Ken Wyatt (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Closing the Gap: Prime Minister's Report 2014. I enjoyed listening to the speeches of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition because the bipartisan commitment is strong and is aimed towards the targets that have been established through the Closing the Gap COAG work. But there were two lines in the Prime Minister's speech that resonated and stuck with me. One was:

Many of us have been on a long journey.

If we look at the context of that long journey then, depending on which side you stand, that journey is very different—particular for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities over that period of time.

The second sentence that stayed with me was:

The challenge is to turn good intentions into better outcomes.

That is the challenge in this process. I have always been of the view that we will not close the gap unless we focus on the total Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population of Australia—that is, urban communities, rural, remote and regional centres. That is because three-quarters—75 per cent—of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people live in major cities or regional areas, with the remaining 25 per cent living in remote and very remote areas. So whilst the targets apply equally, the challenge is in the programs and the types of initiatives that you put into place that will be effective within those locations.

The challenges faced in these different environments are very similar. We make assumptions about the overarching issues of high Indigenous infant mortality rates, the extraordinary prevalence rates of otitis media and the other health problems that prevail and the need to address the social determinants which impact on every facet of the goals that we have set ourselves. And we need to look at appropriately negotiated services, because they remain critical in the way that we achieve an outcome.

All of us, when we are involved in determining our own destinies—we look at what it is that we should improve or how to add to the quality of our lives—generally expect and want to have the capacity to participate in those negotiations. It does not matter whether those negotiations are with our GP or whether they are with the local shopkeeper. Transcend that model into the way in which governments deliver services to Aboriginal communities: we should be doing exactly the same there. Because if we are doing to people the things that we want to implement then they will not be effective unless they are owned.

Leaders of change must ensure that the status quo is not retained or justified, because we will not see the shift in the outcomes that we seek. We know that change is inevitable and that there is a need to take strong action to eliminate the high levels of disparity that prevail within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. In the new and emerging directions, Indigenous affairs will experience unprecedented change. Those working in the area will be required to adapt, adjust and work to achieve the directions set out by all levels in government. That includes doing things in concert with Aboriginal people—working with them to determine what is an achievable outcome.

In the forward of a book I read recently, the former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser, wrote:

Recent governments have failed to consult closely with Indigenous communities in various parts of Australia. Two or three years ago when I was travelling through the Kimberley, I spoke with Indigenous people and asked them how they saw this consultation. In simple terms they said: "Well, Canberra makes up its mind what is good for us, and consultation consists of trying to persuade us what Canberra has decided is indeed good for us."

Above all, Australian governments must learn to treat Indigenous Australians with respect and work on programs with Indigenous leadership, but equally we need to be mindful that there are people within the Aboriginal industry who rely on the incomes that they receive for the work that they do—and sometimes change is not advantageous. It is interesting when I walk into a community and the CEO of an organisation says. 'We have achieved our goals; we have achieved the targets that the Commonwealth and the state have set for us.' When I walk around that community I see the reality of what impacts on a family. I see a family that is troubled by health problems, a house that I do not consider habitable, or a family that does not benefit from the food availability we take for granted in capital cities. But I see the same in capital cities. In my own electorate, Aboriginal families do not access mainstream services—we should not use the term 'mainstream services', because they are government services for all Australians. That is the challenge we have to get our mind around. If we shape the services then we have to link with those who are affected, and the immediate beneficiaries of that are families.

In my 60 years of living I have noticed that every layer of government picks identified leadership that it negotiates with only. Each and every state, territory and Commonwealth government tends to hand pick leaders that they consult with to give them the solutions for families on the ground, yet their connection is not with those families. Even I as an Indigenous Australian do not connect with every Nyungar family in the south-west, so I cannot and never will represent them all. That is why I have said in this chamber on many occasions that every federal member should get out and meet every Aboriginal organisation to find out what the gap is in their electorate. It is through that process that we can collectively bring about the change that the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Greens have committed to—set aside the politics; we are leaders in our communities and electorates so let us go out there and demonstrate practically how we can engage, how we can acknowledge. We might not agree with the views presented to us; we may not agree that a community wants to bury the guidelines because it would better suit them, but let us try it. Often I hear from Indigenous leaders at the community level, including urban, who say they want to do something this way but the bureaucrat they deal with is insisting they have to continue doing it another way. They take the view that Malcolm Fraser expressed to the Kimberley people—they are being told how to do things.

I remain optimistic that the changes that we have in mind collectively out of both chambers of this parliament will make a difference, but they will only make a difference when we walk with people. There are individuals from the past like Fred Chaney and Ian Viner who started the journey long ago and then were joined certainly by Kevin Rudd, and I was there for Paul Keating's famous address in Redfern. It was a powerful delivery of a commitment but the trouble is that commitments have to be implemented; change has to occur in concert with the very communities we talk about. The aggregation of national data should not be seen as a mark of improvement if we have families that live in abject poverty and struggle. Even the truancy program has merit, but if you bring kids back into a classroom—I know this as a former teacher—who have not been engaged then you have to re-teach. You have to teach them to catch up, and that is challenging. Every idea on merit is good; what we have to do is think about how we implement those ideas. I have been critical recently of the public service, and they have to change the way they engage. That is not to say there are not good people working in those agencies.

I would also encourage us, with current employment and incarceration rates, to undertake a concerted effort to close the gap and reduce the number of kids in incarceration. Let us build a pathway that gives the hope and aspirations that we expect and provide to all Australians. But sometimes we need to nurture pathways for people who come out of disadvantaged families—and I am talking of all families in this instance—and give them that level of intervention and support that will enable them to be people who will make a difference in the future for this nation, for this country and for the people who live here.

I have always said that the capability that we have as parliamentarians to make a difference is there, but it is whether we have the will and desire to do it at the tangible level, at the electorate level, and by meeting Aboriginal organisations and communities. It is my intention to start talking to all Aboriginal organisations and communities and asking them if they have invited their local member, including senators, to come to their communities and to come to their organisations and see what the gaps are and then champion for them on their behalf within government, government agencies and within this House.

See this speech in context