Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services, Indigenous Affairs and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House:

(1)

calls on the Government to end the permit system preventing access to remote Northern Territory townships;

(2)

calls on the Government to restore the pornography bans put in place by the former Government; and

(3)

urges the Government to not further water-down the Northern Territory intervention.

Over the last few days I have been very lucky to hear two government ministers speak passionately in support of the Northern Territory intervention. I heard the Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy speak with palpable sincerity about the importance of the intervention on the Lateline program on Friday and, when prerecording the SBS Insight program on Saturday night, I heard the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs defend the intervention in a hostile ambience when it would have been easier for her in some respects to have fudged her attitude. I want to congratulate both those government ministers for the strong position that they have taken and to say to the House that the intervention is about upholding the same standards of decency and humanity in Indigenous townships that we would expect in our own suburbs and neighbourhoods.

The important thing is to ensure that nothing we do detracts from that intervention and waters down its impact. I would remind the House of what the most senior Aboriginal person in the federal Labor Party, the former national president, Warren Mundine, said about the permit system:

The permit system didn’t stop crime. In fact, if you look at all of the reports that have come out in the last few years, crime has flourished under the permit system, so it’s a fallacy to say that it helps law-and-order problems. It really embedded these problems because some powerful people were able to get away with things without being watched.

Mr Mundine went on:

If you want to create a real economy you’re going to have to have more commercial activity happening and that happens by allowing people to flow in and out of places.

But it is not just Warren Mundine who is urging the new Labor government here in Canberra to think again about the permit system. The central Northern Territory member of parliament in the Territory legislature, Alison Anderson, said that the permit system:

... has been used as a tool by some people in communities to reject certain people that they disagreed with or don’t want out there.

So here you have two very senior Labor people, of impeccable Labor credentials, who are saying to the new government, ‘Don’t restore the permit system.’ I say to members opposite: please don’t let ideology get in the way of common sense on this issue.

If there is any doubt about just how ideological the new government’s position is on the permit system, I refer to a report in the Northern Territory News last week, where a Territory man who drove a road accident victim to a health clinic was charged by Northern Territory police for entering Aboriginal land without a permit. This is the kind of nonsense that the permit system has permitted.

Let me also talk about the pornography ban which the Howard government sought to enshrine in legislation and which is now being watered down by the incoming government. The Little children are sacred report said:

The issue of children’s and the community’s exposure to pornography was raised regularly in submissions and consultations with the Inquiry. The use of pornography as a way to encourage or prepare children for sex ... has featured heavily in recent prominent cases.

                        …                   …                   …

It was subsequently confirmed at the regional meetings conducted by the Inquiry ... that pornography was a major factor in communities and that it should be stopped.

That is what the report said, and that is what the Howard government sought to do. We even had the new Prime Minister claiming in his booklet on his first 100 days to have introduced legislation to ban R18+ content in Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory. Not true! The legislation, as introduced by the government, bans pay TV porn only if there is 35 per cent pornographic content, if the community asks for it and if that request passes a public interest test. Please think again. What earthly good can pay TV porn be doing in these communities? We do not need it. Let us get rid of it. Let us support the intervention by restoring the original legislation on this point.

Danna Vale (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Heritage, the Arts and Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to 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.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Community Services, Indigenous Affairs and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Abbott interjecting

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

I am not prepared to comment on a matter that is apparently before the courts. The member for Warringah has referred to the case of someone who has been charged.

It is worth reflecting on the wealth of material that was available to the former government, and is still available to the opposition to consider, if it wishes, in the form of not one but two reports. There is a report by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs from 1999 and another report, much more recent, from September 2007, by the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs—both of which make it clear that Aboriginal communities are very, very directly opposed to the removal of the permit system. Not only are they opposed; almost all other groups who have any involvement in this matter have expressed trenchant opposition to the removal of the permit system, which, I repeat, will do nothing to address the scourge of child sex abuse which was one of the reasons behind the intervention.

