Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Native Title Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2010. The purpose of this bill is to amend the Native Title Act 1993 to create a new process to deal with the construction of housing and other relevant infrastructure on land which is or may be subject to native title. This bill is almost identical to the Native Title Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2009, which lapsed on the proroguing of parliament in September this year. That original bill was referred to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry, and the committee reported on it in February this year. The key amendments in the bill before us today provide a new process to assist in the timely construction of infrastructure that is being built for the benefit of the relevant Indigenous community by or on behalf of the Crown, a local government body or any other statutory authority of the Crown in any of its capacities, for Indigenous communities or on Indigenous held land.

Schedule 1 of the bill inserts new subdivision JA into the ‘future acts regime’ in division 3, part 2 of the act. The future acts regime sets out how acts that will affect native title, called ‘future acts’, can be undertaken. Importantly, if an act will not affect native title, it is not subject to the Native Title Act and the future acts regime in this bill. It is not an open licence to override the provisions of the Native Title Act. If an act will affect native title, it will be valid to the extent of any effect on native title only where it is covered by one of the subdivisions of the future acts regime.

The types of infrastructure that this bill applies to are set out in the new subdivision JA and include public housing for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders living in, or in the vicinity of, the area—and it is not intended that this will extend to cover housing for private ownership; public education and health facilities; police and emergency services facilities that principally or primarily benefit Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders living in the area; certain facilities, such as sewage treatment facilities, relevant to this; and other relevant facilities. Furthermore, following stakeholder input and feedback from the Senate inquiry into the bill, the 2010 bill’s coverage has been extended to include staff housing. This is an important part of ensuring there are sufficient staff to deliver services in Indigenous communities and is important to remove systemic obstacles to the delivery of much needed services, particularly in remote communities.

I want to talk about consultation. There will also be a requirement for genuine and appropriate consultation with possible native title holders and this will require state and territory governments to lodge a report outlining how these consultations were conducted. As part of this consultation process, representative Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander bodies and any registered native title claimants and registered native title bodies corporate will be notified and have the opportunity to comment on acts which could affect native title with regard to the relevant land or waters.

Importantly, the consultation process may be enhanced through experience. The consultation provisions and definitions in this bill are strengthened by the provision that the Attorney-General has the power to make a determination to refine the requirements for this consultation process over time to reflect the experiences of the relevant groups as a result of this new process. This power with regard to consultation will ensure that the process can be adapted to deal with differing projects and community circumstances. This strong and flexible consultation process reflects the intention of this government to deal with native title issues in a way that is respectful of the interests of all parties but also serves to ensure the timely delivery of this important infrastructure. Native title is protected for the long term because, where this new process is used, native title will not be extinguished but merely suppressed.

This bill has come about because some state governments have indicated that uncertainty in relation to native title could be and is a barrier to meeting housing and service delivery targets, which could create a delay in the delivery of housing projects. The new process outlined in this bill will be subject to state and territory heritage processes, and this is an important provision. A sunset clause will apply to ensure the amendment operates for a period of 10 years, consistent with the current funding commitments under the national partnership agreements on remote Indigenous housing and remote service delivery.

There is no doubt that Indigenous Australians remain the most disadvantaged group in the country and that we need to take all practicable steps to improve the delivery of basic services to this community. At present, there is extreme overcrowding and an appalling standard of housing and public infrastructure, particularly in remote communities. Improving housing and reducing overcrowding in Indigenous communities is essential to the Gillard government’s efforts to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage. The amendments in this bill are therefore necessary to help achieve these important goals.

It is important to note in this regard that the Gillard government’s housing program in the Northern Territory is now on track to deliver 750 new homes, 230 rebuilds of homes and 2,500 refurbishments of homes by 2013—and all of that in remote communities in the Northern Territory. The Gillard government exceeded our target for the most recent financial year and, as at 11 October 2010, 82 new houses had been completed, and we have 101 houses under construction in remote communities in the Northern Territory. In addition, 645 refurbishments and rebuilds of houses have been completed and another 105 refurbishments and rebuilds are underway.

The Gillard government is also making important efforts to build a strong Indigenous workforce, which is another important part of closing the gap on Indigenous disadvantage. This goes directly to the points the member for Kennedy is trying to make by interjecting. There are currently around 300 Indigenous people employed in this housing program—and around 30 per cent of the housing workforce in these remote communities is Indigenous, well above our commitment to 20 per cent Indigenous employment in the workforce. Despite these achievements, we are only too aware that we have got an enormous amount more to do in remote Indigenous housing, both in the Northern Territory and in other parts of remote Australia. The Gillard government has made a very significant financial commitment to addressing the need for Indigenous housing and intends to get on with the job.

As well as these important housing measures, other improvements are taking place in remote communities. The most recent monitoring report shows that there are now additional police in remote communities, and many of those communities have never before seen police on the ground. There have of course been tens of thousands of child health checks and specialist follow-up services with doctors and dentists. There are now an additional 140 teachers in schools in remote communities. More safe houses and creches have been built in these communities. The government is also in the process of putting in place the new income management system, which will improve parental responsibility to make sure that welfare payments are spent how they are intended to be spent—in the interests of children. Most significantly, for the first time we are introducing the new child protection income management system, which does mean that child protection workers can now refer parents for 70 per cent of income management in cases of neglect.

Most relevant to this bill we are debating today, it is good to know that there have been improvements in housing for Indigenous people in remote communities in the Northern Territory. Of course there is more work to be done, but improvements in these communities are occurring. This is important for many reasons, not the least of which is the reason highlighted by the recently released report of the most recent inquiry into child protection in the Northern Territory. That report highlighted how overcrowded housing impacts on family wellbeing. This reminds us that decent housing is vital if we are to see a safe environment in which children can grow up.

As I said at the outset, Indigenous Australians remain the most disadvantaged group in the country. There is extreme overcrowding and an appalling standard of housing and public infrastructure in many remote communities. Improving housing and reducing overcrowding in Indigenous communities is essential to the Gillard government’s efforts to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage. The provisions of this bill will assist us to meet this objective. For these reasons I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context