation successfully completed its pilot phase, which proved that the idea of an Indigenous supply council could work in Australia.

The formal DEEWR review of Supply Nation outlined the significant success of the pilot phase and recognised Supply Nation as a well governed organisation with strong leadership.^[81] This demonstrated that, with practical support from Supply Nation, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can establish sustainable and profitable businesses that are part of the supply chain providing goods and services to private sector corporations and government agencies.

This growth should continue as the implementation of the Indigenous Opportunities Policy (IOP) and changes to the Commonwealth Procurement guidelines create incentives for Australian companies to engage with Indigenous people and companies. The IOP aims to increase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment opportunities and the engagement of Indigenous businesses through Australian Government procurement processes.^[82] Additionally, changes to the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPR) provide increased opportunities for Indigenous businesses to become part of the supply chain of major suppliers to the Australian Government.^[83]

I am encouraged by progress of the IOP and CPR changes in supporting Indigenous business. To ensure that these opportunities are maximized it is important that the implementation of these programs includes targets to determine the amount of Government obligated funds for contracts made with Indigenous businesses. This requirement for targets is supported by outcomes in the United States of America (USA), where the US Small Business Administration negotiates annual procurement goals for small, minority and woman owned firms. In the 2011 fiscal year, the USA federal government obligated over $36 billion to small, minority owned businesses.^[84]

(ii) Certified Indigenous Suppliers and Membership

Supply Nation membership and certification are the important elements for bringing large corporations, government agencies and Indigenous businesses together. Supply Nation certifies Indigenous business suppliers as majority Indigenous owned, managed and controlled. Australian companies and government agencies that are members of Supply Nation are able to access a database of Indigenous suppliers for procurement opportunities.^[85]

Certified Indigenous Suppliers

Indigenous businesses that are majority owned, controlled and managed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people can become a Supply Nation Certified Indigenous Supplier.

In doing so, Indigenous businesses must meet the following criteria to become certified through Supply Nation:

• 51% ownership of the company must be by an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person/s.
• The company is led or managed by a Principal Executive Officer who is Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander.
• The key business decisions regarding the company’s finances, operations, personnel and strategy are made by an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person.
• The company is able to distribute its equity to members or others trading as a business, for example it has goods, services and/or products to sell.
• The business is located in Australia.^[86]

Members

Members of Supply Nation are represented by some of Australia’s largest government, non-government enterprises, universities and not-for-profit organisations. To become a member of Supply Nation, organisations must make a three year commitment to their membership to allow supplier diversity to get traction within the organisation.

The benefits of becoming a Member of Supply Nation helps organisations increase the diversity of their supply chain by providing:

• Access to the country’s database of Certified Indigenous owned and controlled suppliers that are business ready.
• Access to a national and international network of supplier diversity experts and procurement professionals.
• Support from a Supply Nation Account Manager to assist with the implementation of the company’s commitments.
• Learning opportunities to develop the organisations knowledge and practice in supplier diversity.
• Quarterly reports on the organisation’s engagement with Indigenous business.^[87]

Supply Nation is working on a transition program to become financially independent while continuing to provide streamlined services to its membership. As part of this process, in 2013, Supply Nation commenced charging membership fees and introduced a nominal fee for Indigenous businesses to obtain and renew certification. Supply Nation will also continue to generate income from its annual Connect event and some of its supplier diversity training programs.^[88]

(iii) Outcomes – growth in Indigenous businesses

Supply Nation demonstrates how business can enable our people to fully realise their social, cultural and economic development aspirations. To date, the achievements of Supply Nation are:

• Membership growth is on the rise and currently includes 115 Members.
• Certified Indigenous Suppliers numbers are above identified targets and are now at 208.
• Interest from new Indigenous businesses is on the rise which demonstrates that outreach activities are working.
• Supply Nation’s Member expenditure on Certified Indigenous business Suppliers has exceeded targets in every year of operation and now stands at $64.6 million.
• Certified Indigenous Suppliers are rapidly increasing Indigenous employment opportunities.
• Certified Indigenous Suppliers are winning contracts in a wide range of industries across Australia.^[89]

The story of Indigenous business, Yaru Water and their partnership with Qantas is an example of positive cultural, social and economic outcomes: see Text Box 5.8.

 

(b) KPMG – ‘good business and creating better lives’^[95]

KPMG is a global network of professional firms providing audit, tax and advisory services which operate in 156 countries and have more than 152 000 people working in member firms around the world. In Australia, KPMG has around 5 200 employees who operate out of 13 offices around the country.^[96]

KPMG Australia recognises that the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are one of the most pressing social issues in Australia, and that there is a direct connection between ‘good business and creating better lives.’^[97] Consequently, KPMG is working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to promote economic and social development, and to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia.

(i) KPMG’s reconciliation journey 2006–13

KPMG began its journey of reconciliation and engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in 2006 when Doug Jukes, then Chairman of KPMG Australia travelled to Cape York, Queensland. His own journey proved to be a catalyst which prompted KPMG to empower its employees to utilise their skills and expertise to increase the capacity and build the sustainability of Indigenous organisations and businesses.^[98]

In 2007, KPMG commenced a relationship with Jawun Indigenous Corporate Partnerships (Jawun), which enabled KPMG to expand its work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.^[99]

KPMG launched its first RAP in 2009 as part of its commitment to improving the wellbeing of our communities through building mutual respect and creating opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.^[100]

Since then, KPMG has used its skills and resources to work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to promote economic and social development. This has involved ‘tackling Indigenous economic disadvantage through business leadership, cultural awareness and respect within their own organisation, building capacity by providing business advice and services, and employing Indigenous Australians directly.’^[101] Key initiatives by the company have focused on:

• an ongoing collaboration with Jawun
• building the capacity of, and procuring goods and services from, Indigenous businesses
• developing Indigenous cultural awareness amongst KPMG staff
• encouraging KPMG staff to become leaders for reconciliation
• supporting the pathway into education and employment for young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
• committing to support Indigenous not-for-profit organisations through KPMG’s honorary work program
• supporting the campaign for constitutional recognition.^[102]

The commitment of KPMG to these initiatives was explained by Peter Nash, Chairman of KPMG Australia earlier this year:

Put most simply, a new generation of business leaders has emerged who take human rights seriously. They pursue reconciliation because it’s the right thing to do...

