Senate debates

Thursday, 12 September 2024

Documents

Australian Human Rights Commission

3:48 pm

Photo of Kerrynne LiddleKerrynne Liddle (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Child Protection and the Prevention of Family Violence) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the Women in native title—Native title report 2024 on page 7 of the Notice Paper.

I rise to speak on the Australian Human Rights Commission's Women in native title—Native title report 2024. 'Bullied, treacherous and littered with violence'—these are the words of Indigenous women talking about native title. 'Oppressive, ostracising, filled with fear, anxiety, paranoia, fighting, carry-on and abuse'—this is the language of Indigenous women in the latest native title report of the Human Rights Commission, talking about native title. The motion Senator Lambie, Senator Thorpe and I put to the chamber this week was simple: let's talk about native title from the perspective of the very people it is designed to provide rights and interests for. Despite the overwhelming evidence, the Australian Greens, the Labor Party and some of the Independents did not vote for the motion. It's remarkable, isn't it? There's all that evidence and yet they still said no. They said not to the evidence of native title negotiations that contribute to bullying, harassment, violence and intimidation, no to the impact of the physical or economic exclusion of individuals by the prescribed bodies corporate who are the point of contact for anybody wanting to engage in developments and no to the evidence in this very report presented in this chamber. Instead, they're ignoring it or—worse—responding with an excuse of consultation fatigue and that the inquiry would use up resources.

Who told them there was consultation fatigue and that it would use up so many resources? It wasn't those women and men who were walking the halls this week in this very parliament. It wasn't the overwhelming evidence in the many, many reports that tell them there are issues that need exploring—and not from the land councils' perspective. If the land councils were really interested in making a difference, improving lives and closing the gap, they would be doing much more, and so would their leadership, elected or otherwise, about people with criminal records or people that actually engage in the type of behaviour that is described in this report. These issues of youth crime and violence against women, children and the vulnerable languish when good people do nothing, when people choose to ignore in silence.

What they did was listen to the voices of those who work in or represent the very organisations this report is talking about—the land councils, the NTRBs and the PBCs. They wrongly ignore the people that those organisations exist to represent. It's astounding that the Labor Party would say that Indigenous people are at risk of consultation fatigue. Well, this is what they said in that report. Page 80 talks of violence fuelled by native title representative bodies. Page 98 talks about prescribed bodies corporate enabling violence and conflict. Page 177 talks of the misuse of power by dominant men in leadership positions, some of whom are known perpetrators of violence against women and children. It's throughout the report. The women have talked courageously of being bullied when they've demanded transparency and accountability. This week the government, the Australian Greens and those Independents that voted against it ignored all of that. But the claims of the powerful land councils reverberated. They were amplified by the government's response and their remarks.

Aboriginal women are 34 times more likely to be hospitalised than others, six times more likely to die as a result of family violence and 30 times more likely to be hospitalised from injury. Surely, with all the discussions about respectful relationships, the public outcry about violence against women and the investment in ending family violence, they would get this? Native title is not a safe space. Why are they providing protection to those who don't provide a safe space or safe place? I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Comments

No comments