Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for External Territories) Share this | Hansard source

Just pursuing where I left off: in January of 2019 the then opposition leader, Bill Shorten, visited Kakadu and announced $220 million in funding to upgrade Kakadu National Park and support the township of Jabiru to transition to a tourism based economy, which was part of the vision of the master plan that I spoke about earlier.

In August of 2019, four parties formally executed a memorandum of understanding on the future of the Jabiru township, with the then Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Sussan Ley, signing the memorandum of understanding on behalf of the Commonwealth. Negotiations were led by the Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation, as the architect of the way forward for Jabiru is an Indigenous-led multipurpose town.

In early 2019, the Australian government—the current government—promised $216 million and the Northern Territory government promised $131.5 million, which made a $347.5 million investment over 10 years to upgrade Kakadu National Park and support the transition of the Jabiru township to a tourism services hub. This piece of legislation is important to the Mirarr people and the communities of western Arnhem Land. It's something which we all support. I know the passage of this is very keenly awaited by Mirarr people and the communities of western Arnhem Land. I know the benefits will accrue not only to those communities but to the people of the Northern Territory and Australia as a whole by the development that will take place.

The other issue I want to briefly talk about is the amendments moved by the honourable member for Barton around the issue of the flag. It's important that we understand the significance of the Aboriginal flag to First Nations people in this country, and I'm not sure it, nor its history, is as broadly understood as it should be. The member for Barton spoke about its history and the important work that was done by Harold Thomas, who designed the flag, but the concerns we have now are that this flag is being used by a particular clothing company against the interests of the broader Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community. I say that because I'm aware of letters which have been sent. I'm sure that Mr Thomas would not want to think that the flag could not be used or should not be used as a promotional tool for Aboriginal health, for example. Yet, I'm aware that WAM, the company which he's assigned rights to, has been making cease and desist demands of Aboriginal organisations such as health services about the use of the flag.

Many of these organisations, Aboriginal organisations, use clothing as a promotional tool or as an encouragement for First Nations people, for example, to have health checks. Deadly Choices, a product of the Institute for Urban Indigenous Health, is one of those organisations, and it now no longer uses the Aboriginal flag on its clothing because of a cease and desist letter from WAM. We're not talking about a multinational organisation here, or the AFL or the Rugby League. We're talking about Aboriginal community based organisations who see the flag as central to their purpose. What we're saying here is that it's inappropriate and wrong, really, for this company to exercise the rights they have in the way they are doing. I'd implore them to see what's going on here—there's a broader purpose. We indeed need to accept and look after the intellectual property rights and the copyright of Harold Thomas. That does not mean that we have to support the way in which the licence which has been issued to WAM is being utilised. This is a shonky organisation, as was demonstrated by the member for Barton. I support the amendments which the member for Barton has proposed in trying to release the flag for its good and public purpose. (Time expired)

See this speech in context