Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

[by video link] After some three years of consultation and achieving the support of key Aboriginal land councils, it would appear that this bill, the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment (Economic Empowerment) Bill 2021 is okay, that it's worth supporting. However, what I think about this bill—and in fact what anyone in the House who is not of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander heritage thinks—is in some ways quite irrelevant, because the only thing that really matters is what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people think of this bill. It is up to them to decide what good policy is and what their needs are.

To tease that point out a little more: it's been the paternalism of what I might call old white men over 233 years that is at the heart of the problems with public policy and decision-making regarding our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. When you drill down to all the problems and deficiencies and the enduring and chronic disadvantage that has been suffered by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in our country, so much of it goes to that paternalism over hundreds of years. It helps to explain why so many of the indicators remain so bad and remain unaddressed and why year after year in the parliament, when we have the Closing the Gap speeches and lots of hand-wringing, the indicators don't change that much. We're in the practice of, once a year, looking at those indicators—education, employment, health and so on—and then forgetting about them for another year, so many of the problems go unaddressed. I think we should be talking about those stats every day of the year until they get better.

We—people like me and my colleagues—should be ashamed of these indicators every day of the year until they markedly improve, until we can finally stand in the parliament and have a Closing the Gap speech that we can be so proud of and to say, 'We have finally, working together, ensured that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the equal of the rest of the community of Australians in every other way'; that we won't have to be ashamed of the fact that, for example, the life expectancy of kids aged up to four years in our Indigenous population are twice as likely to die as non-Indigenous children in this country; that we won't have to talk every year about and be ashamed of the fact that Indigenous Australians die on average about 10 years earlier than non-Indigenous Australians in this country; that we won't have to talk every year, it seems, about how when it comes to all chronic diseases, with, I think, the exception only of cancer, Indigenous Australians are so much sicker; that the likelihood of circulatory disease for Indigenous Australians is twice that for non-Indigenous Australians and that among Indigenous Australians the likelihood of kidney disease is 11 times as high as that being experienced by non-Indigenous Australians; and that the suicide rate for Indigenous Australians is double that of the general population.

When it comes to education, only about 60 per cent of Indigenous students in this country finish year 12, compared with almost 90 per cent of non-Indigenous Australians The employment-to-population rate for Indigenous Australians—youth through to retiring age, around mid-60s—is about half the rate for non-Indigenous Australians, which is about three-quarters. The median weekly income for Indigenous Australians is about two-thirds of the median weekly income for non-Indigenous Australians. Indigenous children are about 10 times as likely as non-Indigenous kids to be placed in out-of-home care in this country.

And, of course, so much has been said about justice and incarceration, for as long as anyone can remember, and, frankly, things haven't got any better. Indigenous inmates account for about a quarter of Australia's prison population, even though only about two per cent of Australia's adult population are Indigenous adults. I will say that again: the Indigenous prisoner population throughout all of the jurisdictions in this country is about a quarter of the entire prison population, when about two per cent of Australia's adult population is Indigenous. Equally horrific is the fact that, for children aged 10 to 17 years old, the detention rate in the justice system is 26 times the detention rate for non-Indigenous children.

So who is to blame for this? Who is responsible for this? Well, it is not our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. It's not their fault; it's entirely the responsibility of the paternalistic and often old white men—to use that term again—who, for 233 years have been normally thinking they are doing the right thing but just as normally completely missing the mark, not actually sitting down with First Nations people and saying: 'How can we help? What do you need? Please design it for us and we will support you in every possible way to eventually end the enduring and endemic disadvantage that's experienced in this country.'

It's not as though we haven't had the answers at our fingertips over the years. Decades ago the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody did a very thorough examination of the issue and laid out dozens of strong recommendations to start to wind back the shocking prevalence of Aboriginal deaths in custody. But, to this day, none of the significant recommendations have been implemented. We know about justice reinvestment. There are so many clever people out there at the moment researching and coming up with blueprints for effective justice reinvestment to keep people out of the justice system—to improve their lives, to keep them out of prison, to keep them out of being in custody. We know the answers, but we ignore them. We know for a fact that raising the age of criminal responsibility would go quite some way to dealing with the incarceration and detention rate for youth and the way in which that sets those unfortunate young kids on a pathway of bad outcomes.

