Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—In the long story of relations among the peoples of our nation—the story of our struggles with each other and of our struggles to reconcile—there have been some good days which we will not forget. Days when a glimpse of a better time came briefly into view. We have cherished them. We cherished 27 May 1967, when Australians voted 'yes' to empower the Commonwealth to bring the resources of the whole nation to bear to address Indigenous disadvantage. Perhaps the greatest was here, four years ago, 13 February 2008, when Kevin Rudd said 'sorry'. Sorry on behalf of all of us, for the 'grief, suffering and loss', for the 'pain, suffering and hurt', for the 'indignity and degradation'. A day we cherished, when we saw our nation as we wish it could always be.

Now we look forward to another such day—to the day when Australia’s Indigenous peoples are recognised in the act which constitutes the Australian Commonwealth. And we look forward to the work that we will do together on all the days that lie between. Every day, our conscience demands we work to Close the Gap. That work, every day, is what this government has done. By embracing the targets of the Closing the Gap campaign, this government deliberately leaves itself nowhere to hide. Closing the Gap is a practical and empirical project and it is a project that should move us deeply, work which will make such a difference in so many individual lives.

We aim to halve the gap in mortality rates for Indigenous children under five by 2018, so more Indigenous babies live; to ensure access to early childhood education for all Indigenous four-year-olds in remote communities by 2013, so more Indigenous children are ready on their first day of school; to halve the gap in literacy and numeracy achievements for children by 2018, so more Indigenous children know the love of books; to halve the gap for Indigenous students in year 12 or equivalent attainment rates by 2020, so more Indigenous young people are ready for life and a job; to halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians by 2018, so more Indigenous adults know the dignity and benefits of work; and we aim to close the life-expectancy gap within a generation—that is, by 2031—so every Indigenous Australian has the chance to grow old.

Measurement Has Improved

Measurement is central to this project of Closing the Gap. Because the Closing the Gap targets are not meant just to challenge us to do more—they are designed to hold us accountable to our ambitions. It is through the annual assessment of the independent COAG Reform Council that is published in June each year and through the annual Closing the Gap report, which the government releases today, that we are brought to book.

The targets we have set are specific and measurable tests of our improvement. Last year I reported that measurement of progress towards these targets, including by the states and territories, also needs to improve. However we can already track progress in reducing under-five-year-old mortality each year. We have effective measures of access to early childhood education and our measurement of achievements in reading, writing and numeracy is sound. Direct measurement of life expectancy and year 12 attainment relies on the Australian census data, which is only available every five years. So we track overall mortality on an annual basis—and this forms a reliable proxy from which we can track improvement in life expectancy. And we track trends in apparent school retention each year, which acts as a guide to year 12 attainment. Our employment target is measured using the respected National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Survey and the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey, direct measures of progress which are available every three years—supplemented by the five-yearly census.

But when we began the work of closing the gap, we knew that we needed better information about Indigenous health, education and employment. This is why the 2009-10 budget invested almost $50 million extra over four years, funding new work by national data agencies and the states and territories, to give us data which is more detailed and reliable, more comprehensive and easier to compare—particularly between census years. This year I can report that measurement has improved.

Central to the effort to measure progress is the census—and last year’s was better than any before. Twenty million dollars of that extra funding was allocated to improve census data collection methods. Local engagement managers and mobile teams built early rapport with Indigenous communities. They organised the delivery and collection of census books differently and they developed new ways for people who aren’t literate in English to answer census questions. They worked especially hard in the most remote areas and among the most disadvantaged. Indigenous communities themselves already tell us the 2011 census was an important improvement on the past.

We have improved other measurement besides the census. To improve data on access to early childhood education, the Australian Bureau of Statistics has led the development of the new National Early Childhood Education and Care data collection. Importantly, this collection includes data on early childhood education in early childhood centres. We now have nationally consistent data on smoking during pregnancy and we have agreed data to track the timing of the first antenatal visit—so we will be able to say how many Indigenous women get advice from a health professional at the right times during their pregnancy. New key performance indicators will help us better understand the contribution of Indigenous specific primary health care services.

