Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Indigenous Affairs (Senator Scullion) to a question without notice asked by Senator Siewert today relating to assistance schemes for Indigenous Australians in remote communities.

Today it was reported in The Australian:

UNEMPLOYED Aborigines in remote communities will be forced into work for the dole five days a week, with tough new sanctions for failing to participate, under changes that have in-principle cabinet agreement.

I asked a question of the minister about whether these will be separate and new sanctions and new mutual obligations specifically applied to unemployed Aboriginal people in remote communities and areas and was told by the minister: 'No, they won't be.' My next question was: will they then apply to all Australians? The minister said that that was under consideration. If this report in The Australianthat there will be new sanctions, new mutual obligations and new measures to force people into 25 hours of work-like dole activities spread over the week—is correct, that means this will apply to all Australians who are currently on Newstart. What are the government's intentions around new sanctions and new mutual obligations on people on Newstart?

This is another element of the government's attack on those people on Newstart in this country. The newspaper article suggests that this applies to Aborigines in remote Australia, yet the government say that they will not make these requirements any different for Aboriginal people. Of course, if they were going to be different, the government would probably try to imply that these are in fact special measures under the Racial Discrimination Act. For the life of me, I cannot see how this could be:

… understood to apply to positive measures taken to redress historical disadvantage and confer benefits on a particular racial group …

I fail to see how subjecting people in remote communities to even harsher sanctions and even greater mutual obligation requirements and work for the dole requirements could be a positive measure under the definition of 'special measures' under the Racial Discrimination Act.

The government also talks about creating replicate measures that look like real work. We all know it is very difficult to find work in remote communities. We also know that it is very difficult to provide adequate training and support for Aboriginal people. The minister in particular did a big media blitz last week on the RJCP, attacked the previous Labor government on the program, saying that there had only been 277 26-week outcomes, and failed to mention that there had been 1,167 outcomes for 13 weeks. In estimates, when I asked about this, the government was not able to explain the very big disparity between the 13-week outcomes and the 26-week outcomes, which is why I asked the minister about that again today. The minister said, 'It may be that they are just 13-week projects.' There does not seem to have been an analysis of why so many people are managing to get 13-week outcomes and not 26-week outcomes. Is it really because those jobs are only there for 13 weeks? Is it because the RJCP has only been able to put in place certain labour market programs for that period of time? Or are there other barriers whereby people are not able to maintain connection with work between that 13-week period and the 26-week period?

Before increasing sanctions, before changing mutual obligations and before increasing work for the dole requirements—and then, of course, with work for the dole requirements come additional excuses to dump people off Newstart—surely we should have a thorough understanding. Why are people failing to maintain that connection to work between the 13- and 26-week outcomes? You cannot just imagine up jobs in remote communities. There needs to be a lot of work done in advance. I am deeply concerned about the government's approach here. All Australians, I think, need to be concerned about this approach. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.