Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) acknowledges the concern of Aboriginal Western Australians about the sustainability of their remote communities in the wake of the withdrawal of municipal and essential services funding and the need to plan for members of those communities after the withdrawal of funding;

(2) recognises that local government authorities have not been consulted in any meaningful way by the Government of Western Australia on this change in responsibility and they are deeply concerned that seven months is not sufficient to make workable alternative arrangements; and

(3) calls on the Australian Government to delay the withdrawal of funding from this program until 1 July 2016.

For more than 35 years the Commonwealth has accepted responsibility for funding critical infrastructure in remote communities through the Municipal and Essential Services Program, known as MUNS. The original purpose of this program was to supplement the efforts of the states, territories and local government to deliver municipal services to Indigenous people, particularly in remote communities where, quite simply, mainstream municipal services were not available. The federal government has now determined that it is simply going to walk away from this responsibility, hand a bucket of short-term funding to a number of the state governments and simply wash its hands of all responsibility.

There is grave disquiet throughout the Pilbara and the Kimberley in Western Australia and to a lesser extent in the Goldfields. Western Australia is the community most affected by this decision. In Western Australia we have around 204 permanent remote Indigenous communities, with a population of over 12,000 people, and 164 of those communities rely on this MUNS funding in many instances to provide the basic services of power, water, rubbish disposal and sewerage.

There has been absolutely no consultation with the Aboriginal communities. The Aboriginal communities are deeply aggrieved by what has happened here—firstly, by the federal government simply walking away from their responsibility and, secondly, by the approach that has been taken by the state government. The state government have taken the equivalent of three years funding for this project. After that all funding will cease. The state government's approach has been very clear. They expect that there will be a significant number of communities that will close. Indeed, it has been suggested that up to 150 communities will close.

This has caused extreme angst throughout the Aboriginal communities and within local government. I want to outline some of the concerns. When this announcement was made and the Premier indicated that up to 150 communities may well close there were lots of protests. The local governments received an email on 25 November saying that the department of local government would be advising that there would be a meeting of local government planning committees on the municipal service implementation. To date—and we are less than five months from D-day—there have been no terms of reference developed, there has been no committee called and no committee has met. So we have got five months before D-day—before these contracts that have been issued by the Commonwealth cease to apply—and there has been nothing put in place.

Of course the Aboriginal communities are distraught. I met this morning with Michelle Nelson-Cox, who chairs the Aboriginal Health Council of Western Australia. She with many senior people across Western Australia, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, recently put a letter in the paper talking about how outrageous it was that there was a suggestion that many of these small communities would be closed down.

The recent debate about funding to local Aboriginal communities does not recognise their importance to Aboriginal people or the cultural asset they are to both the state and the nation. The debate does not recognise the important role Aboriginal people play as custodians of the land and its conservation values. There is no doubt that improvements to services are needed in many communities but, given their importance to the health, the well-being and the continuing culture of Aboriginal people, governments should invest in these communities rather than simply withdraw services.

These concerns are echoed by local government. The Pilbara Regional Council on Friday in a discussion with me said that local government has still not been advised of any formal process to manage the Commonwealth exit from MUNS and is completely in the dark regarding services to be transitioned, time frames for transition and costs for both the transition into the future and community closures. Mixed messages are coming from the state government, and the federal government claim it is no longer their problem. The state government is in chaos on this point. (Time expired)

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

Is the motion seconded?

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will second the motion if that helps. I rise to speak on this private member's motion which is of fundamental concern to me and my constituents of Durack. I acknowledge the disquiet among some Aboriginal Western Australians about the sustainability of remote communities in the wake of the withdrawal of the municipal and essential services federal funding and the need to plan for members of those communities that are now the WA state's responsibility. I recognise that local governments must be consulted by the government of Western Australia on this change and that sufficient time and certain measures are required to make workable alternative arrangements. This change in responsibility for municipal and essential services has understandably created a dichotomy of opinions that are both emotional and financial in nature.

First, I will give a bit of useful background information. There are 274 remote Aboriginal communities in Western Australia, with the majority of them in my seat of Durack. As we have heard, they are across the Pilbara, Kimberley, Gascoyne, Midwest and also in the northern wheat belt. There are 1,309 Aboriginal people living in 174 of the smallest communities. That is an average of just 7.5 people in each of those 174 communities. Across 115 of those communities there are 507 people in total. That is an average of 4.4 people in each community.