All this is thankless, detailed, time-consuming work—performed by dedicated professionals in statistical collection and analysis. But because of it, I am confident we can say that we are better placed than ever before to measure effectively our progress to close the gap.

Progress against the Closing the Gap t argets

Today’s Closing the Gap report shows that the foundations for overcoming Indigenous disadvantage are in place. The report shows that we are seeing progress—we are making gradual gains. The Australian government remains most confident of meeting two of the six targets. The target of halving the infant mortality rates for Indigenous children under five by 2018 is on track. We are also confident we can ensure access to early childhood education for all Indigenous four-year-olds in remote communities by 2013.

For the third, we are also now generally on track to meet the target to halve the gap in reading, writing and numeracy achievement for Indigenous children by 2018. This assessment is based on results from the annual National Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy, which most people know as NAPLAN. We can see measurable improvement in the 2011 NAPLAN results. Significant gains occurred between 2010 and 2011 in the percentage of Indigenous students at or above the national minimum standards. For example, year 3 numeracy was up by 7.0 percentage points and year 9 reading was up by 7.7 percentage points. In fact in seven of the eight areas in which we can assess progress in reading and numeracy since 2008 the gap has narrowed. And in six of these eight, the improvement over four years is fast enough that if it continues we will meet the target by 2018. In year 7 and year 9 numeracy progress still needs to accelerate.

We continue to see improvement in two more of the six targets, and with faster improvement over time we believe these can be reached. The report shows that apparent retention rates to year 12 are improving for Indigenous students—up from barely 30 per cent in 1995 to just over 47 per cent in 2010. Faster improvement will be required to halve the gap in year 12 or equivalent attainment rates by 2020. We will need to keep expanding post-school training and education—we need more places. We will need to keep working with Indigenous young people to ensure they find the opportunities which exist in the education and training system.

Faster improvement will also be required to halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians by 2018. Indigenous employment has increased sharply in Australia in recent decades, reflecting a long period of almost uninterrupted economic growth—and an active and engaged approach from corporate Australia. Never before in our nation’s history has business been more prepared to play its part. Just under 90,000 additional jobs were won by Indigenous Australians from 1994 to 2008. The Indigenous unemployment rate fell from 31 per cent in 1994 to 23 per cent in 2002 and to 16.6 per cent in 2008. In urban areas, the majority of Indigenous Australians of working age are employed—this was not the case 20 years ago.

Closing the gap on life expectancy by 2031 remains the most challenging target of all. Progress towards the other health, education and employment targets all provide strong foundations to help us lift life expectancy. And the life expectancy target is the longest term of the six—it is a twenty-five-year target. While the challenge is very large we do know that some progress is being made. In Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory the Indigenous mortality rate declined by 36 per cent from 1991 to 2010—and there was a significant narrowing of the gap in mortality rates with non-Indigenous Australians. We know what the main causes of Indigenous mortality are—chronic disease and accident and injury, so we are working to limit their incidence and reduce the harm they do. Hundreds of extra Indigenous health workers are working to attack scourges like cancer, diabetes, heart disease and mental illness, as well as targeting risk factors for chronic disease such as smoking, poor nutrition and lack of exercise. Four years into a 25-year project, this much is true: health outcomes, employment outcomes, education outcomes are improving; they need to keep improving and to improve more quickly. This much is also true: foundations are in place, work is underway, we can measure encouraging improvement right now. This is our progress towards Closing the Gap.

The work goes on

One of the great myths of Indigenous disadvantage is that it persists despite decades of expensive public responses. The reality is quite the reverse. Report after report has shown that decades of under-investment in services and infrastructure are unquestionably a major cause of disadvantage, especially for the very young. No Australian family, however hard-working, self-respecting or self-reliant, is expected to fix broken sewerage pipes at the end of their street or repair street lighting outside their house. These are things governments are responsible for—the basic, universal services all Australians are entitled to expect. So the Australian government has heard the call to change.