But of course, as we have discovered, reconciliation is good for business. How could it not be? Progressive opinion is no longer to be found only on campus, but increasingly in commerce. The smart young employees we need to help run our companies rightly find any racism totally unacceptable. Our clients demand we share their social as well as their business values. Our accountants tell us that ethical procurement actually saves us money. Our business developers tell us that connecting with Indigenous communities drives innovation.^[103]

This approach to reconciliation has led to the following outcomes for KPMG:

Economic and social development

KPMG provides an example of a business that supports the economic and social development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in a way that is consistent with Article 20 in the Declaration.^[104] This is demonstrated by KPMG supporting the economic and social development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples by:

• Purchasing goods and services from Indigenous owned businesses. In the past financial year, KPMG sourced almost half a million Australian dollars in goods and services from Indigenous-owned businesses certified by Supply Nation, reflecting the firm’s commitment to embedding Indigenous business into their supply chain and procurement processes.^[105]
• Providing professional services on an honorary basis to support and build these Indigenous owned businesses and Indigenous controlled community organisations.^[106] In the 2012-13 financial year, KPMG provided more than 250 days worth of professional services to Indigenous organisations through its honorary work program.

KPMG remains committed to Jawun as it also provides employees with an understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander culture, and contributes to transforming both the workplace and communities. Since 2007, more than 150 KPMG people have participated in Jawun secondments, equalling more than 3 300 days of skills transfer and capacity building. A KPMG secondee to Jawun reflected:

Working with Jawun is one of the most impressionable experiences of our careers and will have a lasting impact on both our personal and professional lives. Without doubt, it is definitely an experience we would all do again and something everyone should try.^[107]

In its most recent RAP, KPMG is seeking to further develop ways to increase its involvement and impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities by refining its commitment to build capacity in Indigenous owned and controlled organisations.^[108]

Education to employment

Economic participation requires access to a quality education as a pathway to employment. In 2011, KPMG built on its relationship with the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation to provide mentoring and tutoring to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander high school students.

To increase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment, KPMG in Australia will implement the following strategies into the workforce:

• dedicated recruitment resources
• a clear strategy to inspire Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to consider employment opportunities at KPMG
• renewed focus on existing high school and tertiary scholarships
• expand current mentoring and work experience programs
• increase collaboration with community partners
• expand current cultural awareness training
• support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff in the organisation.^[109]

Recognising and promoting the rights of Indigenous Australians

KPMG International is a signatory to the United Nations Global Compact; and the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been a priority for KPMG Australia in implementing their response to the Global Compact.^[110]

KPMG Australia has participated in the Global Compact LEAD taskforce, which is tasked with developing the Business Reference Guide on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (see Text Box 5.3). KPMG has remained committed to working with the business community to raise awareness of the Declaration and to promote the drafting and use of the Business Reference Guide.

A key step towards reconciliation is the formal recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Australian Constitution. KPMG is one of the first businesses to support the campaign for constitutional recognition and is also actively encouraging the wider business sector to engage in the discussion of constitutional recognition because:

The business community has a special role to play as a partner of Indigenous Australia – because it has the means and the scale to convert changes in public attitudes into a fairer go and rising living standards for Australia’s first peoples... And it can help immediately by adding its voice to the growing numbers of Australians calling for constitutional recognition.^[111]

Corporate citizenship extends beyond compliance with our human rights; it requires businesses to be involved in and take leadership of the issues that shape our nation’s identity and prosperity. Through its work to promote and protect the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, KPMG is demonstrating the meaning of true corporate citizenship.^[112]

(c) Rio Tinto – a case study of the extractive industry engaging with the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders

Rio Tinto is a global mining company operating in different social, political, economic and cultural contexts.

Rio Tinto’s extensive Australian operations include the production of iron ore, coal, bauxite, alumina, aluminium, uranium, copper, gold, diamonds and salt from more than 30 sites and processing plants.^[113] Many of these operations are in remote areas in Australia where there is a significant Aboriginal population and on or near native title claims or Aboriginal land, leading to a high degree of engagement between Aboriginal peoples and the company.

As noted earlier in the chapter, the Special Rapporteur, James Anaya, has reported on the potentially detrimental impacts of extractive industries on Indigenous peoples and their lands, and highlighted the need for extractive companies to understand, prevent and address their potential and adverse impacts on the rights of Indigenous peoples.^[114]

Rio Tinto manages its Australian operations in a way that aims to respect and support the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. One of the catalysts was a landmark public address by then CEO Leon Davis in 1995 in which he stated his wish to see Rio Tinto’s operations work in active partnership with Aboriginal people and create ‘innovative ways of sharing with and compensating Indigenous Australians.’^[115]

This address deliberately set Rio Tinto apart from other mining companies during the highly acrimonious period following the High Court’s decision in Mabo and the negotiation of the Native Title Act.^[116] It also established Rio Tinto’s future direction and approach to engaging and negotiating with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in relation to mining operations occurring on or near their traditional country.^[117]

First drafted in 1996, Rio Tinto outlines the company approach in its Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy: see Text Box 5.9.^[118]

 

(i) Rio Tinto’s human rights framework

Since the late 1990s, Rio Tinto has sought to incorporate human rights into its policies and processes. The company has been a participant in the Global Compact since 2000 and is a signatory to a range of international human rights initiatives.^[120] Rio Tinto was one of the first transnational companies to adopt a stand-alone human rights policy, which has recently been revised,^[121] and the company’s code of business conduct, The way we work contains a specific section on human rights.^[122]

Most recently, Rio Tinto has set out the human rights framework that helps guide its’ work with communities in the publication, Why human rights matter, which states that ‘respecting human rights helps to underpin our business success.’^[123] This recognises that operating within a human rights framework is ‘good business sense’ as well as the ‘right thing to do.’^[124]

Explaining the reasons for compliance with human rights, Rio Tinto:

...understands that not doing so [respecting human rights] poses very real risks to the company such as operational delays, legal disputes, reputational harm, investor challenges, loss of social license to operate and employee dissatisfaction. On the other hand, the actions [Rio Tinto] takes in support of human rights help us to build enduring and positive relationships across the community and the world.^[125]

