Rod Kemp (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Hansard source

I beg to differ. He is not Senator Faulkner—he is far brighter and more intelligent than Senator Faulkner, but that is not saying much, I have to say, from where we come from. I had to speak to Senator Siewert about this: the strength of the argument is not a function of the strength of the voice and the shouting that continues, nor is it a function of the abuse that can be levelled at a political opponent. I will say one thing about Senator Ian Campbell and Senator Carr: I know who my money would be on in a head-to-head debate. I have to say that Senator Campbell is more than capable of defending himself. He does it so well and so effectively. If I were in Senator Carr’s position, I would probably look around the chamber to see if Senator Campbell were here or not and then get up and abuse him. I think that is probably a bit of a tactic on your part, Senator Carr.

It was a bit hard to distinguish whether in among all those comments there was anything of substance which a conscientious minister at the table should respond to. I will make a couple of points, which may have been made before but are worth stating in case someone was deluded by the rantings of Senator Carr. The government stands by its commitment to introduce improved legislation in this area in line with many of the Evatt report recommendations. The basic principle remains—and this is worth noting—that states and territories have the primary role in the protection of Indigenous cultural heritage and the implementation of standards for accreditation of state and territory laws.

The government has consulted Indigenous stakeholders over the larger changes to the ATSIHP Act. I remind Senator Carr that Indigenous representatives were briefed on the proposed replacement in March 2004. In April 2004, the Prime Minister announced the new arrangements in Indigenous affairs. These were introduced on 1 July 2004 and implemented progressively over 2004-05. During this period, the government has progressed legislative reform through the current Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Amendment Bill 2005 [2006] to repeal the Victorian specific provisions, so the implication by Senator Carr that people were not bothering about this is not correct. After these amendments are finalised, consultations with Indigenous parties and other stakeholders will resume on the broader legislative change.

Senator Carr was worried that there were so few declarations under this act. I remind Senator Carr that the primary responsibility belongs to the states and the territories. In a sense, the fact that few declarations have had to be made rather suggests to me that the states and the territories are accepting their primary role in the protection of Indigenous heritage. It is worth recording, Senator Carr, that the fact that few declarations have had to be made would indicate that the states are doing their jobs more effectively. The federal act is the fallback position. I would have to closely read the Hansard but I suspect that a fundamental misunderstanding of the act was apparent in Senator Carr’s comments. Let me leave it there. The government, I am sorry to inform you, Senator Siewert, will not be supporting your amendment.

Question put:

That the amendment (Senator Siewert’s) be agreed to.