Blakwashing or “blak cladding” is a growing concern within Australia’s business landscape, particularly concerning the effectiveness of the Indigenous Procurement Policy (IPP) and this deceptive practice (like greenwashing) basically involves joint ventures and partners that pretents to be “Indigenous” on the outside to secure government and corporate contracts meant for genuine Indigenous enterprises.
And the ramifications of blakwashing extend far beyond business ethics, deeply impacting Indigenous communities and undermining the very goals of the IPP.
The Story of Koolyn Briggs
Melbourne electrician Koolyn Briggs became an unexpected victim of blakwashing when he was appointed as a director of an Indigenous arm of an electrical contracting business.
And with promises of creating career opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, the business seemed legitimate but Briggs was never invited to board meetings or compensated for his role and when the business collapsed, he faced a staggering $700,000 tax bill from the Australian Taxation Office.
“I felt my whole world had really fallen apart when I read it. I was in shock. It was just instant stress,” said Melbourne electrician Koolyn Briggs, SBS
But Briggs’ story is just one example of how blakwashing can exploit well-intentioned policies and take away money and opportunities from First Nations.
And despite winning a legal battle against the tax office, the experience left him and other Indigenous directors facing immense stress and financial burdens.
The Mechanism of Blakwashing
Blakwashing typically involves appointing an Indigenous face to the board of a non-Indigenous business, often without genuine involvement in the company’s operations, which allows the business to qualify for government contracts designated for Indigenous enterprises.
And the Federal Government’s IPP mandates that three per cent of government contracts go to Indigenous-owned businesses, translating to a significant portion of the $75 billion annual government spend.
But the consequences of blakwashing are profound as Indigenous business consultant Katja Henaway notes that this practice can be traumatising for Indigenous business owners and their communities.
And the stress and financial liability imposed on these individuals can disrupt families and erode trust within the community.
Calls for Accountability and Reform
Many experts and community members in First Nations label blakwashing as fraud and are advocating for the need for strict adherence to Commonwealth Procurement rules and suggests that prosecuting offenders would deter future blakwashing.
And there are theories that estimating that up to a third of certified “Indigenous businesses” via Supply Nation and other “middlemen” might be engaging in blakwashing, which highlights the need for more rigorous oversight and verification processes.
Thus, Blakwashing undermines the objectives of the Indigenous Procurement Policy, which initially was a social procurement policy that aimed to help close the disparity gaps in First Nations through business opportunities and employment.
So to combat this practice, stricter regulations, thorough verification processes and accountability measures are essential.
And genuine Indigenous businesses deserve the opportunity to thrive without the shadow of blakwashing casting doubt on their legitimacy and by addressing this issue head-on, Australia can ensure that the benefits of the IPP truly reach those it was designed to support.