We have delivered billions of dollars of additional investment in the 'building blocks' of better lives. In early childhood and in schools, in health and healthy homes, in economic participation, in safe communities, in leadership and governance. I have seen the difference this is making even in places where problems seem as intractable as they have been in the town camps of Alice Springs.

And so many Indigenous people have heard the call to change too. They have taken on new responsibilities, not only to improve their own circumstances, but also to share the example with their young. I have met the people who are making these changes in their own lives. They know that no Australian government, however active or ambitious, can get any child out of bed for school in the morning or make any parent ask visitors to leave at a reasonable hour so the children in a small house can sleep. These things are the responsibilities of every Australian family.

Another great myth of Indigenous disadvantage is that the nation must choose between 'two reconciliations'—symbolic and practical. That we must choose between a reconciliation which respects the rights and responsibilities of culture and land and a reconciliation which respects the rights and responsibilities to education, health and jobs. This is also quite false. It runs against what we all know to be true in our own lives—that the things of the spirit are inextricably linked with the things of day-to-day life. A life of plenty without respect and acceptance is still a life half-lived—as is a life of poverty with respect and acceptance. Human beings need to nourish and sustain both body and soul. The reconciliation we seek between us is not something which can be sorted or classified like a list of policy priorities. We seek precisely the kind of harmony and concord—a national unity—which can never be whole or complete under conditions of poverty and unfairness. And we seek precisely the kind of practical benefits in people’s lives: better education, employment and health, which can never ultimately work without sharing responsibility and self-respect.

I think of my visit to the Northern Territory during the dry season last year. There, in the spectacularly beautiful Alice Springs Desert Park, I handed back to traditional owners the title to their land under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act. I saw people overwhelmed and emotional about the handover and what it represented. I remember Alice Ngalkin signing the deeds while her friends and family took photos to mark the event. A moment of great symbolic power which I shared with deep respect and which on that day brought me so much closer to the Indigenous people there.

And in the atmosphere of respect which we had built between us, the local Aboriginal elders and I then sat down to talk. And they told me as frankly as anyone could, with both sentiment and deep conviction, what they believed I need to know about the practical problems they face. They spoke about the need to listen and to trust. And they said that the education system had failed Aboriginal people and it is critical to addressing disadvantage. They said that the way the emergency response started in 2007 caused shame and hurt and they wanted to stay with us on the new journey. And they spoke about alcohol and its harms—the need to be tougher. They did not pick sides in some dialectic or debate, but because of the trust we had shared that day, we could speak together in respect about what they knew was wrong and what they knew would work.

And that week, on the Gove Peninsula, I saw the traditional owners of the land and the representatives of a mining giant sign an agreement. Signed before a gathering of thousands of people from all over Arnhem Land and from all around Australia. We all met there for a striking ceremony performed on what was long contested country, where those most potent of all symbols of the struggle for land—the Yirrkala bark petitions—were inscribed in 1963. And we met to celebrate an agreement which secures the future operations of the bauxite mine, alumina refinery and Nhulunbuy township, which delivers Indigenous people real economic benefits from the mining investment boom, with economic development, jobs, better housing and community facilities.

In the Desert Park and on the peninsula—among Australians who treasure progress and respect—I have seen and felt the presence of the reconciled nation we can become. Where secure title to the big tracts of traditional land gives traditional owners a long-term economic future and a share in the jobs and opportunities the land can create. And where secure title to a home in a town or community gives parents the security to raise and educate their children in a safe environment. Where, by saying sorry for the wrongs of the past and by recognising Indigenous people in our Constitution, we build respect between all Australians. And where that respect allows us to speak honestly with each other as we decide, together, what works where. Not to the detriment of basic local service delivery—never accepting the 'soft bigotry of low expectations' or attempting to 'explain away' violence against women. But yes, bound together as individuals and as a nation by shared symbols of respect and practical action—listening to each other properly, about what the best evidence tells us about what will make the greatest difference.