Yes, responsibility for services such as water, power and infrastructure lies with the state and local governments. Yes, the Commonwealth has, in the past, provided support to these remote communities. Now the West Australian government will need to provide these services for their remote Aboriginal communities, as it does for every other town and city. I do not think there is any argument there. Those opposite might recall that the previous Rudd government acknowledged that these services are indeed a state responsibility, but sadly failed to do anything about it at that time. Our federal government has taken the decision to change, made an agreement with Premier Barnett, provided some funding and extended contracts with service providers.

I met with the Premier of Western Australia, the Hon. Colin Barnett, over the Christmas break (1) to discuss the servicing of these communities; (2) to confer my concerns; and (3) to exchange views about the transition, timing and long-term planning and potential issues. As the member for Durack, I met with the Premier because I wanted to impress upon him the need to consult broadly. I wanted to understand his plan, I wanted to understand what the state government's plan was and I wanted to have my say on behalf of the Durack constituents. I am pleased with what I heard and trust that I can ease the anxiety of those opposite. The Premier assured me that the state government will work through a detailed process to determine how best to proceed. To quote the Hon. Colin Barnett:

A detailed process ... that is, to ensure funding is invested in sustainable and healthy communities that can offer improved opportunities and outcomes for residents, especially children. No decision has yet been made to close any of Western Australia's remote communities. We will work through the issues and consult widely with residents about how together we can make things work better and improve outcomes.

WA knows that it needs a strategic approach and the withdrawal of commonwealth funding has promoted this.

The West Australian government had recognised that serious reform is required to address the disparity between the living standards of Aboriginal people in remote locations and the rest of the West Australian community. Despite efforts by successive governments there is still a shortfall of economic opportunities in remote communities in Western Australia. The ad hoc approach to investment that occurred under successive governments will be replaced by investment targeted to those locations which can provide a viable platform for promoting opportunities and enabling access to education, employment, quality health services, housing and safe communities.

Very importantly, I am informed that funding has been provided that will see services continue for at least the next 12 to 18 months. Any changes after that will be incremental and involve close consultation with affected communities. Local government and stakeholders will be consulted as part of the process over the next 12 months. As recently as last week, the Premier's office confirmed that I shall receive an update on the consultation and other transitional processes over the next period. In closing, I do acknowledge the concerns and the requirement for extensive consultation and am of the view that the WA government plans to do just that. (Time expired)

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

I commend the member for Perth for this motion. When we were in government, in our last budget we provided $44.1 million to assist 340 remote communities with power, water, sewage services, garbage collection and road maintenance. These are tiny little communities around the country in places like Western Australia, South Australia, Queensland, Victoria and Tasmania. The truth is that all Australians expect essential services to be provided in these communities as well as in major capital cities like Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. This was in addition to the $221 million we committed over 10 years under the Stronger Futures package. These kinds of services include dog control, accounting administration services, electricity, garden and road maintenance, animal control, and environmental health services.

But what has this government done since they came to power? What they have done here is undertake what they call a historic deal by the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, who should hang his head in shame. What he did—let's not mince words—was put a financial gun to the heads of the states and territories. That is what he did. He said, 'We will give you some money and you are on your own.' He said to the Western Australians, 'Here is $90 million and we will let you do whatever you want'—with no conditionality whatsoever, no consultation with homeland communities, no consultation with these remote communities which absolutely need this funding. The Abbott government have redrawn federal funding for municipal services. This type of funding was provided by both sides of politics, by Labor and the coalition, for decades and decades. It is a disgrace and they have done it without adequate consultation with these communities.

When the Western Australian government announced that they were closing about 164 communities across remote areas like the Pilbara and the Kimberley there was a hue and cry, not just from Indigenous leaders on the left but also from the right. So we have seen this procrastination, but we know that that is the decision that they have made. They are going to engage in forced removal and relocation, and the federal minister said, 'It's not my responsibility.' What do people in the urban areas expect but good services in these remote communities. In these Indigenous communities, 38,000 indigenous Australians are at risk of forcible removal and relocation because of the Abbott government's decision, the lack of consultation and the lack of conditionality on this funding—leaving Western Australian communities and remote areas at the mercy of the Barnett government. That is what has happened as a result of this decision.

