Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the motion just moved by Senator Evans in relation to an apology to those Indigenous Australians that were forcibly removed from their families and communities under laws of past state and federal governments. While the coalition do support the motion, I must say at the outset that we do have strong objections to the way in which the government has handled this matter.

An apology has been Labor policy for many years, and they have now been in government for nearly three months, but it was only last night that MPs and senators were able to see the wording of the motion to be put to the House and Senate. Not only that but the government have insisted that a vote be taken on the motion after only a limited number of speakers and before everyone who wants to speak has had that opportunity. The government’s handling of this sensitive matter has been arrogant and disrespectful of the parliament in whose name this apology is to be made.

Nevertheless, as we have announced, the coalition will support this motion. We have given a very lengthy consideration to this matter in our party room. We admit this has not been an easy issue for many of us or for the millions of Australians that we represent. The debate about an apology has, of course, been held previously in this parliament, and state parliaments across the country have made some form of apology or statement of regret for the actions of the past. As parliamentarians we have a big responsibility to ensure that these issues are debated for the right reasons, and in this case it is about making sure that we see better outcomes for Indigenous Australians and that we all work to overcome obvious Indigenous disadvantage.

As I said, we have given a lot of thought to this matter for a decade. When our government responded to the Bringing them home report in 1997 the then Prime Minister, John Howard, expressed his profound personal sorrow but stated that the coalition did not believe that Australians of this generation should be required to accept guilt and blame for past actions and policies over which they had no control. That was a view sincerely held by our government and it was, I think, shared by many Australians at that time. I must say that one should always approach with caution any proposition which involves judging past actions by contemporary standards or seeking to hold one generation responsible for the actions of those who came before.

I should also state for the record that our government were concerned that a formal statement of apology could trigger a substantial number of claims for compensation which we felt then would be both very divisive and, if successful, an unjustified burden on current taxpayers. We remain of that view in relation to the issue of compensation. We note that, while the government has ruled out any compensation, this motion is silent on the matter. I note that Senator Bob Brown proposes to move an amendment on that matter and I give notice now of our opposition to an amendment relating to compensation.

In light of our reservations about a formal apology, in 1999 the then Prime Minister moved a statement of regret in the House of Representatives. That statement reaffirmed the parliament’s commitment to reconciliation, acknowledged that the mistreatment of many Indigenous Australians over a significant period represents the most blemished chapter in our national history, expressed the parliament’s deep and sincere regret that Indigenous Australians suffered injustices under the practices of past generations, and acknowledged the hurt and trauma that many Indigenous people continue to feel as a consequence of those practices. The intent of that statement remains as relevant today as it was nearly 10 years ago, but we acknowledge that Indigenous Australians affected by the policies of the past need more than our sympathies and regret in order for them to accept the sincerity of our nation’s remorse for past practices.

It has been a long road since that national inquiry into the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children—the Bringing them home report. May I say that Brendan Nelson’s contribution to the debate after the release of that report is as poignant and emotive today as it was then. His strong sense of humanity and commitment to Indigenous Australians helped to ensure that the coalition would move to support this motion today. Dr Nelson is to be commended for his leadership on this issue which, as I said, is not an easy one for the men and women of the Liberal and National parties and the millions of Australians we represent.

But Dr Nelson was right when he stated back then that this is not a question of our generation or subsequent generations carrying guilt. It is about understanding what was done and the consequences of it. We now understand and accept that this apology is the right thing to do. We accept that the Australian people want this parliament to come together to settle this matter. Our policy on this matter has evolved against the background of our strong faith in the importance of families. The impact on families of the policies of forced removal does not sit well with what our parties fundamentally believe in. When we look at the individual stories of those affected by separations we find hurt, damage, regret and, in many cases, justifiable anger.

But we also find that those who implemented these policies were in many cases acting in what they believed were the best interests of the children at the time. Of course, any civilised society has laws to provide for the protection of children from harm, including from their own families. Such laws exist today in Australia but regrettably do not always operate to protect Australia’s vulnerable children. This is a fundamental argument about who knows what is best for children in our society. It is a debate that is still going on. We trust that even today state government officers around the country act appropriately when they remove children at risk, even from their parents. The danger is in creating a perception that removal is always wrong. Ultimately, authorities must act to protect children at risk. So the balance between the sanctity of the family and the state’s responsibility for the protection of children is never easy to achieve, especially in the case of Aboriginal children.

The last decade has seen much action and many programs in relation to Indigenous affairs, and this chamber has been very active in the matter. The former government implemented a number of significant reforms as we turned away from what we perceived to be political correctness to focus on real results. The former government had at the forefront of its policy for Indigenous Australians the ensuring of better outcomes. Our policies were admittedly about substance; they were not about symbolism. John Howard was not the barrier to an apology. It cannot be said of our government in any way that we did not do our utmost to ensure that Indigenous people in this country received adequate support, or that our reforms did not help reduce the disadvantage facing our Indigenous communities.