Whether the conversation is between a minister of my cabinet and the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples, or between a departmental official and a parent who works part time as a local teacher’s aide, we listen to each other—and then we get on with the job. This is the relationship between our people that I seek.

Constitutional r ecognition

Perhaps the ultimate manifestation of respect is constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians. The proposal before the country now has been many years in the making. Over decades, many ways to recognise Indigenous Australians as our first peoples, to affirm their full and equal citizenship and to remove remaining traces of racial discrimination from our law have been proposed.

In August 1937, William Cooper sent a petition with 1,814 signatures to Prime Minister Joseph Lyons requesting that he forward it to King George VI, seeking direct representation in parliament. In June 1988, the chairs of the northern and central land councils presented the Barunga Statement to Prime Minister Bob Hawke. It called upon the Australian government and people to recognise key Indigenous rights and 'to negotiate a treaty recognising our prior ownership, continued occupation and sovereignty and affirming our human rights and freedoms'. And my party’s national platform has pledged its support to constitutional recognition since 1998.

Then, in October 2007, Prime Minister John Howard raised the hopes of a nation, pledging that:

If re-elected, I will put to the Australian people within 18 months a referendum to formally recognise Indigenous Australians in our Constitution—their history as the first inhabitants of our country, their unique heritage of culture and languages, and their special (though not separate) place within a reconciled, indivisible nation.

It was a gracious and deliberate statement which effectively began the contemporary process that leads to today.

And four years on, the movement for constitutional recognition is strong and growing. It grew through 2008, when the cabinet met in East Arnhem Land and was solemnly petitioned to continue with this process. And in 2010 I announced the appointment of an Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians to do the hands-on work of developing options for constitutional change.

I didn’t send the panel on an easy journey—and they performed mightily. Last month, the co-chairs, Patrick Dodson and Mark Leibler, delivered the panel’s report on Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution to the government. I have thanked them publicly already and I do so again here today.

For constitutional change, Australians have to understand and be persuaded of the case for change. This does require all-embracing political bipartisanship. But it requires more. Political bipartisanship, while necessary, is not sufficient. We need more than the consent of the governed to an agreement between parliamentarians—we need a genuine community desire for change.

Our Constitution is our nation’s founding contract—our people rightly guard it with care. Support for constitutional recognition must genuinely have the people’s support. This is what happened in 1967. Yes, bipartisanship—but more. A deep feeling in the Australian community leading to millions of Australian people deciding to say yes to change.

Today, the minister for Indigenous affairs and I are announcing funding for a community conversation, to be sponsored by Reconciliation Australia. To build support for what is already the subject of bipartisan agreement: the principle of constitutional recognition. And to build understanding of the ways in which constitutional recognition might be achieved. The expert panel’s report provides a firm foundation for this discussion.

This is an opportunity for the Australian people to get involved. To get on the You Me Unity website, to learn about what’s in the panel’s report, and what happens next. To find practical information and solid ideas and to discuss them—in their homes and with their neighbours, in their community meetings and in their workplaces, in their trade unions and in their churches.

The government is committed to this change—we are committed to building public support for this change—and in the many conversations which follow in the Australian community, we will take a leading part. It is through the sum of that myriad of conversations, of people listening and speaking with respect, that we will truly know that our people are ready to say yes to this change.

Small v ictories

The day we said sorry was a great day in this nation’s history. The day of constitutional recognition will be another. Closing the gap is an accumulation of all the small victories on all the many days that lie between. The young man, first in his family to learn a trade, with skilled work on his traditional lands. The young woman, first in her family to earn a degree, holding a job in the city. The basic public services that surround them, delivered at the standard every Australian expects. The keys to a couple’s first home—and the life of dignity and pride they live within it, raising children who are ready to take their place in a reconciled nation. The respect shown to them by people in the community where they live. The detailed measurements which tell us this is so.

When more Indigenous children are ready to learn on their first day of school, we will know we are closing the gap. When brilliant Indigenous school leavers are as sought after by the big firms as brilliant Indigenous footballers are sought after by the big clubs, we will know we are closing the gap. When fewer Indigenous men between 35 and 45 die of disease, we will know we are closing the gap. Today, we know we have a long way to go. But we also know we are closing the gap.

