Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 2006, particularly the proposed instruction to the committee to divide the bill. Those opposite, who propose to support the dividing of the bill in committee, do so on the basis that for some reason or other they believe that the government has failed to consult widely, particularly on the issue of the headleases on Aboriginal townships. The Commonwealth government have to rely from time to time on the consultation processes of others as well as our own. It is with interest that I note that those on the other side, from the Labor Party, are supporting the proposition that the Labor Party in the Northern Territory have not in fact consulted on this matter. It was the Labor Party in the Northern Territory who indicated quite early that they would be consulting widely with communities. They have instructed us that they have spoken to a number of communities on this matter. If anybody knows about state and territory governments, they know the way they work every day in a whole range of departments, from education and health delivery to policing.

This notion of a 99-year lease in the Northern Territory has been about for a very long time. Over the past year, at almost every level of government, I know that this has been discussed. Every community that I visit tells me that the issues surrounding the 99-year lease have been widely discussed, so again I am a bit miffed that those on the other side are saying that we have not consulted sufficiently on this matter, when this is a matter on which we have taken some guidance from the Northern Territory branch of the Labor Party. Clare Martin and her government in the Northern Territory have said, ‘We think that the 99-year head leasing and the proposed amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act should go ahead.’ So here we are in this place. We now have those opposite telling us that that is not the case, that we have not consulted widely enough. Again, with the Labor Party one would expect that the left hand would not really know what the right hand is doing, but this is a very important matter. People are quite concerned about what is going on. The Labor Party in the Northern Territory have said to us, ‘We would like this to go ahead.’ The government must make some reasonable assumptions, not only that they would like it to go ahead but that they have consulted reasonably widely.

I have been in two communities where not only has it been debated widely but this particular issue has been widely supported. The whole notion of a headlease on Indigenous land in the Tiwi Islands was most applauded, and since then, I am pleased to report, as recently as Friday last week I had a phone call from an individual representing some traditional owners on the Tiwi Islands. They were delighted that the process of the headlease is in fact going to go ahead with the Tiwi Islands. The opposition says they have not been consulted with, but at least one of the principal land councils, the Tiwi Land Council, not only accepts it but is currently, as we speak, taking the first steps to implement it.

Those on the other side either have very little idea of what consultation means or they are fairly ill-informed about what is happening in the Northern Territory. We are a long way from the Northern Territory down here—I concede that—but one would think that the Labor Party could simply ring the old Northern Territory branch. Pick the phone up. ‘Clare, how’s it going?’ Senator Evans could say, and Clare Martin will be able to explain to the good senator exactly why we do not need a split in this bill, why we have had adequate and sufficient consultation. Groote Eylandt is another area where we have had extensive consultation, and again people are very supportive of that matter. Not only are they supportive of that matter but they are actually moving ahead to start to get business done in a way that predicates not only consultation but wider acceptance on that matter.

The whole notion that we should split this bill comes because Senator Evans says: ‘Look, Senators, I accept the notion. I accept the end point of this, but I just don’t accept the process.’ Quite clearly, what has already been said in this place, in this debate, is that the Northern Territory branch of the Labor Party, the Northern Territory government, the Tiwi Islands local government, the Tiwi Land Council, the Anindilyakwa Land Council, the people from Groote Eylandt and the spokespeople from Galiwinku have clearly articulated that not only is this something that they want and require but it is also something that they have started to go down the process of implementing. We have started to go down the process, so do not confuse issues and say, ‘Are we going to do this or are we not?’ We have already taken steps to go down the process of creating a headlease for these areas.

I have to say that I am extremely disappointed that those opposite really do not have a reasonable handle on the level of consultation that is taking place or just how long this process has taken. I have just taken one aspect, and that is the aspect of the headleases, but there are a whole range of other matters associated with the amendments to the Aboriginal land rights act which have taken a full nine years. I can tell you, Mr Acting Deputy President, that the Northern Territorians saw amendments to the Aboriginal land rights act a little like the railway: it was something that had been coming for decades. Someone had promised us some reviews. It is 30 years since the Aboriginal land rights act was amended. Clearly it is not only something that needs to be amended but over the fullness of time it needs to be modernised and it needs to reflect the wishes of Indigenous Territorians.

The wishes of Territorians in this matter have quite clearly been reflected because of the facts that they have been consulted, the Northern Territory government agrees with it, I know certainly one land council agrees with it and everywhere I travel in the Northern Territory people say: ‘This is not only something we demand but something we are already up to our fetlocks in. We’ve already made commitments.’ People are already consulting. People are already making decisions about where that town lease should go. Traditional owners are meeting and deciding exactly what this means for each of the clan groups. The issues that have infected the growth of some of these towns for so long are going to be resolved, but they are not going to be resolved by the continuous delay under the ridiculous banner of, ‘The process isn’t quite right.’ The process is not only right; the process is on foot. On behalf of Indigenous Territorians, I call on those opposite to support the bill immediately.