Specifically acknowledging the impact of extractive industries on Indigenous peoples, Rio Tinto’s human rights policy states that it:

respect[s] the diversity of indigenous peoples, acknowledging the unique and important interests that they have in the land, waters and environment as well as their history, culture and traditional ways.^[126]

The company seeks to embed support of human rights including the rights of Indigenous peoples through comprehensive written procedures and policies – including voluntary commitments, policies, standards and guidance notes. These procedures and policies are interrelated. For example, Rio Tinto’s Communities standard contains principles that support human rights and engagement with Indigenous peoples; and this is consistent with and supported by the Cultural Heritage management standard that sets out how operations manage and respect cultural heritage for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia.^[127]

Rio Tinto’s Community Agreements Guidance, written in 2012, outlines the company’s position on Indigenous communities and the Declaration: see Text Box 5.10.^[128]

 

Reflecting that Rio Tinto’s operations involve a high level of engagement with communities, Why human rights matter provides a practical guide for personnel to integrate human rights into the company’s communities and social performance processes.

This process has four phases that are consistent with the Guiding Principles:

1. Know and understand

This involves knowing and understanding the human rights context, undertaking risk analysis and impact assessment, and collecting data.^[130]

2. Plan and implement

This phase involves working to implement the knowledge collected (from the first phase) into multi-year communities and social performance plans. Human rights considerations may be integrated into these plans through steps such as developing human rights training programmes, assessing procurement processes for human rights risks and working with civil society to empower at risk and vulnerable groups.^[131]

3. Monitor and implement

Developing robust monitoring and evaluation is viewed as essential for the learning processes for integrating human rights into communities and social performance processes including addressing complaints, disputes and grievances from the community.^[132]

4. Report and communicate

This phase involves working towards effective internal reporting, external reporting and communication with communities.^[133]

Each of these four phases relies on inclusive engagement, including recognition of the human rights of Indigenous peoples.^[134]

(ii) Outcomes – Rio Tinto and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities

Rio Tinto seeks to reach agreements with Indigenous communities to gain access for exploration (land access agreements) and to develop mining operations (mine and regional development agreements).

The company’s approach to agreement-making is underpinned by recognition and respect of mutual interests; a process in which Rio Tinto ensures community groups entering into agreements have access to independent advice and expertise during negotiations. Rio Tinto applies a ‘participatory process’ so that local community members understand the operations, what is proposed in the agreements and that the negotiations to get to agreement occur at a pace and scope that local communities can sustain.^[135]

Details about Rio Tinto’s agreements are available on the ‘Agreements, treaties and negotiated settlements project’ website^[136] and in Rio Tinto’s RAP, which draws together existing agreements and reports on current and long-term targets for each agreement.^[137] More broadly, Rio Tinto is the largest private sector employer of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia, with Indigenous people comprising around 7% of the company’s total workforce in Australia.^[138] In the Pilbara region of Western Australia, the company’s Indigenous supplier base has grown from six businesses in 2009 to 104 businesses in 2012 – the largest Indigenous supply network in Australia.^[139]

These outcomes – both the process of agreement-making and the terms of the agreements – aim to be consistent with many of our human rights including self-determination, respect for culture and participation in decision-making underpinned by good faith. For Rio Tinto, these outcomes ensure that the company continues to strengthen its ‘social license to operate.’^[140]

(d) Bourke Aboriginal Community Working Party and Lend Lease – the Bourke Indigenous Housing Project

In November 2010, Lend Lease was approached by Aboriginal community leaders from the Murdi Paaki region to provide advice on project management and capacity building for the development of a new, innovative and cost efficient concept for community housing.^[141]

There was recognition by the Murdi Paaki community leadership of deficiencies in the design and construction of Aboriginal housing in remote locations in NSW. The project’s vision is to:

• Develop an environmentally efficient and scalable Indigenous housing model for remote and regional areas that is designed, owned and maintained by the community and provides sustainable training, skilling, and employment opportunities.
• Work towards identifying how this new model will contribute to improved social and economic development outcomes, including aspirations for people to transition from social and community housing to home ownership.^[142]

This initiated what is now called the Bourke Indigenous Housing Project (the project).

While this project has primarily been a partnership between the Bourke Aboriginal Community Working Party, Murdi Paaki Building and Lend Lease, other organisations have also been involved. A complete list of participants in the project is set out in Text Box 5.11.

 

(i) Outcomes from the project^[145]

The Bourke Indigenous Housing Project aimed to develop a process of community-led housing design and capacity building in project development.

This involved the construction of two houses at Bourke which reflect the identified tenant’s / owner’s lifestyle needs, and are suitable to the environment, climate and conditions. The project also identified the need to improve housing quality and durability, and to reduce maintenance demands and costs.

The project aims to identify and support the levels of skills in the local area required for the ongoing construction, delivery and other employment and training outcomes in the community to contribute to a sustainable local housing industry.

The project has been in existence for over 12 months. Between June and November 2012, Lend Lease’s Principal Architect Rob Brennan and Murdi Paaki Building Manager Steve Parish held consultations with members of the Aboriginal Community in Bourke to inform the design brief for the houses. Following agreement on the final design by the community, the Bourke Shire Council identified a site for the construction of the two houses and then approved the development application.

The project developed a procurement strategy, which focused on local trades and suppliers. Lend Lease provided advice on procurement and project staging and secured the bulk of materials at cost or no cost.

In February 2013, Murdi Paaki Building began the construction of the two houses which were completed in late May 2013.

The two houses have now been sold to members of the Aboriginal community in Bourke. The intent of the project is that proceeds from the sale of the houses will fund future construction of community-designed housing.

The project’s approach to community ownership created the following outcomes:

• 30 young Aboriginal people signed up for the training courses to be part of the project build.

• About 15 community members were involved in the development and delivery of the community survey which informed the community education program.

• Several applications were received from potential buyers of the new homes who are interested in the long-term aspiration of home ownership.

• Primary school children at the three schools in Bourke participated in a competition to draw their vision for the perfect house.

Community engagement and participation

This project provides an example of effective community engagement in line with the standards of consultation and participation in decision-making outlined in Articles 18 and 19 of the Declaration.

The genuine partnership that has been built between the Bourke Aboriginal Community and Lend Lease is working to realise the community’s aspirations.

