Black cladding is economic violence against Aboriginal women!?

Every year during the 16 Days of Activism against Gender‑Based Violence we are reminded that violence is not only physical. It is emotional, psychological and economic.

Yet when Aboriginal businesswoman Jolleen Hicks uses her LinkedIn page to call out potential “black cladding” in the Australian Government’s Indigenous Procurement Policy (IPP) it is still too often dismissed as a niche business argument instead of a gendered justice issue.

New research from ANU’s Dr Christian Eva, based on freedom‑of‑information releases from the National Indigenous Australians Agency shows just how narrow the IPP pipeline has become. In the first eight years of the policy, from 2015‑16 to mid‑2023, half of the A$7 billion in federal Indigenous procurement contracts went to only 18 businesses.

FOI tables published by First Nations News add more recent detail, listing companies such as Barpa, Evolve FM and Pacific Services Group Holdings among the biggest beneficiaries.

Hicks’ concern seems not to be that large Aboriginal businesses exist (success should be celebrated) but that the ownership and control of some high‑earning “Indigenous” suppliers is opaque.

When companies that are Indigenous in name but not in substance dominate the IPP, the businesses crowded out can include many that are genuinely Aboriginal‑owned and led, especially by women.

Those missed opportunities mean fewer stable jobs, fewer community‑controlled services and less economic independence for women already at high risk of violence.

Which is why black cladding should be seen as economic violence.

Because it redirects public money intended to help close the disparity gaps (social procurement policy) into structures that may deliver little back to community. The services that miss out are the ones that keep women safe: housing projects, legal centres, healing programs and local enterprises that employ women on their own terms.

During this 16‑day campaign, governments and procurement officers could take one practical step towards ending gender‑based violence: treat the misuse of Indigenous procurement as a serious harm, not a technicality.

That means backing reforms that tighten eligibility, expose conflicts of interest and put Aboriginal women at the centre of decisions about where the money flows.