I lament over 200 years of paternalism from people like me telling our First Nations people what they need instead of asking them, 'What do you need?' and 'How can we support you?' It's in this context that the 2017 First Nations National Constitutional Convention was so important. It was so important that the government, the opposition and all members of the House would get behind the Uluru Statement from the Heart, because there was a wonderful opportunity to listen to first Australians and to finally find out what is needed and how we can help. It is a terrible thing that the government is yet to sign up to a voice to parliament. It's a terrible thing that the Makarrata commission has not been established. These are the sorts of reforms that are needed in this country.

We need a speedy and full implementation of Uluru Statement of the Heart, including—just to be very clear here—a constitutionally enshrined voice to parliament. What that looks like should be what First Nations people want it to look like. If they want it to look like what we have in the New Zealand parliament where seats are reserved for the Maori, I will support that. I will support whatever they want that will turn around over 200 years of persecution, disadvantage and shocking policymaking. Regrettably, though, the Uluru Statement from the Heart remains stalled. There is some work and some talk. I note that the minister, who is a good person, is trying to do good things, but the whole thing is stalled. So I again call on the government, in the last days of this parliament: let's lay down some clear markers about what the future looks like. Let's have a constitutionally enshrined voice to parliament. Let's have a Makarrata commission. Let's do whatever else we can do. And if we don't have the time to implement the changes in the next couple of months, maybe six months, then at least lay down the markers and have bilateral support for that pathway forward so the next parliament and the next government—whoever it is—knows that they have bilateral support, unanimous support, in the House to bring about the reforms that are necessary.

In closing, I make the point that this is a good bill. It's three years in the making. It does have the support of the big land councils, and that's good. I think it's a credit to everyone who has been involved. Sure, we can always do things better. In fact, I've heard from some constituents that they regret that this matter will be dealt with in such little time today. I assume that there couldn't be more people involved in the debate. But generally it's a good job.

I do take this opportunity to emphasise what I think is a central part of the explanation for the continuing chronic and entrenched disadvantage of First Nations people in this country, and that's the paternalism that has characterised it up until now—too many old, white men making decisions for our First Nations people, instead of sitting down with our wonderful First Nations people and working with them to deliver what they want and what they need. An important step in that direction would be sitting down and saying: 'Right, how do we deliver the Uluru Statement from the Heart? How do we have a constitutionally enshrined, permanent and powerful voice in the parliament? How do we have a commission of some kind to oversee agreement-making and truth-telling?' I call on the government. I know the opposition is onside on this. We just need the government to get on side and then we can go into the next parliament with a unanimous response and maybe start turning these things around. Maybe we won't have to—for the next who knows how many years—put up with more and more of these completely unsatisfactory, shameful reports on closing the gap.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In speaking to this, the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment (Economic Empowerment) Bill 2021, I want to acknowledge the First Nations traditional owners of this country and pay respects to elders past, present and emerging. I want to make a few brief comments about this bill and the substantial carriage of this bill on behalf of the Greens. It will be taken up in the Senate by Senator Lidia Thorpe, our First Nations spokesperson and a strong and proud Gunnai Gunditjmara and Djab Wurrung woman.

One of the key principles that has to be applied to this bill, and indeed to any piece of legislation in this parliament, which has been reinforced and strengthened as a key pillar of Greens policy, is that everything has to be driven by genuine self-determination of our First Nations people. For too long, as many people in this place have said, there have been decisions made about First Nations people, almost always to their detriment, because this country has a history of oppression and racism that we still have not had the courage to be honest enough to face.

One of the things that we've got to start doing, especially when we're dealing with land rights legislation, like this legislation, is understanding that genuine self-determination must be at the heart of everything we do. We need to begin by telling the truth about the history of violence and dispossession that lies at the heart of this country that we call Australia. It's only when we've begun telling and acknowledging the truth that we can move forward to genuine reconciliation and then strike a treaty, or treaties, with our First Nations people. We need that process. We need that process because otherwise we're never going to be able to move forward as a country. We've got a lot of challenges that we've got to deal with, including dealing with the climate crisis. One of the things that we are hearing very clearly and that we need to understand as a country is that to have true justice in this country, to have true climate justice, we need First Nations justice. In dealing with a land rights bill, which is what this is—especially the most complex set of changes to the land rights act since it first came into force—we need to have self-determination and we need to be driven by a response that listens to First Nations communities and First Nations peoples and the incredible diversity of opinion that exists there, rather than just presuming that there's one single voice. It's a community. It's diverse communities. Of course there are going to be differences of views.