It is worth making the point that many communities, not in the Northern Territory regrettably, have a high incidence of child abuse—just as high as those in the Northern Territory—and they do not have a permit system. This opposition is intent on ignoring the views of Aboriginal people; ignoring the views of Aboriginal communities; ignoring the views of the Northern Territory police, who have expressed a very clear opposition to the scrapping of the permit system; and ignoring the recommendations of the House of Representatives committee when it looked at this in 1999 and the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee when it looked at the matter as recently as last year. I could go on to point to the way in which the former government— (Time expired)

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Heritage, the Arts and Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to wholeheartedly support the motion moved by the member for Warringah. The opposition condemns the watering down of any elements of coalition policy or legislation concerning the Northern Territory intervention, because it would have the effect of diminishing the protection of Indigenous women and children who are subjected to sexual abuse and violence. The Kevin Rudd government has introduced a bill into this House which would certainly diminish that protection by reinstating, in particular, the old permit system, which ensured that the atrocious conditions of some Indigenous settlements were kept out of sight and, so, out of mind of mainstream Australia. The Labor government’s bill, the Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Other Legislation Amendment (Emergency Response Consolidation) Bill 2008, also seeks to water down our policy intent in relation to access to an avalanche of brutal and degrading pornography. This material is regularly seen by Indigenous children, given the overcrowding in many houses in the prescribed communities.

The John Howard government decided that it had to act when we received a copy of the report of the Northern Territory government’s board of inquiry into the protection of Aboriginal children from sexual abuse. The co-chairs called their report Little children are sacred. This report described the shocking nature of the sexual abuse—its extent, its prevalence, who the perpetrators were and the immediate, long-term and intergenerational effects of this abuse on the children in the community. The John Howard government decided not to wait interminably for a Northern Territory response; rather, we acted decisively and comprehensively—and in consultation with the Northern Territory government and Indigenous leadership.

The media brought to people’s attention the contents of the Little children are sacred report, which shocked and shamed ordinary Australians, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, across the country. People commonly asked how the dangerous and dysfunctional communities identified in the report could exist in a developed and caring country like ours, which boasts freedom of the press and freedom of movement for all, a fair go and a decent, peaceful life. Of course, one of the reasons that this crisis of abuse, fuelled by alcohol, drugs and pornography, persisted in the squalid ghettos of the remote Northern Territory was that the settlements in question were hidden from the view of the wider public. The permit system ensured that.

The grey nomads could not stop on their way up the highway to buy a can of Coke at the local store, they could not drop into the settlement art galleries to buy a painting from the locals, and they could not spend a night in the caravan park admiring the beautiful scenery and having conversations with the community because, with the exception of a few—who painstakingly charted their way through the confusing and ridiculous permit approval system—ordinary Australians were excluded from these settlements. It is hard to see how the squalid un-Australian standards of living would have been tolerated if their existence had been more regularly seen. The Northern Territory government’s inertia could not have persisted as it did.

The permit system did not protect dysfunctional Indigenous communities from exploitation by both Indigenous and non-Indigenous pushers of drugs, alcohol and pornography. I believe that locking the blighted settlements away from the public’s gaze ensured the appalling conditions of the houses, the neglected and vandalised schools, the packs of wandering dogs, the neglected and dirty kids sitting in the dust and not going to school, and the drunk and doped adults—all of these un-Australian circumstances—were perpetuated because few people beyond the victims knew it was happening, and so they could not care and complain. We decided that just 0.2 per cent of the areas previously covered by the permit system would be changed and the public would be allowed access to the usual places you visit when you drive through a town: places like the public store, other shops and perhaps galleries. People could stop at a public place. We had a lot of support from the women and children for this to happen. Unfortunately, the federal election approached, the member for Lingiari put about the myth that sacred places would be trampled on, that people would enter houses. How ridiculous. That was not our intention. We ask that the permit system for 0.2 per cent of the towns be reinstated.

Then there was the pornography. We said that it must be banned. The ridiculous proposed legislation says that it is okay for broadcasts containing 35 per cent R18+ pornography to be seen in these communities—unless the minister is satisfied that the community wants a ban to occur. I want to know how they are going to get that permission from the community when it is so abused and victimised, when the women and children are so afraid of standing up against those who want the pornography to be perpetuated in those communities—those who make money from it and those who groom children, in particular, for sexual abuse through the use of that pornography.

