Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Chairman, you will be aware that the Australian Greens propose to move an amendment to this one. We have already at some length debated the issue of a sunset clause, and we were seeking to essentially make it consistent with a set of amendments which have already comprehensively and unfortunately failed. So I withdraw our amendment to the government amendment (4) and indicate that we will support the government's amendment.

The CHAIRMAN: The question is that government amendment (4) on sheet BW232 be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

by leave—I move Australian Greens items (7) and (1) to (6) on sheet 7230:

(1)   Clause 3, page 4 (after line 10), insert:

Part 4A—Consultation

Part 4A is about consultation with Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory to enable them to effectively engage in matters affecting them under this Act.

Part 4A requires the Minister to make rules prescribing consultation requirements that must be complied with in making a decision or legislative instrument under this Act that is likely to affect Aboriginal people living in one or more areas in the Northern Territory.

(2)   Clause 4, page 4 (lines 19 to 22), omit the clause, substitute:

4 Objects of this Act

     The objects of this Act are:

  (a)   to support Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory to live strong, independent lives, where communities, families and children are safe and healthy; and

  (b)   to enable Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory to effectively engage in matters affecting them under this Act.

(3)   Clause 27, page 32 (lines 22 and 23), omit subclause (8).

(4)   Clause 34, page 41 (lines 9 and 10), omit subclause (9).

(5)   Clause 35, page 43 (lines 9 and 10), omit subclause (5).

(6)   Clause 41, page 50 (lines 12 and 13), omit subclause (3).

(7)   Page 94 (after line 15), after Part 4, insert:

Part 4A—Consultation

Division 1—Introduction

110A Guide to this Part

This Part is about consultation with Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory to enable them to effectively engage in matters affecting them under this Act.

It requires the Minister to make rules prescribing consultation requirements that must be complied with in making a decision or legislative instrument under this Act that is likely to affect Aboriginal people living in one or more areas in the Northern Territory. Those rules must be consistent with principles set out in this Part.

Consultation requirements under this Part apply in addition to any other consultation requirements under this Act.

Division 2—Consultation

110B Minister to make rules specifying consultation requirements

(1)   The Minister must make rules prescribing consultation requirements to be complied with in making a decision or legislative instrument under this Act (other than a rule under this section) that is likely to affect Aboriginal people living in one or more areas in the Northern Territory.

(2)   Before making a rule for the purposes of subsection (1), the Minister must:

  (a)   have regard to the object of this Act in paragraph 4(b); and

  (b)   be satisfied that the rule is consistent with the consultation principles set out in section 110C.

(3)   A consultation requirement prescribed for the purposes of subsection (1) applies in addition to any other requirement relating to consultation that applies in relation to the making of the relevant decision or legislative instrument.

(4)   Rules made for the purposes of subsection (1) may prescribe different requirements in relation to:

  (a)   different decisions and legislative instruments; and

  (b)   different areas.

110C Consultation principles

(1)   This section sets out the consultation principles for the purposes of paragraph 110B(2)(b).

Obtaining consent or agreement

(2)   The object of consultation must be to obtain the consent or agreement of the Aboriginal people likely to be affected by the proposed decision or legislative instrument, not simply to outline what is proposed.

Using feedback

(3)   Consultation is a two-way process, which includes listening to the Aboriginal people likely to be affected by the proposed decision or legislative instrument, and using this feedback to influence and develop the decision or instrument.

Consensus negotiations

(4)   Consultation processes must be products of, and build, consensus. Consultations must be in the nature of negotiations and the Aboriginal people being consulted must not be pressured into making a decision.

Adequate time

(5)   Consultations must begin early, be ongoing (if necessary), and have adequate timeframes built into them.

Assistance to participate

(6)   The Aboriginal people likely to be affected by the proposed decision or legislative instrument must have access to financial, technical and other assistance to enable them to participate in the consultation process.

Coordination across agencies

(7)   Consultations that involve a number of Commonwealth, State and Territory agencies must be coordinated across those agencies.

Reaching people in places most convenient for them

(8)   Consultation processes must reach the Aboriginal people likely to be affected by the proposed decision or legislative instrument, and must be held in the location that is most convenient for, and chosen by, those people.