I present a copy of the Closing the gap: Prime Minister's report 2012.

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I seek leave to move a motion to enable the honourable Leader of the Opposition to speak for 30 minutes.

Leave granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent Mr Abbott (Leader of the Opposition) speaking for a period not exceeding 30 minutes.

Question agreed to.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise with pride to follow the Prime Minister on this occasion. I do congratulate her on a fine speech. May I say that it is on occasions such as this that our parliament is at its best because we are discussing a noble objective on which we are all agreed. So I congratulate the Prime Minister. I congratulate the former Prime Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, for his role and his work. The historic apology was a very significant milestone in our national life and it is appropriate that we remember that on a day such as this. It was gracious of the Prime Minister to also acknowledge her predecessor but one, Prime Minister Howard, and his commitment to the cause of constitutional recognition of Indigenous people. Prime Minister Howard had a long personal journey when it came to Indigenous issues. It was a difficult journey in some ways for him. One of the best speeches he ever gave was to the Sydney Institute in October of 2007, where he spoke of his personal journey on Indigenous issues. We are all on a personal journey when it comes to this subject, but I think I can say this: for quite some time now there has been a new spirit of appreciation and engagement of Aboriginal people on the part of the leaders of our country. When we are dealing with Indigenous issues, we do not think of ourselves anymore as solving problems; we think of ourselves as building a nation. That is what we do today when we consider how we can better and further close the gap.

I want to thank all of the people who have helped me on my personal journey to better understanding and appreciation of Aboriginal issues and Aboriginal people. I particularly want to thank my friend Noel Pearson for the miles that he has walked with me, literally as well as metaphorically, towards this great goal. I thank Warren Mundine. I do not agree with all of Warren Mundine's positions; nevertheless, he is a great Australian who has been very gracious. He has been very appreciative of work that we have done as well as work that his own party has done towards this great goal. I also want to thank people like Mick Gooda and Sue Gordon. I want to particularly thank those two for the support they gave me just a couple of weeks ago when we had a difficult situation that involved both me and the Prime Minister.

I remind the House of what I think was perhaps the most lapidary remark of the former Prime Minister in his apology:

… unless the great symbolism of reconciliation is accompanied by an even greater substance, it is little more than a clanging gong.

It should be a resonant statement, evocative as it is not just of the great issue before us but of our great heritage of love and of reaching out to people. We must always remember that, unless the great symbolism of reconciliation is accompanied by an even greater substance, it is little more than a clanging gong.

The Prime Minister has given us some very encouraging statistics today. There is much to be grateful for. There is much to take satisfaction in. There is much to be proud of in what the Prime Minister has told us today. I do not want to quibble because I know that, were I in her position, I would be recounting similar statistics to the House. They are important, yet so often when we look at the statistics and we hear the statistics there is a nagging sense that they can obscure as much as they reveal. So often the statistics are a record of what government is doing, rather than a record of how people are living. It is excellent and I congratulate the Prime Minister and the government that we are moving towards halving the gap in so many of these areas, but a gap which has been halved is not a gap which has been closed. In the end, it is not good enough merely to halve the gap—we have to close the gap.

It was very encouraging to hear the Prime Minister tell us that access to preschool for all four-year-olds living in remote communities would be achieved next year. Remarkable—wonderful, praiseworthy. But it is one thing for people living in these communities to have access to preschool for their four-year-olds; it is another thing to ensure that all the youngsters are attending preschool. This is the big challenge and it is the real test of whether we are building civil society in the remote Indigenous communities of our country.

So often when we see the reports we know the effort that officials are making. We feel a palpable sense of the goodwill behind these reports and yet we do not get a sense that individual lives are improving and that communities are flourishing. We know there are better resourced schools in remote Aboriginal communities but we cannot be sure that Aboriginal children are really better-reading, better-counting; are really more familiar with what they need to know in order to be first-class Australians in the modern world.

