Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

There is presently a bill before this House which reinstates the permit system that was removed without justification when the former government announced the legislation that it was proceeding with last year at the time of the Northern Territory intervention. The removal of the permit system—the ‘scrapping of the permit system’ was the way it was described at the time—occurred without any real consultation by the former government and without any justification. I say ‘without any justification’ because, although the removal of the permit system was announced in June 2007, when the then Prime Minister and the then Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs announced the intervention in the Territory, it was not explained or justified at that time. There was a media release that referred to the scrapping of the permit system. It directed attention to two so-called fact sheets that were put out with regard to changes to the permit system, but they contained no justification for its removal.

It is a fact that the Little children are sacred report, by Pat Anderson and Rex Wild, on which the intervention into the Northern Territory and Indigenous communities was said to have been based, did not call for changes to the permit system. There is no evidence that the permit system was in any way related to child sex abuse. In fact, it can squarely be said that there is some risk that removing permit requirements might worsen the problem of child sex abuse. By contrast, there is evidence that the proposal to abolish the permit system predates the Little children are sacred report by some years. The pursuit of the proposal last year by the former government, and its continued pursuit in the guise of this motion today, is simply the pursuit of an ideological position which does not have a factual basis. Indeed, it is an ideological position which is opposed to the control of traditional land by Aboriginal people, an ideological position which is apparently opposed to consultation and an ideological position which is prepared to proceed entirely without any evidence. It is clear that the member for Warringah is intent on listening very selectively—only to voices that he agrees with. It is laughable to suggest that the government is letting ideology get in the way of common sense. The opposition is so blinded by the ideology that drove its legislation last year that even now it is not prepared to let go of it.

See this speech in context