Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House notes:

(1) notes that:

(a) the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples (Congress) is the national representative body of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and

(b) Congress:

  (i) was established with a view to creating a new relationship with governments to reset the relationship based on partnership and genuine engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and

  (ii) is owned and controlled by its membership and independent of government;

(2) recognises:

(a) the important role of Congress as a leader and advocate for recognising the status and rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as First Nations Peoples in Australia; and

(b) that the existence of an effective national body is essential to the Government's ability to fulfil its Closing the Gap targets;

(3) acknowledges that:

(a) Congress received Deductible Gift Recipient status in July 2013, allowing it to begin to pursue income opportunities with corporate Australia and the wider community;

(b) the previous government committed:

  (i) $29.2 million over four years to establish Congress; and

  (ii) $15 million over three years in the 2013 budget to support Congress to continue to develop income opportunities to sustain the organisation; and

(c) ongoing Commonwealth funding beyond 2013 is essential to support the continued sustainability of an independent national voice for First Nation Peoples;

(4) notes with concern that the Government plans to cut the $15 million funding and abandon the commitment to the sustainability of Congress as the national representative body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples; and

(5) calls on the Government to commit to the sustainability of a strong Congress by honouring the $15 million funding commitment.

The Prime Minister's budget of broken promises and betrayal gutted more than $500 million from programs that support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. More than five weeks on, the government is yet to explain where most of the $500 million in cuts will fall. But the government had no trouble in deciding where to cut the first $15 million. Despite the government's rhetoric about a new engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, the first cut this government made was to the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples. The then opposition leader, now Prime Minister, in a speech to the Sydney Institute, on 15 March last year, said:

I want a new engagement with Aboriginal people to be one of the hallmarks of an incoming coalition government—and this will start from day one …

Well, the Prime Minister honoured this commitment by cutting $15 million from congress, the national representative body, owned and operated by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Labor are committed to genuine engagement and partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Central to Labor's efforts to strengthen relationships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples has been our continuing support for the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples.

The congress was established to represent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples across Australia and to provide a national voice in policy development and evaluation, independent of government. Today, congress has a growing membership of over 7,500 individuals, as well as hundreds of organisational members.

We acknowledge the valuable role of congress as leaders and advocates for the recognition and status and rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples as Australia's first nation peoples. The Kimberley Language Resource Centre, which I had the honour and privilege about a year or so ago of attending, is an organisation affiliated with and is a member of congress, as is the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women's Legal Service North Queensland Inc, in my home state of Queensland, is also a member of the organisation.

Congress engage a youth forum, which started in 2012, a representative body, and continue to make valuable contributions to parliament and the public debate in terms of policies in relation to our Indigenous people. As a member of various committees, I have personally witnessed contributions that congress has made to inquiries into FASD, constitutional recognition, the Gonski funding model and of course into the early education of Indigenous people. They released an education policy after extensive consultation, addressing issues including early childhood education, employment transition from school, bilingual education, ATSIA content and curriculum teacher education courses.

They also partnered with the former federal Labor government and the member for Lingiari, when he was the Minister for Indigenous Health, in relation to the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan. They had been holding governments of both persuasions to account in relation to closing the gap. Co-chairs Les Malezer and Kirstie Parker have said of policy in relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples:

Nothing about us without us.

Closing the gap will not work as an exercise in paternalism. There is and must remain a partnership based on mutual respect, trust and acknowledgement. That is why Labor committed a further $15 million over three years in the 2013 budget; to ensure the continuation of this national voice, providing the views of Indigenous people to governments and community on issues and policy that affect them.

Of course we committed, as I said in the motion, $29.2 million over four years to establish the Indigenous congress. Kirstie Parker has been very critical of the current government in relation to the discontinuation of the $15 million. She said:

Discontinuation of $15 million set aside in the Budget Forward Estimates for Congress from 2014-17 amounted to censorship of independent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices by stealth …

The tragedy in all of this is that the coalition government has adopted a paternalistic approach in relation to this issue, not consulting the peak body and not taking forward Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander policy in a good way. This funding should be restored.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Warren Entsch (Leichhardt, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. Can I say from the beginning that there are many large and vibrant Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in the electorate of Leichhardt. We rate sixth-highest in Australian for Indigenous residents. Issues of effective advocacy come up fairly regularly in my office, and that is how I became aware of the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples. I welcome the opportunity to clarify a few of the misconceptions around this organisation and what they do, and to explain why we should not be honouring Labor's $15 million funding commitment.