At a presentation of the project in February 2013, Alistair Ferguson, the Chair of the Bourke Aboriginal Community Working Party, highlighted that the difference between the Bourke Indigenous Housing Project and previous attempts to address housing issues:

Planning around housing in the past has been done for Aboriginal people, not with Aboriginal people. The Aboriginal people of Bourke have ownership of the project, through the design consultations to the capacity building of individuals and community groups throughout the design of the community education program (via design and delivery of a survey); true engagement with the community on this project has been driven by the community.

The house is a vehicle for closing the gaps in health, training and employment, and economic opportunity in Bourke. It’s not about the house but about the process – because we know a one-size-fits-all solution doesn’t work. All communities are different so we don’t need a technical fix, we need solid partnerships and processes that will deliver what’s right for the Bourke community.^[146]

At the same presentation, Cath Brokenborough, Chair Reconciliation and Indigenous Engagement at Lend Lease observed that, while Lend Lease initially became involved to meet its RAP objectives, the company subsequently came to realise the project:

...allows us to better understand the issues working with remote, regional and Indigenous communities on the development and delivery of hard and social infrastructure projects, particularly in meeting the real needs of communities.^[147]

Both the Bourke Aboriginal Community Working Party and Lend Lease recognise the following factors were important in making the project work:

• Time – it took two years to build the relationships between the Bourke community and the Lend Lease project team.

• Effective community engagement through maintaining consistency of project team members and personal commitment from the same people turning up at every meeting to see the project through.^[148]

I am encouraged that Bourke’s community leaders, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, are backing this project;^[149] it is an example of genuine partnership between our communities and corporate Australia.

(e) Westpac – supporting Indigenous leadership

Formed in 1817, Westpac has played an integral role within the Australian community as the first bank operating in Australia.

Today Westpac Group employs approximately 36 000 people and operates throughout Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific region, with offices located in Asia, the USA and the United Kingdom. Westpac Group’s portfolio of financial services brands includes Westpac, St George, Bank SA, Bank of Melbourne, BT Financial Group, RAMS, Westpac Institutional Bank and Westpac New Zealand.^[150]

Westpac works across the saving and investment needs of retail customers to service the needs of corporate, institutional and government clients. As part of this, Westpac works with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander customers to understand their financial and non-financial needs.^[151]

(i) Background – Westpac’s engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

Westpac has launched two RAPs, which outline the companies’ commitment to reconciliation and closing the gap through supporting:

• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership
• initiatives leading to empowerment and social and financial inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.^[152]

The Westpac Group believes that empowerment and social and financial inclusion are the most tangible ways that staff can make a positive contribution to support all of Australia’s First Peoples. Gail Kelly, CEO of Westpac, recently stated:

We need to ensure indigenous Australians are economically empowered, not just dependent on government support...And this is where the business community needs to continue to do more as the engine of sustainable employment and thus higher living standards. And when businesses support indigenous enterprises, the effect is even more powerful and immediate.^[153]

Seeking to reflect this approach, Westpac is increasing employment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, sourcing products from Indigenous suppliers, and aiming to provide appropriate banking services to Indigenous businesses and communities.

(ii) Outcomes

Since the launch of Westpac Group’s inaugural RAP in 2010, Westpac has provided a best practice example of progress against their commitments to supporting reconciliation between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and non-Indigenous Australians.^[154] Some of the major structural achievements include:

• Establishing an Indigenous Employee Action Group representing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees called ‘Brothers and Sisters’.
• Establishing a RAP Steering Committee to focus on the strategic agenda and inform the Indigenous Working Group.
• Becoming a member of Supply Nation and engaging accredited suppliers as part of sustainable supply chain procurement. This includes signing with Indigenous supplier MessageStick to provide teleconference facilities to a number of Westpac Group locations.
• Launching an Internet Kiosk pilot in two remote communities during late 2011 to explore option of accessing account balance information without cost for remote customers as an alternative to ATMs.
• Appointing a Senior Manager Indigenous Engagement for the Westpac Group.^[155]

Economic and social inclusion

Westpac provides an example of a business prioritising the economic and social inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to achieve culturally safe environments. Westpac acknowledges that education and employment are often the two best pathways for inclusion to occur. Westpac Group currently employs 221 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people across all states – this includes 43 school based trainees.^[156]

To support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, Westpac Group has set up an action group named ‘Brothers and Sisters’ under the direction of the Diversity team at Westpac Group. By 2013, ‘Brothers and Sisters’ has grown to nearly 100 members including both Indigenous and non-Indigenous employees to ensure Westpac Group is an inclusive workplace where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and cultures are understood, respected and celebrated.^[157]

Westpac Group believes that empowerment and social and financial inclusion are the most tangible ways they can make a positive contribution to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Westpac’s relationship with Jawun provides a strong example of their commitment to empowering Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders: see Text Box 5.12.

 

(f) What can we learn from these case studies?

Each of these case studies illustrate how business is developing relationships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples that are enabling us to achieve tangible social, economic and cultural outcomes. Fundamental to each of these case studies is the relationship between business and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples being underpinned by support and respect for our human rights.

Business’ engagement with the Declaration is still in its early days. This is in part due to the adoption of the Declaration by the Australian Government occurring relatively recently in 2009. In addition, the wording of the articles in the Declaration focuses on the rights of Indigenous peoples and the responsibilities of governments, rather than specific obligations of business to respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples. As I set out above in Text Box 5.3, the Global Compact is assisting businesses to incorporate our rights in the Declaration into their human rights policies through the development of a Business Reference Guide to the Declaration.

Despite the relatively recent adoption of the Declaration, many businesses are leading the way in considering how their operations can respect and support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ human rights. And not only are businesses respecting and supporting these rights, they are also playing a key role in the realisation of our human rights. This is demonstrated in each of the case studies above, which show specific outcomes for business and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in terms of economic development, employment, self-determination and cultural awareness.

There are also broader social and economic benefits that occur when business engages with Indigenous Australians in ways that support and respect our human rights. The Reconciliation Action Plan Impact Measurement Report (RAP Impact Report) undertaken by Reconciliation Australia in 2012 analysed the impact of RAPs in enabling organisations to make ‘a difference to the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the nation as a whole.’^[161] The key outcomes of the RAP Impact Report are enlightening and shown in Text Box 5.13.

