Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) Share this | Hansard source

For me, that was a particularly unconvincing contribution about why we cannot deal with this urgent issue now, this week, and not delay it for another four weeks. It was unconvincing because Senator Wong got some simple facts wrong. We are not seeking in this motion to establish a guillotine or a gag on debate. We are seeking to have enough time to deal with this issue, which the National Native Title Council itself has said is a matter of urgency. We are responding to their needs, their wants and their issues, to make sure this is dealt with.

I agree, Senator Wong—through you, Madam Acting Deputy President—that this is a matter of sensitivity. This is a matter we should deal with properly, and that is why we are saying: let's have sufficient time to deal with it this week so we do not delay it another four weeks. This is a test for the Labor Party. It is a test of whether they support the interests of traditional owners and our First Australians. Do they support jobs for them and other Australians as well?

We need this bill. The reason this bill is urgent is that hundreds of Indigenous land use agreements across Australia are contingent on the clarity and consistency of native title law. As the Attorney-General said in his contribution, that has been called into question because of a court case earlier this year. We agree that that is an issue. We all agree on the changes, in my understanding. We all agree, after the Senate committee inquiry, that it should go through. So what is stopping us hanging around for one more day for our First Australians, to say that they can have a future as well? The Labor Party's position here is: 'We can't change our flights. We can't have a night in Canberra for your interests and your views. We will have to wait another four weeks.'

I also object. This is not about the Adani project alone. This is about 123 Indigenous land use agreements that have been called into question. This is about the people of the East Kimberley who want the Ord expansion to occur, who want that land to be developed. That needs an Indigenous land use agreement that could potentially be called into question. We want Project Sea Dragon to occur in the Northern Territory, an aquaculture project that could create 1,500 jobs there, in an area of our country that is of low-socioeconomic disadvantage. We want the bauxite mining of the cape to expand as well. Some of the first Indigenous land use agreements were made by the Wik and Wik Way peoples there. They need to be set in stone. They need to be given certainty as well. Why can't we give them certainty?

But this also is about the Adani Carmichael mine project. That is a project that could also deliver thousands of jobs to Indigenous Australians and other Australians. This is something that the traditional owners of the land there want, and that does not get said enough down here—that the Indigenous landowners met last year in Maryborough and voted 293 to one in favour of the Adani Carmichael coalmine. If we cannot spend another night in Canberra for them, we are insulting those 293 First Australians who want this project to go ahead, who just want the same opportunities and jobs that we in this place all enjoy. Why can't we extend that generosity to them as well? It does not stop there. This project also means jobs and benefits for all Australians. Last week we saw that Adani will use Australian steel and Australian steel only in their rail line. That will help protect jobs at the other end of the country, in Whyalla, South Australia, where they produce Australian steel. They will be one of the few mining companies in this country to use Australian steel in their project. In the Pilbara it does not happen, in Central Queensland it does not happen, but it will happen at the Carmichael mine. They will use Australian steel and protect Australian jobs in our manufacturing sector too.

So what is stopping the Australian Labor Party from supporting those jobs, supporting traditional owners and having one more night in Canberra? What is stopping them doing that? What is stopping them spending a little bit more time here to get this done now and respond to those urgent needs? If they cannot do that and if they cannot support this, I do not want to hear any comments about jobs from the opposition leader, Mr Shorten, tonight in his budget reply. I do not want to hear him talk about jobs tonight, because it is clear here today that the opposition do not support jobs if they do not support this motion. We saw earlier this week what the Labor Party think about jobs in the ad that they put out. They think about jobs for some but not all Australians, and certainly not for Australians of colour. If they did support jobs for all Australians, they would support this motion. They will support hanging around for another day, for a little bit longer, to deal with a matter we actually all agree on. We actually agree on this. Let us just get together and make sure it happens for our First Australians.