Linda Burney (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It gives me no pleasure to stand and speak in this debate this evening. However, as the shadow Attorney-General has outlined, these are Labor's amendments. The two ministers opposite might show a little bit of respect for this instead of joking around and thinking it is funny. You might just sit there and listen. The shadow Attorney-General has made very clear the history of native title in this country. I attended the Mabo family's event for the 25th anniversary of the High Court decision in the Mabo case. It was a really special event. Of course, that decision is what led to Paul Keating bringing in the Native Title Act. I well remember, as others in this chamber will remember, the attacks on native title, led by John Howard and his government in 1997, and the consequent amendments to the native title legislation.

In politics, pragmatism is an important thing. As the shadow Attorney-General has said, as Labor has said, this is a process we have taken seriously. Yes, we needed more time, because there had been no consultation. The hapless Attorney-General had rushed this legislation in and unnecessarily wanted it to go through in a very short period of time. Labor showed respect and it is Labor's amendments that are being discussed this evening to try to fix a mess that has been created by the Attorney and others.

I pay enormous respect to Senators Dodson and McCarthy and those in the other place who have worked assiduously to make sure that the rights of Indigenous people have been upheld in this. I have a sense that this issue has a long way to run, in terms of legal proceedings. Some traditional owner groups have made that very clear. But this is important because something like 126 ILUAs have been signed, and the McGlade case has made the uncertainty of those ILUAs a reality. That is why we have had to pursue this piece of legislation and the amendments that have been put forward.

The inept way in which the government has handled this—and I have watched this very carefully—astounds me. Given the lack of respect this government has shown to Aboriginal people and the very fact that had it not been for Labor standing up for Indigenous people, saying that there had to be consultation, saying that there needed to be a Senate inquiry into this, then we would see a much different outcome than that which we are seeing tonight. The reality of what has been put before you results from Labor pursuing discussions and consultations and insisting on the Senate inquiry. It seems clear from comments that there needs to be a very close look at the native title legislation in the future. As the shadow Attorney said, this is no ordinary piece of legislation, this is no ordinary piece of law and this is not about anything ordinary. It goes to the heart of what connects Aboriginal people, and that is land. Our connection to country is absolutely fundamental to our identity and to our place in the land in this country. Native title legislation is of importance to that. It is very easy for people to make jokes about this. It is very easy for people like the Attorney to think that this can go through in just one day. But land and connection are important, as this side of the House understand. We understand the importance of cultural connection to country and that the native title legislation has for the making of law in this land. It was not until the native title legislation in 1992 that law was created between Aboriginal people and the state. That is the significance of this legislation. I thank Labor for its persistence in ensuring that we get this as correct as we can.

See this speech in context