I say it is a shame to see these changes being brought into this House. I am wondering why the actual bill has been delayed now for two days. It looks like it will not get up tomorrow either. It should be brought on and we should deal with it properly. (Time expired)

Kerry Rea (Bonner, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Rudd Labor government, when in opposition, supported the then government’s Northern Territory emergency response because we were prepared to support any measures that dealt with the elimination of sexual abuse and violence against women and children in Indigenous communities. That has been made clear in statements made by both the Prime Minister and the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs prior to and subsequent to the last election. It is also clear from the legislation before the House. That is why I think this motion is very confusing. I do not really understand why this motion is before us. I am particularly concerned and confused by the second dot point, which calls on the government to ‘restore the pornography bans put in place by the former government’.

What does the member for Warringah mean by ‘restore’? As the shadow minister, surely he has read the current legislation and the second reading speech by the minister. When he calls on the government to restore something, it implies that the government is taking something away. The government is taking nothing away. In fact, it is actually extending the pornography ban to include pay TV licences, ensuring that they do not provide television channels that include R18+ content. It is actually an extension of the ban. The previous government’s legislation clearly talks about X-rated pornography. The motion before us says that the government is taking something away, when the legislation before the House in fact extends the pornography ban. We are absolutely clear in our commitment to protecting children from sexual abuse and violence and we are absolutely committed to cracking down on children being exposed to pornography, particularly in these communities and particularly when they are exposed to X-rated and, in this case, pay television licensed channels which include R-rated material as well.

I hear from the opposition criticism that this is also a watering down because it includes consultation with communities. This government is committed to consulting with Indigenous communities on such far-reaching proposals as those that are contained within this legislation and the previous government’s legislation. It is also a requirement of the Racial Discrimination Act that this particular measure be declared a special measure, which requires a community member to make the request. It also requires that the relevant community be consulted and informed and it does allow for a time ban. So, not only are we adhering to what I believe is a genuine approach to working in partnership with many people in Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory who wish to see some form of action taken against sexual abuse and violence; it is actually a requirement under the Racial Discrimination Act, and it could lead to a legal challenge if we do not have that included in the legislation that is before the House.

I do not understand why the member for Warringah has moved this motion. He talks about permits, which are clearly irrelevant to the stamping out of sexual abuse and violence—as my colleague the member for Isaacs very clearly outlined. The member for Warringah’s statements about pornography bans were completely erroneous and his last point about ‘watering down’ does not make sense. What does he mean by ‘watering down’? Does he not think that we should review and assess this legislation? Does he not think that, if things are not working, we should have the opportunity to change them? Does he not think that, if we can identify areas for improvement, we should not do that? Clearly he does. Clearly this motion is not about outcomes or achieving things. The member for Warringah has clearly identified that he is ill-informed. His motion is sloppy. In fact, he is much more concerned about politicking than actually getting outcomes for Indigenous communities. That is absolutely clear. (Time expired)

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a disappointing contribution we have just heard. It sought to misrepresent the facts of the situation and to defend the indefensible. The reality is that many Indigenous communities are locked into a lifestyle that offers no opportunities, no productive jobs and no hope. It is distressing to visit communities where alcohol abuse and violence, filth and hopelessness are a way of life. With all the effort and all the funding that has been provided, we should have been able to achieve much more. But all of the abuse and loss of productivity have been locked behind a permit system which has hidden the reality of what has happened. It has been out of sight and out of mind. Poor health, sexual abuse, violence and lost hope have been hidden behind a permit system that has served no-one well.

So much effort has been dedicated to delivering and creating outcomes, but it has not achieved the desired objectives because these communities have essentially been closed to the world. You cannot lock away what is happening in one part of our community if you expect it to progress. Aborigines too are in the world but they do not have to be of the world. That is why this decision by the government to wind back the previous arrangements in relation to banning pornography in these communities is so disappointing. I was appalled to see in the glossy publication about the Rudd government’s first 100 days, a statement in relation to Indigenous Australians which said:

In its first 100 days the Rudd Government has:

• introduced legislation to ban R18+ content in Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory ...

The truth is the opposite. They have sought to wind back the bans that were in place, to allow pornography to once again enter into these communities and destroy the lives of people—taking away their opportunities and undermining the safety that we have been trying to build up through the intervention and by providing an effective police and health presence in these sorts of communities. Over the years, what was thought to be right has had perverse effects.

Debate interrupted.