So this is a government that cut $534 million from Indigenous affairs in their first budget. This decision has to be seen in context, and then they have completely messed up the Indigenous Advancement Strategy and cut funding everywhere: family violence prevention centres, Prisoner ThroughCare, antirecidivism programs; the National Congress of Australia' First Peoples defunded; and the National Family Violence Prevention Legal Services Program utterly defunded.

The shambolic way they have conducted Indigenous affairs is clearly evident by the decisions they have made. What have they done? Particularly relevant to Western Australia and this motion before the chamber today, they have reneged on a commitment to justice targets to reduce Indigenous incarceration rates and improve community safety. What about these communities that are now at risk in Western Australia?

They want to get the kids to school—we support getting kids to school. We want to make sure kids go to school, finish primary and high school and get good jobs; and that skills and talents are fostered to make sure they participate in community. But you cannot do that if you are cutting the funding and forcibly relocating communities. People have lived for millennia in parts of Western Australia, and what does the Abbott government do? It says: 'Bye-bye. We'll wash our hands like Pontius Pilate. You can have some money. We'll have nothing to do with this anymore'.

This is a Prime Minister who said he was going to be Prime Minister for Indigenous affairs and would indeed be at the front and heart of the centre of decision making in this government. What have they done? Cut. Cut. Cut, and Closing the Gap is a fiction under this government. We will see in the next couple of days, with the Closing the Gap report and this motion before the chamber—the MUNS funding, the lack of consultation, and the consequences to remote communities in WA—that it is clear the Abbott government has failed Indigenous Australia.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In joining with my colleague, the member for Durack, there are 274 remote Aboriginal communities in Western Australia containing approximately 15,000 residents. Of these, 150 communities are in the Kimberley region and are not considered sustainable or viable, because of poor health and education standards, and social problems such as domestic violence and child abuse.

I quote figures released by the Premier of Western Australia's office stating that there were 1,309 Aboriginal people living in 174 of the smallest communities, with an average of 7.5 people in each community. That is effectively one family per community and is clearly not viable to sustain employment or service delivery. In one particular community, it is estimated to cost the taxpayer $85,000 per person per year to provide municipal services such as water and sewerage.

Whilst the traditional and cultural connection of Indigenous people to their land is acknowledged and respected, it must also be recognised that modern Aboriginal people have embraced certain aspects of Western culture and, as such, they expect modern conveniences and services to be provided. By necessity, provision of these services requires a critical mass of population to be feasible and logistically viable. Sustainable communities are those that provide strong employment opportunities, are economically sustainable, have infrastructure capable of maintaining the community and a strong governance structure. Clearly, remote communities with fewer than 10 residents are unable to be sustained in the long term.

The delivery of municipal and essential services, including the supply of power and water and the management of infrastructure is a state and local government responsibility—despite this, the Commonwealth has been supporting these services in remote Indigenous communities for decades. In Western Australia, the state is the major funder of 94 camps, whilst the Commonwealth has historically funded the remaining 180 to the tune of approximately $45 million a year.

The Abbott government recently reached historic agreements with the Queensland, Western Australian, Victorian and Tasmanian governments that will see these states assume full responsibility for municipal and essential services. The involvement of the Commonwealth represents a duplication of services and results in inconsistent and ad hoc services for residents in these remote communities.

Funds which should be directed towards closing the gap are being tied up in the delivery of basic services that are the responsibility of the states. The Commonwealth is not withdrawing from its responsibilities but rather assisting state governments to take up their responsibilities for provision of municipal and essential services to Indigenous communities—something the states provide for every other town and city within their state.

The WA government has agreed to these arrangements and will be working with local governments, service providers and communities as it would in any other part of the state to deliver municipal services. To support the transition to these new funding arrangements in WA, this government has extended existing contracts until 30 June 2015 and provided a transitional funding agreement. Under the arrangement, the Commonwealth will provide $90 million to WA for a two-year transition. This agreement demonstrates how this government is delivering outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities by ensuring responsible stewardship of public funds to obtain value for money.

The Commonwealth is not shutting down communities nor is it asking the WA government to do so. This is entirely a matter for WA and has nothing to do with the Commonwealth's decision to end municipal and essential services funding. The WA government has been discussing the closure of remote Indigenous communities for a number of years—well before it agreed to take on responsibility for municipal services in these communities.

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

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.