Unfortunately, this is another example of the previous government splashing the cash without requiring accountability or real outcomes for Indigenous Australians. Here are a few points to consider. On its website Indigenous congress describes itself as 'a company limited by guarantee'. It is owned and controlled by its membership and its directors. In 2009-10 the congress received $29.3 million from the previous government to support its setup and operations. Labor also committed another $15 million over three years for the 2013-14 budget. That would have come to united government funding of $44 million, for an advocacy body of less than 8,000 members. That is a huge amount for an organisation that sees itself as fiercely independent of government and provides no advisory services whatsoever for government. Late last year, as a courtesy, Minister Scullion told the congress that they were unlikely to get the $15 million that Labor had promised them. We did, however, extend their funding agreement until 30 June 2017 to enable congress to use its substantial cash reserves, some $7 million, to support its operations and achieve financial independence, which was part of its commitment and charter. I find it somewhat hypocritical that congress is using some of its government provided financial resources to carry out a campaign against the government when we are effectively helping them become what they have always wanted to be: independent.

At the same time Indigenous people are questioning whether the national congress is truly representative and the extent of its community engagement. The Indigenous Times on 19 February 2014 reported some members of congress were disappointed with the organisation. In the letter to the editor it stated:

Does congress truly represent us? Membership is so low, voting numbers even lower. … They have taken their eye off the bigger, strategic picture. They should have been lobbying on issues, making the organisation relevant and bringing about change for our mob … Instead they focussed on lobbying about themselves …

I note that in early 2014 the congress held public meetings in a range of cities and regional centres to discuss the impact of the so-called funding crisis. Attendance ranged between 20 people and 40 people. At the same time, the congress started a letter-writing campaign asking members to email their local members and senators. They were aiming for 1,000 emails, but I am told that there was limited take-up from the communities or the media and the campaign appears to have fizzled out. As somebody who has the sixth-largest Indigenous population in my electorate, I received almost none. In fact, I do not recall receiving any letters or emails whatsoever. A further indication is that, at the latest election, when congress's co-chairs were elected, only 800 members voted. This is out of a membership of 7,500 individual members and 172 member organisations. To me, these factors raise serious concerns as to whether congress is a true voice of Indigenous Australia.

Over the past 12 months, this government has sought to go where no other government has gone before in terms of Indigenous engagement and driving policy that will better the lives of First Australians. In the 2014-15 budget, we are investing $4.8 billion to support priorities of getting kids back to school, adults to work and community safety. We are consolidating more than 150 individual programs and services into five new streams, under an Indigenous Advancement Strategy. By targeting funding towards the key outcomes, organisations will be able to focus their time and effort on delivering services on the ground. We are also continuing to work on recognising Indigenous Australians in the Constitution and will release a draft proposal this year.

It is absolutely vital that the government stay attuned to the range of voices within the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community. We will continue to engage with Indigenous stakeholders from right across the spectrum, including the national congress, when designing policies and implementing services that affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. For the reasons I have outlined, I certainly do not commend this motion to the House.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When a government changes, the country changes. So said Paul Keating in his famous dictum. I agree with that totally. But some national projects have to survive the political baton change. It often falls to a government and a parliament to continue the good work of the previous government and the previous parliament. So it is with the project of national reconciliation, recognition and removing the gap that exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. I thank the member for Blair, the shadow spokesperson, for bringing this matter before the parliament. I acknowledge the traditional owners of the land, the Ngambri and Ngunawal people, and pay my respects to elders past and present.

Deputy Speaker, you would remember that, on 13 February 2008, the former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd delivered the apology to the stolen generation. This was another step in the process of reconciliation, another step in acknowledging that it falls to the government to remove the burden of disadvantage and discrimination. He had this to say:

… we harness the determination of all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement and economic opportunity.

We on this side of the House believe that it is critical that, in fulfilling these objectives, you have representative bodies of Indigenous Australians to enable us to consult and enable them to have an organised voice so that they can speak to government effectively, with power and dignity. The National Congress of Australia's First Peoples is a critical body, as the peak body representing Indigenous organisations and individuals, as the member for Blair said in his contribution on this motion. It is an important body in doing that. The congress's strength comes from the fact that it has direct membership, with 171 member organisations and close to 6,000 individual members, growing week by week. Collectively, tens of thousands of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people now make up one of the largest Indigenous networks ever created in Australia. It is a critical body.