One of the things that is concerning about this bill is that it hasn't been through a committee process and it's not clear why. Consider that this government, during its whole term, has not done that much to progress the cause of treaty, truth and justice for First Nations peoples. In fact, the government has arguably taken it backwards and slowed down progress towards that. When the government introduces a comprehensive bill to amend land rights legislation, First Nations communities have a right to be heard, and one of the ways that that could happen is through a committee process.

This parliament has a good history of using the committee processes to find out if there are unintended problems with bills and if amendments are required. That's something that we should be doing here. Senator Thorpe will make more fully in the Senate the point that there are differences of views, including about some of the provisions in this bill. Maybe they could be dealt with through a proper, comprehensive consultation process, but they need to be addressed if reforms are going to have support, because we can't just mouth 'self-determination' and 'consultation'; we've actually got to put them into practice.

Now, this bill does a number of significant things. There's the establishment of the Northern Territory Aboriginal Investment Corporation. There's the streamlining of exploration and mining provisions in the Land Rights Act, something that many First Nations communities feel like they are not heard on and want to be heard on. There's the changing of land administration provisions and there's the aligning of the Aboriginal benefits accounts with the Commonwealth financial framework. One of the things that has become crystal clear to so many people over the last period of this parliament, especially as this week we look at the report that'll be handed down with regard to the Juukan Gorge and we see the systemic and systematic destruction of First Nations heritage and culture by big mining corporations, is that, when it comes to changes to nomination and approval processes but also, in particular, to exploration and mining provisions in the Land Rights Act, we need to make sure everyone gets their say. And so the question here is whether or not this bill should go to a committee process. That's the simple point that is being made: this bill deserves to go through a committee process.

As I said, Senator Thorpe will be making further contributions about this in the Senate, including that we may need to move amendments to this to deal with issues that are raised, but, especially given this government's history, it is not objectionable to ask for the processes of the parliament to be followed. Just because someone raises concerns—they've got the right to do that.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hear the Labor opposition heckling on this point, but people have the right to raise concerns. It's called democracy and it's called debate. It's called the ability for people to make contributions and for the committee process to do its usual work. That is the point that we're going to be making and making strongly when this bill goes to the Senate.

I thank the House for hearing this contribution, but I hope that it is listened to with a bit more respect, at least from the Labor Party, when the matter goes to the Senate, because we in the Greens are taking a very clear approach. It is time for this country to end the top-down approach to dealing with First Nations people. It is time to genuinely listen and consult. That includes consulting with people whose rights are going to be affected. One of the things that we have seen here in this parliament is Labor and Liberal routinely stitch up deals that hurt First Nations people.

An honourable member interjecting—

I remember sitting here—if the member interjecting wants to interject and defend this, he is more than welcome—when legislation was rushed through this place to ensure that projects like Adani could proceed, even when traditional owners were saying, 'We don't want it.' This place got called together for an urgent hearing because we had to pass legislation, hopefully with no-one complaining until it came in, and the Greens stood up for the First Nations owners and traditional owners as Labor and Liberal tried to take away their land rights.

Whenever you see something come up in here, we have got the right to scrutinise it, because even now—even now—we see it in the Northern Territory with the Beetaloo Basin. We see it with the Adani traditional owners, the W and J clan. We see First Nations communities and traditional owners come to this place to say, 'No, we don't want this mining or this extraction on our land that is going to risk our water and make the climate crisis worse and remove our connection with country.' Time after time after time Labor and Liberal sit in here to do dodgy deals and rush legislation through parliament to take away people's land rights, so excuse me, Labor Party, if, when it comes to having one of the most significant reforms to land rights legislation, we want to ask some questions and apply a bit of scrutiny, rather than just being the Liberal Party's lapdogs.

