Senate debates
Monday, 24 August 2020
Bills
Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Ensuring Fair Representation of the Northern Territory) Bill 2020; Second Reading
12:00 pm
Sam McMahon (NT, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source
I rise today, strongly on behalf of Territorians, in my support of the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Ensuring Fair Representation of the Northern Territory) Bill 2020. I'm not surprised, reading through the submissions to the inquiry of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters into this bill, at the vocal opposition to the Australian Electoral Commission's move to reduce the number of the Territory's lower house seats from two to one. Given the strong opposition from community groups, Indigenous land councils, political analysts such as Antony Green, professors, the Northern Territory government, Territory opposition, federal members and senators in this place, I have to wonder why we allow a blunt mathematical equation on population to get it so wrong.
That leads me to the purpose of this bill. Through this bill we are seeking to ensure a minimum of two seats for the Northern Territory. Let's not forget that as a Territory we have only two senators; that's four representatives in total, and it's proposed to go down to three. Since 2001 Territorians have been served by two members of parliament. Based on Australian Bureau of Statistics data, overlaid by an arbitrary Australian Electoral Commission formula, the Territory is set to lose a seat. This would mean 250,000 Territorians would be represented by just one member of parliament—and, I might add, that doesn't include unenrolled voters. At 31 March, the Northern Territory government believed there were approximately 24,000 unenrolled voters in the Territory. Many of the Territory's unenrolled voters are Indigenous. I myself, having just been through some of the gruelling remote-area mobile polling, have seen firsthand how many people in remote communities are not enrolled.
Without this bill, the Territory would become the largest seat in the country, seeing an extra 30,000 people spread over an area more than 35,000 times as large as the electorate of Melbourne, while, on the other hand, we have Tasmania. I love my Tasmanian colleagues. But Tasmania is, as we've heard, guaranteed five seats, regardless of its population—five members in the House of Representatives, with a population of about 535,000 people. And let's not forget: Tassie gets 12 senators. So, for double our population, Tasmania has over four times our representation. Without this bill, Tassie would have over five times our representation. It doesn't sound fair, and it's not.
But leaving fairness out of it for a second, if it is deemed that an MP can adequately represent a certain population, then why doesn't that apply in the NT? As Territorians, we like to think we're different. But are we? It is an area of approximately 1.4 million square kilometres, has a population of approximately 250,000 and has a population density of approximately 1.75 people per 100 square kilometres—fewer than two people per 100 square kilometres. It's currently the second-largest division in Australia, behind Durack in WA—but let's not forget, WA has many more MPs, and 12 senators.
We have cosmopolitan Darwin and Palmerston, covered by the seat of Solomon. The rest of the NT is covered by the seat of Lingiari. This contains the towns of Katherine, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs, Timber Creek, Pine Creek and so on. We also have reasonably large-sized towns that are incredibly isolated, such as Groote Eylandt, sitting in the gulf, and Gove, up on the tip of Arnhem Land, that is inaccessible by road for much of the year. We also have some of the most remote communities in Australia. Lingara is out in the Victoria River district, out towards Halls Creek in WA. I was there just last week. It's an eight-hour, one-way trip to get to Darwin. Lingara had three voters last week, but those three people deserve representation.
Let's not forget the NT also includes Christmas Island and the Cocos Keeling Islands out in the Indian Ocean. You cannot even fly there from Darwin. You have to go via Perth or Malaysia. There are 2,000 people out in those territories. It takes an entire week to do a trip out there. Imagine that you have to travel to another state or overseas to visit your constituents. It's unimaginable for the rest of Australia. The Territory is six times the size of Victoria and almost double the size of New South Wales. Not only that, as we've heard, the Territory is home to a culturally rich and diverse population, with 27 per cent of Australia's Indigenous population calling the Territory home. Roughly 40 per cent of the population of Lingiari is Indigenous. Most of these remote communities which contain our Indigenous population are only accessible by unsealed roads and are impassable during the Territory's wet season. It makes the work of scheduling for a Territorian MP very challenging.
In July, our government reaffirmed our commitment to ensuring that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people overcome entrenched inequality through the national agreement and set 16 new targets across key challenges, including health, education, employment, justice and housing. At a time when we are seeking to elevate the voice of our First Nations people to address these issues, our Indigenous Territorians deserve effective and efficient representation, and this is best served by ensuring at least two MPs in the Territory.
The seat of Solomon focuses on the Darwin-Palmerston areas. In that seat is Darwin Port, the closest port to South-East Asia. The port is vitally important, not only to Australia's defence capabilities but for trade relationships with the rest of the world. The seat also contains major defence assets and is home to the US Marine Rotational Force. Tourism, education and manufacturing are other important activities for this hub.
As you can see, these two seats have very unique characteristics, opportunities and challenges, but both share in the challenge of the tyranny of distance. Without this bill, there is no doubt the Territory's strategic and economic importance will be undermined. Now, more than ever, in the light of COVID, this is not in Territorians' best interests, and it's certainly not in our nation's best interests. COVID has seen a number of the Territory's key industries and businesses put at risk. The timing couldn't be worse, with an NT Labor government debt forecast to be $8.2 billion. The ramifications of this will see many Territorians seeking access to their local MP, whether that is to help locate opportunities for community funding grants, provide assistance to small business in accessing small business loans, or to help constituents deal with human services.
Despite the challenges, we also need to be looking for the projects capable of ensuring economic recovery. In the Territory, we are blessed with many opportunities. Some of those opportunities are in tourism, mining, gas, minerals, manufacturing and education. MPs are often the first go-to on these project proposals, and ensuring that they are briefed helps them advocate successfully in Canberra. With just one MP—an MP who would undoubtedly spend more time travelling than meeting with Territory constituents—my fear is that the Territory's potential may never be realised and our people, particularly Indigenous Territorians, will continue to be left behind.
In closing, I would like to particularly thank my co-sponsor, Senator McCarthy, for her strong advocacy on behalf of all Territorians and the contribution we make to this nation. I implore all of my colleagues to consider the role our MPs have in representing in Canberra each and every part of their electorates, and to ask themselves: is it fair to give 250,000 culturally, economically, and geographically diverse Territorians just one MP? I hope the answer to that question is an unequivocal no.
No comments