Respecting protocols

(9)   Consultation processes must respect the protocols, including the representative and decision-making structures, followed by the Aboriginal people likely to be affected by the proposed decision or legislative instrument.

Information to be given

(10)   Information about the proposed decision or legislative instrument, and its potential impact, must be provided to the Aboriginal people likely to be affected by it, being information that is:

  (a)   full and accurate; and

  (b)   clear, accessible, easy to understand and otherwise in accordance with plain language principles; and

  (c)   in the language of the people being consulted (if necessary).

The amendments inserts substantive consultation requirements into the bill. We have heard a great deal tonight about consultation and allowing communities to take ownership—and, indeed, about allowing them potentially to be empowered by some of the ideas that come out of this building. In response to the abysmal consultation process carried out in the context of Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory and the NTER, the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into Stronger Futures was told in no uncertain terms that the consultation process taken by the government was completely inadequate. Criticism was made of the way that the consultations were conducted and of the interpretation of the outcomes of this process and the subsequent reports. Criticisms included: meetings being scheduled at times that people could not attend; inadequate notice given; not enough time given to discuss the issues when people did get there; comments misreported; no follow-up materials; not translated into language, and so on. Those were the local criticisms.

In counterpoint, the Australian Human Rights Commission said:

The Commission has previously brought these concerns to the attention of the government in relation to the inadequacy of the consultation process as outlined below:

-the timeframe for consultations was inadequate given the scope and depth of the issues raised in the Stronger Futures Discussion Paper

-significant measures such as income management were not listed for discussion during the Stronger Futures consultation process

-despite the Australian Government’s efforts to work with the Aboriginal Interpreter Service (AIS), there was neither sufficient time to translate the paper into the languages of Northern Territory communities nor to provide the Stronger Futures Discussion Paper to the interpreters sufficiently in advance of the consultations.

Just imagine what would happen if the government bowled up into some suburb, consulting on a particular development, and the consultation paper was written in Swahili. Then, the government having already made its mind up as to what it wanted to find from the consultation, took away their paper in Swahili and did what they were intending to do all along and then wondered why people were a bit narky when the foregone conclusion was eventually announced in whatever language. These concerns were also reiterated by the NT Anti-Discrimination Commissioner, who was somewhat scathing. Many Aboriginal Territorians impacted by the intervention have told me of their disappointment with federal consultations. There were concerns that only a few were spoken to, that the duration of visits was too short and that some Aboriginal Territorians could not participate because of language, dialect or hearing impairments. These are all pretty familiar issues that I am canvassing here. In fact, we are probably getting sick of hearing about them, but they are pervasive when they come to the issue of consultation with Aboriginal people about these coercive reforms which impact their lives directly.

This amendment provides for the engagement of Aboriginal people in effective participation in the consultation process around matters that directly affect them. The minister would be required to develop consultation rules based on principles derived from the guidelines presented to the Senate committee by the Australian Human Rights Council. We intend to inform the development of good policies, rather than be twisted to suit predetermined outcomes. This consultation process around Stronger Futures was limited to a six-week period and that was early warning that things were headed in the wrong direction.

Poor consultation is the starting point which disempowers Aboriginal people. We believe—and we have outlined in these amendments that we are putting to the chamber tonight—that we can do better, that this is not rocket science. This is stuff that in some instances we can point to. We are able to do this well. We believe that something must be done to ensure that future consultations are not as brutally disempowering as the last round and the one before that and that they cannot get twisted. We have seen some instances tonight—and I suspect the minister will dispute this—where the government has already made up its mind by the time it rolls into communities in brand-new four-wheel-drives, consults, ticks a few boxes, sits under a tree, does the best that it can, given the resources that it is allocated, and then heads off in the dust and does what it intended to do all along. We have seen these sorts of things happen over and over again.

We believe these amendments which are put forward in a spirit of constructive criticism of the bill would go a long way towards achieving the aim of effective and genuine authentic consultation with the people most directly affected. I am delighted to commend this last batch of Australian Greens amendments to this bill.