Opposition members interjecting—

Yes, they are in government, the Labor Party interjects, which is why we need to scrutinise what they do. They have got an appalling track record on protecting and advancing the rights of First Nations people in this country, so it would be nice if we didn't get heckled for saying we want to scrutinise this bill when this government has such a terrible record, including with the Labor Party's support, on taking away the land rights of First Nations owners and traditional owners of this country. Yes, we will be looking closely at this bill, as every member of this parliament should. Labor and Liberal have a terrible reputation for siding with the big mining corporations over traditional owners and rushing legislation through this place to make the climate crisis worse by taking away First Nations owners' rights, so I will not be lectured about applying scrutiny to government legislation. That is what we are here for. At any time the government comes in here and says, 'We want to streamline provisions of the law to give mining corporations a greater say and amend land rights,' we're entitled to ask questions about it and we will ask questions about it.

Opposition members interjecting—

I hope that there is a rigorous committee process with respect to this legislation. If you want to heckle about something, Labor Party, and you want to consider your position, consider your position on coming in here and legislating to take away land rights and the rights of traditional owners to stand up to the mining corporations, which you do time after time after time. Enough is enough. There will be no climate justice in this country without First Nations justice, and that includes giving people the right to say no to coal and gas and oil exploration on their land. I know the Labor Party is up to its neck in donations from the gas corporations, just as the Liberal Party is, but that's no excuse. That's no excuse for not applying the scrutiny we need to ensure that self-determination becomes the key principle of everything we do in this country when it comes to our First Nations peoples.

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank members for their contributions to the debate on the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment (Economic Empowerment) Bill 2021. It's a great privilege to provide the summing up of this historic bill to amend the Northern Territory land rights act to empower Aboriginal people to maximise the economic future of their families and communities for generations to come. I remind the House that this bill was introduced just two days after the 55th anniversary of the Gurindji walk-off, an event now woven into the fabric of this nation. I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the late Mr Wavehill, Mudburra elder, father, educator, artist and activist, who passed away on the same day this bill was introduced to parliament. Mr Wavehill stood with Mr Lingiari and many others during the walk-off to demand the return of his land. Their seven-year struggle paved the way for land rights in the Northern Territory.

The passing of the iconic land rights act in 1976 was a great moment of bipartisanship in our parliament, and I am pleased that this spirit of bipartisanship remains as we look beyond party politics to recognise the intrinsic value of these amendments. The centrepiece of the reforms is the establishment of the new Northern Territory Aboriginal Investment Corporation, an Aboriginal controlled body that will be able to use funds derived from the ABA to strategically and proactively seize and generate economic and social investment opportunities. The new corporation will invest in projects that will grow wealth, create jobs and support sustainable Aboriginal economies in the Northern Territory for the long term. For the first time, decisions about investments and beneficial payments will shift from Canberra to the Northern Territory and from government to Aboriginal leaders.

In addition to these momentous changes, this bill also enables other mechanisms for activating the potential of Aboriginal land. Current processes relating to exploration and mining under the land rights act can be unnecessarily time-consuming and costly for all stakeholders. The amendments have been developed after extensive consultations with peak industry bodies, the land councils and the Northern Territory government. I'm confident they will streamline exploration and mining processes to create clarity and build the confidence of investors. Importantly, the rights of traditional owners, including for protected sacred sites, are maintained.

Finally, there is a package of land administration amendments which strengthen Aboriginal control over decision-making, address operational gaps and remove unused provisions in the act. Of most significance here are the reforms which support and standardise the community controlled township leasing model in the land rights act and provide for greater local decision-making on Aboriginal land to deliver housing, business and government services outcomes that meet the needs of the local community. Aboriginal Territorians have asked for these changes through their land councils, and the reforms have been co-designed in partnership over the last 3½ years.

This is an important day for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, as they see their ideas to modernise the land rights act take the next big step to becoming a reality. This is an important day for Aboriginal families, communities and businesses in the Northern Territory, as they see this commitment to grow Aboriginal enterprise and jobs and improve the intergenerational transfer of wealth for Aboriginal families and communities. It is an important day for the parliament, as we seize this opportunity to support the most far-reaching changes to the land rights act since it was enacted in 1976.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.