Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

It is absolutely what he said. I listened to him. I have read him. I open my ears; I do not just spout rhetorical drivel like you do. He has said it repeatedly and continually. We have this bizarre linkage. Where is the linkage? Show me a single piece of evidence that says that the permit system has actually contributed to the perpetration of child abuse or that it has contributed to preventing economic development. That is all we are asking. Forget all of your politics, your ideological obsessions and your symbolism. We need to talk about practical outcomes here. We need practical outcomes, not ideological obsessions, symbolism and politics, which is what too much of this debate has been about. There has been too much of it from all sides, I might say, but particularly from the government side. They have no interest in the practical outcomes; it is all about the symbolism, the grand statements and the ideology.

Let us see some evidence. Where is the evidence that demonstrates that the permit system in any way contributes to child abuse? There are many communities in the Northern Territory, let alone communities in Western Australia and Queensland, that do not have a permit system. I have seen not a single statement that says that child abuse is worse in communities that have a permit system than those that do not. Nor is there any evidence that says that economic development in many of those communities in the Territory that do not have a permit system is somehow better than it is in those that do. Show us the evidence. Why is that so hard? I can tell you that we have some evidence to the contrary. And it is not from your bleeding hearts, the Democrats, the Greens or people whom the government like to smear so much. It is from the Northern Territory Police—people on the ground who are actually at the coalface who say the permit system assists them. Let us see some evidence to counter that.

Instead, the government are insisting that this is going to be bulldozed through and they are not going to let anybody have a say to tell us what the facts are. ‘We do not want to hear.’ That is the government’s attitude. That is just simply not good enough on an issue that everybody keeps saying is so important and so urgent. Why is it so important that you cannot even take the time to listen, look at the facts and examine what the practical consequences and the reality will be? Why do we get all the froth, bubble and smoke that floats around Parliament House continuously?

The issue of the government taking over Aboriginal land with five-year leases is something, again, about which the Democrats want to see some evidence that it will actually contribute to addressing the situation. The previous speakers have already spoken about the problem with excluding the legislation from the Racial Discrimination Act.

I also have to emphasise an even more recent and sudden decision from the government to abolish Community Development Employment Projects in the Northern Territory—and without warning. That is one of those measures where, again, we have to say, ‘It really depends on what you replace it with.’ Many people have pointed out problems with CDEP, Democrats included, but you do not solve a problem by completely abolishing something and not replacing it with something better. We need concrete details, concrete resourcing and concrete commitment. Hopefully, through the process of this debate, we will actually get a more clear-cut commitment from the government and the opposition that indicates their genuine bona fides to see this through in the long term rather than just the short-term politics that too many of them seem to be playing.

But there are other measures that, to me, seem to be beneficial. That does not mean that they cannot be improved, were the government to actually provide the Senate with the opportunity to examine them, which they seem absolutely determined to prevent us from doing. The measures to do with alcohol restrictions are important. Of course, we should not pretend that there have not already been significant alcohol restrictions in place in the Territory, but enabling those to work more effectively is important. I would nonetheless emphasise, once again, the words of Noel Pearson:

… plan to tackle grog and to provide policing is correct. However, the plan needs to be amended so that there is a concerted strategy to build indigenous social and cultural ownership …

Why won’t the government even listen to people like Noel Pearson? They are happy to listen to the parts he says that support their argument, but they do not listen to the parts he says that suggest improvements or amendments.

Another measure is the welfare component. Let me emphasise that there are significant parts of the welfare bill here that do not just deal with the Northern Territory; they deal with the entire Australian community. That is something I think most people are not aware of yet. The Democrats support the need to look at using welfare measures to assist. I have spoken a number of times in support of the intent of what is being proposed in Cape York, but what is being proposed here is not what is being proposed in Cape York. Again, to quote Noel Pearson:

… the … plan needs to be amended so responsible behaviour is encouraged. Responsible people shouldn’t just be lumped in with irresponsible people.

Yet that is what the government is doing. Every single Aboriginal person, regardless of their behaviour, in every designated Aboriginal community in the Territory will have their welfare payments quarantined. That needs to be amended—so say the Democrats, so says Noel Pearson—but the government does not want any amendment and will smear anybody who even suggests that there should be one by saying we are supporting the paedophiles. That is how pathetic the debate has been to date from the government. Let us hope it can improve its standards, because this issue is too important to get down in the gutter about. The Democrats will rise above that; we urge the government to do the same. (Time expired)