I personally had the privilege of spending a considerable amount of time in our Indigenous communities during the first three years of our government, when I had executive responsibility for native title. I therefore experienced firsthand the enormous disadvantage suffered by people in many of our more remote Indigenous communities. Negotiating native title reform with Indigenous leaders and their communities was a difficult but personally very enriching experience. Native title is just one aspect of Indigenous affairs where our determination to implement practical improvements—which we can now see have resulted in real advances—was met with hostility. Our reforms to the way in which we deal with native title claims have resulted in much better outcomes for all involved.

As a coalition we are proud of our overall achievements in Indigenous affairs. Expenditure on Indigenous-specific programs and services in our last budget was set at $3.5 billion for the current financial year, a 39 per cent real increase from the levels of 1995-96, when we came to office. More Indigenous Australians are participating in our strong economy. That includes a fall in the unemployment rate among them from 30 per cent in 1994 to just 12.8 per cent in 2004-05. Over the same period, Indigenous long-term unemployment has fallen from 14.2 per cent to 5.1 per cent. Although more improvements need to be made in the fields of health and education, there are some positive signs, including a 16 per cent decrease in the Indigenous mortality rate in the Northern Territory, South Australia and Western Australia from 1991 to 2003. So we have seen some real and significant improvements—but of course we acknowledge that there is very long way to go to ensure that Indigenous Australians are on an equal footing and no longer feel shamed by past policies.

One of the most significant steps of our government was the introduction of emergency measures in the Northern Territory just last year to protect Aboriginal children from abuse in their own communities. Our government launched this drastic but decisive action after the release of the Little children are sacred report to the Northern Territory government. Like many here I am a parent and particularly felt the repulsion caused by the revelations in that report. This is a most significant intervention. We must act to stop such abhorrent crimes against children in Indigenous communities and must establish the protection of the law.

The measures in that intervention are worth noting. They were increasing police levels in prescribed townships, including secondments from other jurisdictions, funded by the Australian government; introducing comprehensive voluntary health checks for all Aboriginal children, and providing treatment and making referrals where necessary; improving governance by putting managers of all government business in prescribed townships; widespread alcohol restrictions; banning the possession of X-rated pornography and introducing audits of publicly funded computers to identify illegal material; welfare reforms to stem the flow of cash going towards substance abuse and gambling, and to ensure funds meant for children’s welfare are used for that purpose; enforcing school attendance; improving housing in townships through increased funding and the introduction of market based rents and tenancy arrangements.

They are a very comprehensive set of interventions and they were initiated by our government in its single-minded pursuit of ensuring that Indigenous children no longer suffer abuse of any description. That is why the Northern Territory intervention launched by John Howard is just so important. We do need to ensure that children in these communities can grow up without fear and grow up to reach their full potential.

The intervention in the Northern Territory, I think, has also been pivotal in focusing the public’s attention on the plight of Indigenous communities, particularly of their children, and this intervention—its aims, its early successes—have helped bring us, the coalition, and, I think, the parliament and the nation to where we are today. Of course, it raises broader questions about a community. Every one of us is and must be concerned about child abuse in every Australian community, and we need to ensure that all jurisdictions continue to work together to counter child abuse.

I was part of a government that may not have approved a formal apology but did make sure that our Indigenous communities received assistance when and where they needed it most. If there was any failure on our part, it was in relation to recognising the significance of symbolism in helping Indigenous communities to move forward. We were unashamedly focused on practical outcomes but we can now acknowledge that that was at the expense of important symbolic acts. The transition to supporting an apology, for us and I think for the people we represent, has been a gradual process, but the report to the Northern Territory government, that Little children are sacred report, was yet another wake-up call that I think did capture the attention of our population. The fact that such horrific abuse of children could be so prevalent today required that intervention, and it did require the nation’s attention. There is, as Senator Evans has rightly said, so much more to be done, and I do hope this debate focuses the new government on ensuring that funding to Indigenous communities is well managed and does deliver the results we all want. It is vitally important that the new government presses ahead with the measures adopted by the emergency intervention and does not just rest with the symbolism, as important as it is, of today.

We do accept that the lack of a formal apology from the federal government has been an impediment to better relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. The coalition now recognise that this apology is very important to Indigenous Australians and that the parliament should adopt this motion in the interests of enhancing their hopes, their aspirations and their opportunities. But, as important as this motion may be, parliaments and governments must remain focused on delivering real results on the ground for disadvantaged Indigenous Australians. We can only do that by maximising their chances to take advantage of all the opportunities offered by this great country to lead a rich and rewarding life. So, on behalf of coalition senators, I re-emphasise our commitment to our 1999 statement of regret and I do now offer our support for the motion moved by Senator Evans today, as we apologise to all those Indigenous Australians affected by the policies of the past.