 

RAPs have been used to outline the policy commitment of businesses in Australia. Westpac, Rio Tinto Australia, KPMG Australia and Lend Lease all set out how they seek to engage with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in their RAPs.

These outcomes demonstrated in the RAP Impact Report show that if business and our communities can continue and expand this positive engagement, then there is immense hope for the future. This engagement will only become stronger as business and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples establish relationships that are based on our rights in the Declaration.

5.5 Conclusion

I am heartened by the work of business that is leading the way in illustrating the positive outcomes that can occur when engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is based on our rights in the Declaration.

Time and again, we see the benefits from acting in a way that is consistent with our human rights – real outcomes that reflect our social, economic and cultural aspirations, and demonstrate improved relationships between non-Indigenous and Indigenous Australians. And we see real opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to stand on an equal footing and become true partners with business and government based on rights, relationships and responsibilities.

 

---

^[1] For example, see Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Guidelines for Multi-National Enterprises (2011). At http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/oecdguidelinesformultinationalenterprises.htm (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[2] Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2011, Productivity Commission, Canberra (2011), ch 8. At http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/111609/key-indicators-2011-report.pdf (viewed 25 October 2013). Also see Australian Government, Indigenous Economic Development Strategy 2011–2018, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra (2011), p 5. At http://www.indigenous.gov.au/economic-participation/policy-programs/ieds/ (viewed 24 October 2013).

^[3] L Malezer, Joint Statement by the Indigenous Peoples Organisation Network of Australia on Agenda Item 3: Discussion of the special theme for the year ‘Indigenous Peoples: development with culture and identity: articles 3 and 32 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’ (Delivered at the ninth session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, New York, 19-30 April 2010).

^[4] The role of economic development to overcome disadvantage in our communities has been recently discussed by W Mundine, ‘Shooting an Elephant: four giant steps’ (Address to the Garma Festival Corporate Dinner, 10 August 2013). At http://www.indigenouschamber.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Speech-to-Garma-Festival.pdf (viewed 18 October 2013).

^[5] See Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, International Business Leaders Forum, and Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Human Rights Translated: A Business Reference Guide (2008), p viii. At http://www.law.monash.edu.au/castancentre/publications/human-rights-translated.html (viewed 14 October 2013); United Nations Global Compact, Second Exposure Draft – United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: a Business Reference Guide (2013), pp 15–16; CAER and Oxfam Australia, The Right to Decide: company commitments and community consent (2013), p 6. At https://www.oxfam.org.au/media/2013/05/australian-mining-companies-fall-short-on-gaining-consent-from-the-worlds-indigenous-peoples-new-report/ (viewed 14 October 2013).

^[6] As set out in Text Box 5.2, the ILO has developed the Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (2006). At http://www.ilo.org/empent/Publications/WCMS_094386/lang--en/index.htm (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[7] As set out in Text Box 5.2, the OECD has written the Guidelines for Multi-National Enterprises (2011). At http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/oecdguidelinesformultinationalenterprises.htm (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[8] The United Nations Global Compact is a voluntary initiative currently comprising more than 10 000 corporations from over 130 countries: see United Nations Global Compact, Overview of the UN Global Compact. At http://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/index.html (viewed 14 October 2013).

^[9] United Nations Global Compact, The Ten Principles. At http://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html (viewed 14 October 2013).

^[10] The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights were developed by Professor John Ruggie, the United Nations Special Representative for Business and Human Rights.

^[11] Human Rights Council, Follow up report on indigenous peoples and the right to participate in decision-making, with a focus on extractive industries, twenty first session, UN Doc A/HRC/21/55, para 21. At http://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/ipeoples/emrip/pages/emripindex.aspx (viewed 2 October 2013).

^[12] I discussed the duty of governments to protect human rights as set out in the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in M Gooda, Native Title Report 2012, Australian Human Rights Commission (2012), pp 89–91. At http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/native-title-report-2012 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[13] J Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, seventeenth session of the Human Rights Council, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31 (2011), p 1. At www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[14] J Ruggie, Promotion and Protection of all Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, including the Right to Development, Protect, Respect and Remedy: a Framework for Business and Human Rights, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, eighth session of the Human Rights Council, UN Doc A/HRC/8/5 (2008), para 6. At http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/alldocs.aspx?doc_id=14100 (viewed 14 October 2013).

^[15] J Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, seventeenth session of the Human Rights Council, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31 (2011), p 13. At www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[16] J Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, seventeenth session of the Human Rights Council, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31 (2011), p 6. At www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[17] J Ruggie, ‘Progress in Corporate Accountability’, Institute for Human Rights and Business Advisory

Board Commentary (2013). At http://www.ihrb.org/commentary/board/progress-in-corporate-accountability.html (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[18] J Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, seventeenth session of the Human Rights Council, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31 (2011), p 3. At www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[19] For the complete Guiding Principles, see J Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, United Nations Human Rights, Office of the High Commissioner, New York and Geneva (2011), is available at http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf (viewed 18 October 2013).

^[20] J Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, seventeenth session of the Human Rights Council, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31 (2011). At www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[21] The Equator Principles (2013). At http://www.equator-principles.com/ (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[22] Global Reporting Initiative, G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (2013), p 76. At https://www.globalreporting.org/reporting/g4/Pages/default.aspx (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[23] International Finance Corporation (World Bank Group), Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (2012), p 3. At http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/topics_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_site/ifc+sustainability/publications/publications_handbook_pps (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[24] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Guidelines for Multi-National Enterprises (2011), pp 2-3. At http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/oecdguidelinesformultinationalenterprises.htm (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[25] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Guidelines for Multi-National Enterprises (2011), ch 4. At http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/oecdguidelinesformultinationalenterprises.htm (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[26] International Labour Organisation, Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (2006), p 2. At http://www.ilo.org/empent/Publications/WCMS_094386/lang--en/index.htm (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[27] Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights. At http://www.voluntaryprinciples.org/ (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[28] Dow Jones Sustainability Indices. At http://www.sustainability-indices.com/ (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[29] International Finance Corporation (World Bank Group), Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (2012), p 47. At http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/topics_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_site/ifc+sustainability/publications/publications_handbook_pps (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[30] Human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, Human Rights Council Resolution 17/4, UN Doc A/HRC/RES/17/4 (2011). At http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/17/4 (viewed 2 October 2013).