In his contribution, the member for Leichhardt was critical of the fact that the congress spent some of its resources contradicting and criticising the government of the day. There are some countries where the government of the day seeks to close down dissent, seeks to shut off voices that disagree with it, through totalitarian means or through more subtle means such as withdrawing funding and support. Thankfully Australia has not traditionally been one of those countries. Labor recognises that it is important to have contrary voices in civil society. That is why, to support the work of the congress, we gave the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples $29 million in establishment funding over four years and $15 million over three years in the 2013 budget. I disagree with the member for Leichhardt. I agree with him on many things—this is not a partisan point—but I disagree with him on his observation that the congress has not be providing either advice or service to, or on behalf of, government. They most certainly have. The member for Blair went through a great number of instances where they were doing this.

I want to focus on one area in particular: the importance of having an advocacy and an advisory body to government in the area of Indigenous health. If we are going to address the issue of disadvantage, then we have to address the disadvantage and the gap that exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people when it comes to life expectancy and health outcomes. With this in mind, we are very disappointed that there have been significant cuts to Aboriginal health programs in the recent budget across a raft of areas. The general cuts and changes will also fall heavily upon those Australians who have a significant problem. But the one that I want to point out is the cut to the antitobacco and the antismoking campaigns. The National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission identified tobacco smoking as the biggest cause of health disadvantage and differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. If we address this, we will go a long way to addressing the gaps between Australians of different backgrounds. (Time expired)

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is one of the sadder moments in the parliament in my parliamentary career—I do not have many but this is one: to see a group of white blokes chatting about black issues all over again; our children in the room and listening across Australia to this debate; hearing this use of Indigenous issues to kick the government's can. All that has happened is that we spend over $2 billion on Indigenous affairs in this country. We try to do it well. The efficiency dividend that is cast across the whole of government comes to more than the $500 million cut that you are talking about. What we have actually done, as was pointed out by the member for Leichhardt, is bring 150 programs down to five key areas so that there is reasonable understanding by the Indigenous communities where the government is headed.

The previous speaker talked about power and dignity. If that was the case, if it was all about power, dignity and advocacy—Jenny Macklin gave this group $29.4 million so that they would be apart from government and self-funding. They chose to be apart from government and self-funding on the interest of the $29 million. If it was about advocacy and about the work of the organisation, then why do they need another $15 million to do the work that the $29 million was given for, to do the work of advocacy. Why?

An honourable member: It does not make sense.

It does not make sense. So it is only a reasonable statement by a new government to question the former government and say: 'We understand that $29 million. You have given the first peoples of Australia and their congress $29 million'—a lot of money—

An honourable member: Absolutely.

It is a lot of money for advocacy only. They do not deliver a program. It is for advocacy only, and in recognition. That being given, they come along and then say, 'Now we are going to give you $15 million to do—'

An honourable member: They have no idea what the organisation does—

I know exactly what the organisation does. I have read exactly the motion today. I understand the motion, exactly. And all you are doing is using your portfolio standing to kick the can on the government, when something like this should be reasonably approached. The whole nation has to look to how we spend our money. We do not set one group apart from anybody else, like Labor chooses to do.

Honourable members interjecting—

Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for McMillan has the call.

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let them go, Deputy Speaker, I am enjoying it. The more they talk about this issue, the more they show their colours in regard to this. Under Jenny Macklin—she set up this organisation and gave them excellent funding to do their job—there was a plan. The plan has been broken. All this government has done is recognise that, if you have been given an amount of money to do a job and to manage that, you claim independence. You take a step back in government. They can, if they need to, criticise the new government—I have no problem with that. If there is criticism to be had, we will have that criticism. But what I will not have is the shadow minister coming into this place and putting up a motion like this just because, 'I've found a cut, I'm going to run the cut, I'm going to play myself into this organisation, this could be my future.' Let me say this—

An honourable member interjecting—

And they can write that. Let me say this, and I want to say it with clarity. When the previous government gave this money, they gave it for a specific reason: so that this organisation could exist apart from government. That is in the charter. You know that is in the charter. Now they are separate from government, they can write pieces like that in the Indigenous paper. But for heaven's sake, give our government the opportunity to manage Indigenous affairs in a much better way than the previous government did.

Debate interrupted.