Senate debates
Wednesday, 8 August 2007
Business
Consideration of Legislation
9:53 am
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source
I indicate on behalf of the Labor opposition that we will be supporting the motion to grant exemption from the cut-off to bring on the package of bills that relate to the Northern Territory emergency response. In doing that, though, can I say that I did not disagree with anything Senator Bartlett said except perhaps the conclusion he reached. I thought it was a very balanced and useful contribution to the debate. But Labor is of the view that the response to the highlighting of child abuse in the Northern Territory is urgent, that there has been a recognition of a long-term problem and that there has been a recognition that there needs to be an emergency-style response rather than the sorts of gradualist responses that we have seen over the years, which have withered on the vine and not led to meaningful change.
As the Senate knows, traditionally Labor argues very strongly for proper process in the Senate, and I will say something about that now, but we have also always accepted the right of the government or others to move to exempt bills from the cut-off to bring on debate where there is an established need and urgency. We indicated to the Prime Minister from the day the response was announced that we would provide bipartisan support for that emergency response, and that position is respected in our decision today to support exemption from the cut-off—that is, that we ought to facilitate bringing on the debate and bringing on the capacity for the government to take measures that go to assist in dealing with what has become a child abuse crisis in some Indigenous communities.
As I mentioned at the outset, Senator Bartlett’s points are well made. I share some of his concerns about the process. The fact that the legislation was not made available to members of parliament until yesterday means that there has not been time for proper scrutiny. While I appreciate that the government has made some attempt to allow for scrutiny by allowing a one-day Senate inquiry, I think everyone acknowledges that that is an extremely rushed timetable, given the size and scope of the bills and given, as Senator Bartlett rightly pointed out, that so much of what is in the package is not totally related to the Northern Territory emergency response. Nevertheless, on balance we accept the urgency and accept the need for the parliament to get on.
The question of process that most concerns me in this debate is not actually the Senate process; it is the failure to consult with Indigenous people. I think the great failing in this is the concern among Indigenous people that their voices have not been heard and that they have not been engaged in the response. I think that risks the failure of the whole package. All our experience, from all sides of politics, is that solutions do not work unless there is Indigenous ownership of those solutions. That is acknowledged by all Indigenous people from left and right and it was acknowledged in the past by all political parties. So I think the government has to do much better in trying to build Indigenous support for these measures; otherwise, as I said, they will seriously undermine the very genuine and focused attempt to deal with the problems.
So we will be supporting the exemption. I also want to make the point that Senator Bartlett made well, which is that people can have different views about this package and still be equally committed to providing a safe environment for children and to strong attempts to prevent child abuse. That does not mean that people cannot have different perspectives on how one goes about that. I have been concerned at some of the posturing by the minister which says, ‘You are either with me all the way or you are somehow a defender of child abuse.’ That is a totally inappropriate stance to take and I think it would be unfortunate if we went down that path. We have seen a bit of that when we have had debates about the Iraq war—that if you are opposed to the Iraq war you are somehow making some sort of critical judgement of Australia’s service men and women. That, of course, is a nonsense. It is also a nonsense to assert that those who have a different view about how one responds to the question of child abuse in Northern Territory Aboriginal communities are somehow defending the perpetration of that abuse. So I hope we do not see that in this debate. I think all senators are equally committed to measures that assist in preventing that abuse and making Indigenous children safe. To be fair to the Greens and the Australian Democrats, both parties have had a long interest and involvement in Indigenous affairs in this parliament and I do not think their commitment to those issues can be questioned. While I disagree with them on a number of these things and will support the government on measures they will not support, I certainly do not question their commitment to the issues or their right to have a different view. I think it is a good thing for our democracy if those voices are heard.
As I said, my major concern at the moment is the fact that Indigenous voices are not being heard. I saw on the news last night Senator Heffernan gatecrashing a press conference held in the grounds of Parliament House by the Indigenous leadership who were in Canberra yesterday. I think that was one of the most disgraceful acts I have seen by a member of parliament within the bounds of Parliament House. It is another outrageous act by Senator Heffernan, who seems to have no standards. The government seems unwilling or unprepared to take action to ensure that its senators act with appropriate decorum and dignity. I think gatecrashing that press conference where Indigenous people were trying to have their voices heard is contemptible and I think Senator Heffernan owes the parliament and those people an apology. Quite frankly, he is a serial offender and it is getting way beyond a joke. I think the Prime Minister ought to take serious action to deal with Senator Heffernan. By failing to act he is seen to endorse what is, I think, totally unacceptable behaviour.
So, as I say, we think there is a case for urgency with these bills. Labor will be supporting the exemption. We will be actively participating in the Senate inquiry on Friday and we will be actively involved in the committee stage of the bills. We accept that, as it is an emergency response, it is appropriate that the parliament deal with these bills this fortnight rather than delay a further fortnight. Of course, there is always the possibility that we may not sit again. We are now in the time frame for the calling of an election. I think if the Prime Minister does not call the election before the next sitting then he will have gone over three years for the parliamentary term—which of course he is entitled to do. But we are at the stage where an election is due so I do not think postponing this legislation to a sitting that may not occur is a sensible action for the parliament to take. We do think this is urgent. We do support the thrust of an emergency intervention. We have some amendments and we have some disagreements with the legislation but we do think it is important to provide bipartisan support for a strong response. As part of that, we support the Senate debating the bills this fortnight and we will support the exemption from the cut-off.
No comments