^[31] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixty eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 1. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[32] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixty eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 1. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[33] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixty eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 2. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[34] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixty eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 2. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[35] United Nations Global Compact, Exposure Draft – United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: a Business Reference Guide (2012), p 5.

^[36] International Finance Corporation (World Bank Group), Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (2012), p 47. At http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/topics_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_site/ifc+sustainability/publications/publications_handbook_pps (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[37] M Gooda, Social Justice Report 2011, Australian Human Rights Commission (2011), p 9. At http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/social-justice-report-2011 (viewed 15 October 2013).

^[38] M Gooda, Social Justice Report 2012, Australian Human Rights Commission (2012), p 111. At http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/social-justice-report-2012 (viewed 16 October 2013).

^[39] M Gooda, Social Justice Report 2011, Australian Human Rights Commission (2011), p 116. At http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/social-justice-report-2011 (viewed 16 October 2013).

^[40] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples to the Human Rights Council, twenty first session, UN Doc A/HRC/21/47 (2012), paras 55–56. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IPeoples/SRIndigenousPeoples/Pages/AnnualReports.aspx (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[41] Human Rights Council, Follow up report on indigenous peoples and the right to participate in decision-making, with a focus on extractive industries, twenty first session, UN Doc A/HRC/21/55 (2012), paras 21–28. At http://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/ipeoples/emrip/pages/emripindex.aspx (viewed 2 October 2013).

^[42] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples to the Human Rights Council, twenty first session, UN Doc A/HRC/21/47 (2012), para 59. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IPeoples/SRIndigenousPeoples/Pages/AnnualReports.aspx (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[43] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixty eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 19. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[44] United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007, preambular para 2.

^[45] M Gooda, Social Justice Report 2012, Australian Human Rights Commission (2012), p 109. At http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/social-justice-report-2012 (viewed 18 October 2013).

^[46] United Nations Global Compact, Second Exposure Draft – United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: a Business Reference Guide (2013), pp 15–35.

^[47] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples to the Human Rights Council, fifteenth session, UN Doc A/HRC/15/37 (2010), para 46. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-15-37-19-july-2010 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[48] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 27. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[49] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 28. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[50] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 29. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[51] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 23. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[52] J Ruggie, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31 (2011). At www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[53] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples to the Human Rights Council, fifteenth session, UN Doc A/HRC/15/37 (2010), para 37. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-15-37-19-july-2010 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[54] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 31. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[55] Human Rights Council, Follow up report on indigenous peoples and the right to participate in decision-making, with a focus on extractive industries, twenty first session, UN Doc A/HRC/21/55 (2012), para 27(f). At http://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/ipeoples/emrip/pages/emripindex.aspx (viewed 2 October 2013).

^[56] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), paras 1-2, 20. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[57] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 44. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[58] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 20. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[59] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 20. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[60] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 42. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[61] United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, sixth eighth session, UN Doc A/68/279 (2013), para 44. At http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/Reports.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[62] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples to the General Assembly, sixth session, UN Doc A/66/288 (2011), para 97. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-general-assembly-a-66-288-10-august-2011 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[63] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples to the Human Rights Council, fifteenth session, UN Doc A/HRC/15/37 (2010), para 28. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-15-37-19-july-2010 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[64] National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples, First Peoples and Extractive Industries: Report of Roundtable (2012).

^[65] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples: extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc A/HRC/24/41 (2013), para 2. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-24-41-2013 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[66] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples: extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc A/HRC/24/41 (2013), para 8. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-24-41-2013 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[67] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples: extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc A/HRC/24/41 (2013), paras 53–54. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-24-41-2013 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[68] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples: extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc A/HRC/24/41 (2013), paras 61–67, 70. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-24-41-2013 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[69] J Anaya, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples: extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc A/HRC/24/41 (2013), para 72. At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/annual-reports/report-to-the-human-rights-council-a-hrc-24-41-2013 (viewed 29 August 2013).

^[70] M Davis, Study on the impact of the mining boom on indigenous communities in Australia, twelfth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Doc E/C.19/2013/20 (2013). At http://undesadspd.org/IndigenousPeoples/UNPFIISessions/Twelfth/Documents.aspx (viewed 3 October 2013).

^[71] M Davis, Study on the impact of the mining boom on indigenous communities in Australia, twelfth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Doc E/C.19/2013/20 (2013), para 6. At http://undesadspd.org/IndigenousPeoples/UNPFIISessions/Twelfth/Documents.aspx (viewed 3 October 2013).

^[72] M Davis, Study on the impact of the mining boom on indigenous communities in Australia, twelfth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Doc E/C.19/2013/20 (2013), para 8. At http://undesadspd.org/IndigenousPeoples/UNPFIISessions/Twelfth/Documents.aspx (viewed 3 October 2013).

^[73] M Davis, Study on the impact of the mining boom on indigenous communities in Australia, twelfth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Doc E/C.19/2013/20 (2013), paras 14 and 16. At http://undesadspd.org/IndigenousPeoples/UNPFIISessions/Twelfth/Documents.aspx (viewed 3 October 2013).

^[74] M Davis, Study on the impact of the mining boom on indigenous communities in Australia, twelfth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Doc E/C.19/2013/20 (2013), para 12. At http://undesadspd.org/IndigenousPeoples/UNPFIISessions/Twelfth/Documents.aspx (viewed 3 October 2013).

^[75] M Davis, Study on the impact of the mining boom on indigenous communities in Australia, twelfth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Doc E/C.19/2013/20 (2013), paras 2, 18–22. At http://undesadspd.org/IndigenousPeoples/UNPFIISessions/Twelfth/Documents.aspx (viewed 3 October 2013).

^[76] Supply Nation, Supply Nation Brochure: Connecting Australia with Indigenous Business. At http://supplynation.org.au/resources/SNBrochures_Videos (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[77] Supply Nation, Supplier Diversity. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/about_us/Supplier_Diversity (viewed 19 September 2013).

^[78] Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council, Annual Report 2009–2010 (2010), p 4. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/resources/Annual_Report_2009_2010 (viewed 16 September 2013).