We know that much money is being spent, that much effort has been expended, on providing better housing in remote Indigenous communities. But can we be sure that these houses are more cherished by their current occupants than the poorer houses of a generation ago were cherished then? We know that much good work is being done in the area of Indigenous employment. I thank and acknowledge people such as Andrew 'Twiggy' Forrest and Dick Estens for the work they have done in this area. But still there is not nearly enough Indigenous employment in the real economy as opposed to Indigenous employment in Aboriginal organisations and in the governmental sector.

All of us—every Australian, every human being—wants to be able to think that his or her life has been at least as good as the lives of his or her parents and that the lives of his or her children will be better than the life that he or she has led. How many Aboriginal people can honestly say today that their life has been better than that of their parents? How many Aboriginal people can honestly say, as they look at their kids, that they are confident that they will have a better life—a life of more self-respect, a life of more fulfilment—than they themselves have had? These are the challenges before us.

Again I commend the Prime Minister and all members of this House for the diligence and goodwill that they bring to these issues. But I do think there is still a long journey for all of us to make. The statistics are important and it is good that the statistics are more sophisticated than they were; that ever more effort is being put into their accurate collation. But sometimes I think that the official statistics can overcomplicate things. I have said to this House on previous occasions—it is worth repeating, and I will repeat it whenever I get the opportunity—that there are simpler, easier to collect statistics than those which the Australian Statistician labours over which I think would give us a truer picture of the real state of Indigenous society, particularly in remote communities. How many children are attending school every day? It should be 100 per cent, or near enough to it, and yet we know that it is not. There is no reason why the roll could not be called a couple of times during the school day, and we know there is no reason why, in each Indigenous school right around the country, those statistics could not be published on a month by month basis so that we know exactly what is happening in each school. Exactly what is happening in each school is a microcosm of what is happening in each community.

We know, despite all the good intentions, despite all the declarations, that very many Indigenous people do not attend employment programs. We know this because members of parliament go to Indigenous communities and we see the number of youngsters and adults who plainly are not engaged in school or work in the middle of the day. Why could we not publish on a week by week basis the statistics on precisely how many people have been attending work programs in remote Indigenous communities? Again, that would give us a truer snapshot of the real life of these communities than the more elaborate statistics with which the Statistician busies himself.

Finally, we all know that in happy communities the trauma that presents to the clinic is normally the result of something that might have happened in a football match or something that might have happened while mustering stock. We also know that much of the trauma that presents to clinics in remote areas is the result of various forms of domestic violence. This statistic, too, should be collated on a week by week and month by month basis, and it should be published. These are the statistics that would tell us what is really happening in these communities. I would very much commend to the government this proposal of mine that in addition to the statistics that the Prime Minister referred to these simple, easy to gather statistics on school attendance, on work attendance and on trauma presentation be collected community by community and published on a regular basis.

I know what these communities are like—I have not lived in them, I have not stayed in them as much as I would have liked; nevertheless I have spent enough time in the remote areas of our country to know about them. I know that if there is an all-night party, as there often is, the adults do not get up to go to work and if the adults do not get up to go to work the children do not get up to go to school. If the adults do not work and the children do not learn, we will never close the gap. That is why there is much more that can be done.

We know that by dint of vast efforts by government and superhuman efforts by individuals, better services are being delivered to the Aboriginal communities of our country, but we cannot be sure, as yet, that a better life is being enjoyed by Aboriginal Australians. Real change does not happen in this parliament, although sometimes it might start here and sometimes it might be reflected here. Real change begins in the places where people live. I say again to the parliament what I said this time last year: we should try as far as we can, within the limitations of our official lives, to be more engaged with the real lives of Aboriginal people. I have had the privilege of spending some longer periods of time in some of the remote communities of Cape York, in Coen and in Aurukun, and last year Noel Pearson took me to some of his sacred country and I then spent a couple of days helping with a building project not far from Hopevale.