^[79] Supply Nation, Brochure Connecting Australia with Indigenous Business, p 2. At http://supplynation.org.au/resources/SNBrochures_Videos (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[80] Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Post-implementation review of the Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council (2011), p 2. The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations is now the Department of Employment and the Department of Education.

^[81] Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Post-implementation review of the Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council (2011), p 2.

^[82] Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council, Annual Report 2011-2012 (2012), p 4. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/resources/Annual_Report_2011_2012 (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[83] Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations, An Introduction to the Indigenous Opportunities Policy (IOP), pp 5, 7. At http://supplynation.org.au/resources/The_Indigenous_Opportunities_Policy (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[84] United States Government Accountability Office, Government Contracting: Federal Efforts to Assist Small Minority Owned Businesses (2011), p 29. At http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42390.pdf (viewed 20 September 2012).

^[85] Supply Nation, About Us. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/about_us (viewed 26 September 2013).

^[86] Supply Nation, Certification Overview. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/indigenous_businesses/Certification (viewed 19 September 2013).

^[87] Supply Nation, Become a Member. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/membership/Become_a_member (viewed 19 September 2013).

^[88] Supply Nation, Membership Fee FAQs. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/membership/Membership_Fee_FAQs (viewed 19 September 2013).

^[89] Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council, Annual Report 2011-2012 (2012), p 8. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/resources/Annual_Report_2011_2012 (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[90] Yaru Water, True Partnership. At http://yaruwater.com/true-partnership/ (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[91] Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council, Annual Report 2011-2012 (2012), p 18. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/resources/Annual_Report_2011_2012 (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[92] Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council, Annual Report 2011-2012 (2012), p 19. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/resources/Annual_Report_2011_2012 (viewed 20 September 2013).

^[93] B Meddings, Case Study: Qantas and Yaru Water. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/resources/Qantas_Yaru_Water (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[94] L Berry, Case Study: Qantas and Yaru Water. At http://www.supplynation.org.au/resources/Qantas_Yaru_Water (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[95] KPMG, Corporate Citizenship Report 2011 (2011). At http://epublishbyus.com/corporate_citizenship_2011/10020914# (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[96] KPMG, KPMG at a Glance. At http://www.kpmg.com/AU/en/about/About/Pages/default.aspx (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[97] KPMG, Corporate Citizenship Report 2011 (2011). At http://epublishbyus.com/corporate_citizenship_2011/10020914# (viewed 21 October 2013).

^[98] KPMG, Our Reconciliation Journey (2012). At http://www.kpmg.com/au/en/issuesandinsights/articlespublications/pages/our-reconciliation-journey-2012.aspx (viewed 24 October 2013).

^[99] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2010-11 (2009), p 4. At http://www.kpmg.com/au/en/issuesandinsights/articlespublications/pages/our-reconciliation-journey-2012.aspx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[100] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2010-2011 (2009), pp 1–2. At http://www.kpmg.com/au/en/issuesandinsights/articlespublications/pages/our-reconciliation-journey-2012.aspx (viewed 1 September 2013).

^[101] P Nash, ‘Defining Shepparton’ (Speech delivered at the Dungala Kaiela Oration, Shepparton, Thursday 20 June 2013).

^[102] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2013 (2013), p 9.

^[103] P Nash, ‘Defining Shepparton’ (Speech delivered at the Dungala Kaiela Oration, Shepparton, Thursday 20 June 2013).

^[104] Art 20(1) of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples articulates that Indigenous peoples have the right ‘to maintain and develop their political, economic and social systems or institutions, to be secure in the enjoyment of their own means of subsistence and development, and to engage freely in all their traditional and other economic activities.’

^[105] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2013 (2013), p 6.

^[106] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2013 (2013), p 7.

^[107] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan Report and Refresh 2011 (2011), p 8. At http://www.kpmg.com/au/en/about/corporate-citizenship/social-inclusion/pages/reconciliation-action-plan.aspx (1 October 2013).

^[108] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2013 (2013), p 7.

^[109] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2013 (2013), p 12.

^[110] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2013 (2013), p 8.

^[111] P Nash, ‘Defining Shepparton’ (Speech delivered at the Dungala Kaiela Oration, Shepparton, Thursday 20 June 2013).

^[112] KPMG, Reconciliation Action Plan 2013 (2013), p 10.

^[113] Rio Tinto, About Us (2013). At http://www.riotinto.com.au/index_aboutus.asp (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[114] For example, see Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, James Anaya: extractive industries and indigenous peoples, 24^th session United Nations General Assembly, UN Doc A/HRC/24/41 (2013). At http://unsr.jamesanaya.org/notes/special-rapporteur-issues-report-on-extractive-industries-and-indigenous-peoples (viewed 4 October 2013).

^[115] Rio Tinto, Reconciliation Action Plan (2010), p 2. At http://www.riotinto.com.au/ENG/communities/33_indigenous_australians.asp (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[116] B Harvey and P Wand, ‘The sky did not fall in! Rio Tinto after Mabo’ in T Bauman and L Glick (eds) The Limits of Change: Mabo and native title 20 years on, AIATSIS Research Publications, Canberra (2012).

^[117] E Bradshaw, Principal Advisor, Communities and Cultural Heritage, Communities and Social Performance Global Practice, Rio Tinto, Telephone conversation with L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 16 September 2013.

^[118] Rio Tinto, Indigenous Australians (2013). At http://www.riotinto.com.au/ENG/communities/33_indigenous_australians.asp (viewed 10 September 2013)

^[119] Rio Tinto, Aboriginal Policy and Programs in Australia. At http://www.riotinto.com/documents/ReportsPublications/RT_PolicyandProg.pdf (viewed 18 October 2013).

^[120] Rio Tinto, The way we work: our global code of business conduct (2009), appendix. At http://www.riotinto.com/aboutus/corporate-publications-3147.aspx (viewed 27 September 2013)

^[121] Rio Tinto, Human Rights Policy (2012). At http://www.riotinto.com/documents/ReportsPublications/Human_rights_policy.pdf (viewed 18 October 2013); V Zimmerman, Group Human Rights Advisor, External Affairs, Rio Tinto, Telephone conversation with L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 16 September 2013.

^[122] Rio Tinto, The way we work: our global code of business conduct (2009). At http://www.riotinto.com/aboutus/corporate-publications-3147.aspx (viewed 27 September 2013)

^[123] Rio Tinto, Why human rights matter (2013), p 11. At http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/human-rights-4800.aspx (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[124] V Zimmerman, Group Human Rights Advisor, External Affairs, Rio Tinto, Telephone conversation with L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 16 September 2013.

^[125] Rio Tinto, Why human rights matter (2013), p 11. At http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/human-rights-4800.aspx (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[126] Rio Tinto, Human rights policy (2012). At http://www.riotinto.com/documents/ReportsPublications/Human_rights_policy.pdf (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[127] Rio Tinto, Cultural heritage management standard for Australian businesses (2011).

^[128] Rio Tinto, Community agreements guidance (2012), pp 14–15. At http://www.riotinto.com/documents/Community_agreements_guidance_2012_2014.pdf (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[129] Rio Tinto, Community agreements guidance (2012), pp 14–15. At http://www.riotinto.com/documents/Community_agreements_guidance_2012_2014.pdf (viewed 27 September 2013).

^[130] Rio Tinto, Why human rights matter (2013), pp 16 and 34–52. At http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/human-rights-4800.aspx (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[131] Rio Tinto, Why human rights matter (2013), pp 16 and 53–70. At http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/human-rights-4800.aspx (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[132] Rio Tinto, Why human rights matter (2013), pp 17 and 71–83. At http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/human-rights-4800.aspx (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[133] Rio Tinto, Why human rights matter (2013), pp 17 and 84–86. At http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/human-rights-4800.aspx (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[134] Rio Tinto, Why human rights matter (2013), pp 23–24. At http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/human-rights-4800.aspx (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[135] Rio Tinto, Sustainable Development Report (2012), p 1. At http://www.riotinto.com/documents/rio_tinto_2012_sustainable_development_report.pdf (viewed 19 October 2013).

^[136] See Agreements, Treaties and Negotiated Settlements Project. At http://www.atns.net.au/ (viewed 19 October 2013).

^[137] Rio Tinto, Reconciliation Action Plan 2011–2012 Report, (2013), pp 6–35. At http://www.riotinto.com.au/ENG/communities/33_indigenous_australians.asp (viewed 10 September 2013).

^[138] V Zimmerman, Group Human Rights Advisor, External Affairs, Rio Tinto, Email to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 16 September 2013.

^[139] V Zimmerman, Group Human Rights Advisor, External Affairs, Rio Tinto, Email to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 16 September 2013.

^[140] E Bradshaw, Principal Advisor, Communities and cultural heritage, Communities and Social Performance Global Practice, Rio Tinto, Telephone conversation with L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 16 September 2013.

^[141] L Potter, Community Partnerships Australia, Lend Lease, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 19 September 2013, p 1.

^[142] L Potter, Community Partnerships Australia, Lend Lease, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 19 September 2013, p 1.

^[143] L Potter, Community Partnerships Australia, Lend Lease, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 19 September 2013, p 1.

^[144] Lend Lease, Australia Reconciliation Action Plan: Case Study, p 2. At http://www.lendlease.com/australia/sustainability/~/~/media/Group/Lend%20Lease%20Website/Australia/Documents/Sustainability/RAP_Case_Study.ashx (viewed 1 October 2013).

^[145] These outcomes from the project are set out in L Potter, Community Partnerships Australia, Lend Lease, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 19 September 2013.

^[146] A Ferguson, Presentation at Reconciliation Australia’s RAP Showcase, Parliament House, Canberra, 6 February 2013.

^[147] L Potter, Community Partnerships Australia, Lend Lease, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 19 September 2013, p 3.

^[148] C Brokenborough, Presentation at Reconciliation Australia’s RAP Showcase, Parliament House, Canberra, 6 February 2013.

^[149] L Potter, Community Partnerships Australia, Lend Lease, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 19 September 2013, p 3.

^[150] Westpac Group, Working Together: Reconciliation Action Plan 2012-2014 (2012), p 4. At http://www.westpac.com.au/about-westpac/sustainability-and-community/our-community/community-focus-areas/indigenous/reconciliation-action-plan/ (viewed 25 September 2013).

^[151] S Yazbeck, Indigenous Engagement Manager, Westpac, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 17 September 2013, p 1.

^[152] S Yazbeck, Indigenous Engagement Manager, Westpac, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 17 September 2013, p 1.

^[153] G Kelly, CEO Westpac, ‘Business must lift its game for First Peoples’, The Australian, 29 August 2013, p 12.

^[154] Westpac Group, Working Together: Reconciliation Action Plan 2012-2014 (2012), p 3. At http://www.westpac.com.au/about-westpac/sustainability-and-community/our-community/community-focus-areas/indigenous/reconciliation-action-plan/ (viewed 25 September 2013).

^[155] Westpac Group, Working Together: Reconciliation Action Plan 2012-2014 (2012), p 6-7. At http://www.westpac.com.au/about-westpac/sustainability-and-community/our-community/community-focus-areas/indigenous/reconciliation-action-plan/ (viewed 25 September 2013).

^[156] S Yazbeck, Indigenous Engagement Manager, Westpac, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 17 September 2013, p 2.

^[157] S Yazbeck, Indigenous Engagement Manager, Westpac, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 17 September 2013, p 2.

^[158] S Yazbeck, Indigenous Engagement Manager, Westpac, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 17 September 2013, pp 1–2.

^[159] S Yazbeck, Indigenous Engagement Manager, Westpac, Correspondence to L Bygrave, Senior Policy Officer, Australian Human Rights Commission, 17 September 2013, p 1.

^[160] G Kelly, CEO Westpac, ‘Business must lift its game for First Peoples’, The Australian, 29 August 2013, p 12.

^[161] Reconciliation Australia, Reconciliation Action Plan Impact Measurement Report 2012 (2013), p 6. At http://www.reconciliation.org.au/home/reconciliation-action-plans/rap-impact-measurement-report (viewed 7 October 2013).

^[162] Reconciliation Australia, Reconciliation Action Plan Impact Measurement Report 2012 (2013), p 4. At http://www.reconciliation.org.au/home/reconciliation-action-plans/rap-impact-measurement-report (viewed 7 October 2013).