All of us are different. All of us have different demands on our time but the more this kind of thing can be done, the better it is for policy making and for the quality of government when it comes to Aboriginal people. I say to the parliament that should I become Prime Minister, it is my firm intention, my commitment, to spend at least one week every year in a remote Indigenous community and to do this with officials because it is not enough for the politicians to become more familiar with the real life of these places. The officials, upon whom so much depends, also need to become more familiar with the real life of these places. If it is good enough for the Aboriginal people of Australia to live in these remote communities, it ought to be good enough for the Prime Minister and other members of the government to stay there.

We can never forget the importance of good governance in remote Australia. Some people, such as my friend and distinguished former colleague Fred Chaney, go so far as to say that remote Australia is a local version of a failed state because of the problems of governance in these places. Not only do we have the usual not-always-well-coordinated efforts of state and federal government, but we have extra issues with governance and with land councils, and then we have all of the non-government organisations. They are doing good work, but so often they are falling over themselves when attempting to deal with problems. The result is that in remote areas we often have the most governed but least efficient communities in the country. This is a very serious issue and it does need to be tackled.

At the risk of straying into partisanship, I need to raise today the issue of the wild rivers legislation, which has now been before this House, one way or another, for the best part of three years. The wild rivers bill is a modest bill and I have now put it several times before this parliament. All the wild rivers bill seeks to do is ensure that Queensland wild rivers declarations can only apply with the consent of the traditional Aboriginal owners. I am not against wild rivers declarations. I accept that where the traditional owners want them, they should apply. But if Indigenous people are really to be in control of their own land, if they are to enjoy genuine land rights, then surely this is not too much to ask. Yet this modest bill of mine, which has but a couple of operative clauses and which runs to less than nine pages, has now been subject to no fewer than five inquiries by committees of this House or the other place. This modest bill is so inquired into that you cannot help but conclude that those who control this parliament are not trying to analyse it, they are trying to bury it. I fear that it will be up to a new government in Queensland to rectify the pusillanimity of this House when it comes to restoring Indigenous rights in this important way.

Finally, let me turn to the proposal for constitutional recognition of Indigenous people, which is a bipartisan objective. The coalition has a good history here. Whatever faults we may have in this area, whatever mistakes we may have made in the past, the coalition has a proud history when it comes to efforts to recognise Indigenous people in the Constitution, starting with the proposed preamble that was put to the people back in 1999 and continuing with the former Prime Minister's efforts, which the Prime Minister mentioned earlier today. I devoutly hope that we can bring this to pass, but it does have to be a unifying moment for our country. What we have to try to do is recreate the fervour and the sense of unity that were captured in the 1967 constitutional change.

To succeed, any constitutional change in this area has to be completing our Constitution rather than changing it. People have to sense that it is unfinished business that is being addressed rather than a new constitution that is being created. I applaud the work of the expert committee, with which I have had much discussion, but I do think their recommendations are the first word rather than the last word in what should ultimately be put to the people. Whatever differences the Prime Minister and I might have, whatever differences other members of her front bench and I might have, I will work as constructively as I humanly can, and I know members of the coalition will work as constructively as we humanly can, to try to get a proposal that can bring us together. We will not be taking a lowest-common-denominator approach to this. We will not be asking what is the least that people will accept. We will be trying to adopt a highest-common-factor approach to this. What is the best that can be achieved at this time? What can we achieved that future generations can look back on with pride and say of us: 'This generation has genuinely advanced our country?'

In conclusion, what we need are more meaningful statistics about the real life of the Aboriginal people in this country, more meaningful engagement between Aboriginal people and all levels of government and meaningful action in this parliament to match the marvellous and uplifting words which are so often spoken in this place. That is what will lead to real reconciliation. That is what we need in order to make our country whole. If we do all that, maybe the time will come when we no longer need Closing the Gap statements, because the gap will indeed have been closed and this country will be everything of which it is capable.

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To enable further debate to take place in the Main Committee on Closing the Gap: Prime Minister's Report 2012, I move:

That the House take note of the document.

Debate adjourned