Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present a response from the Premier of Western Australia, Mr Carpenter, to a resolution of the Senate of 21 June 2007 relating to the report of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs entitled Unfinished business: Indigenous stolen wages.

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion in relation to the response by the Premier of Western Australia that has just been tabled.

Leave granted.

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

As you have outlined, Mr Acting Deputy President, this is a response from the Premier of Western Australia to a resolution of the Senate on 21 June this year which related to the report of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs entitled Unfinished business: Indigenous stolen wages. I moved that resolution of the Senate and it was, as far as I am aware, adopted by the Senate without dissent. The report was tabled by the committee in December of last year by the then chair, Senator Payne. The report of that committee was also unanimous from all senators across all parties in this place. It contained just six recommendations. The resolution of June this year that the Western Australian Premier has responded to basically requested that the relevant state governments and the federal government respond to the recommendations of the Senate committee report regarding Indigenous stolen wages as promptly as possible and ideally by 7 August.

I thank the Western Australian Premier for providing a response to the resolution of the Senate, albeit not as quickly as I would have liked. I note that the federal government is still yet to respond to this resolution of the Senate, and that is something I find very unfortunate and, frankly, totally unacceptable. The recommendations of the Senate committee were tabled, as I said, in December last year. There are only six recommendations and some of them do not even relate to the federal government; they relate specifically to state governments.

I remind the Senate, as I repeatedly do, that it is an existing standing order that governments should respond to Senate committee reports and their recommendations within three months. If it is a very detailed report with a bevy of recommendations numbering in the hundreds then perhaps a longer response time might be justified. But when there are only six recommendations—some of which do not even apply to the federal government—and nine months later we still have no response, that indicates to me not just a contempt for the Senate and the Senate committee but also a contempt for the Indigenous Australians who are directly affected by the injustice identified in the report and who are extremely anxious, upset, distressed and hurt by the continuing failure of governments, particularly at a state level, to respond. And when the federal government joins in failing to respond it compounds that injustice and that hurt. It is very disappointing and I frankly do not understand it. It is not that hard.

The recommendations are not that complex. They are not asking for billions of dollars from the federal government. The committee recommended that the Commonwealth government facilitate unhindered access to their archives for Indigenous people and their representatives for the purpose of finding out about the extent of Indigenous stolen wages and that the Commonwealth government provide funding to the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies to conduct a national oral history and archival project with regard to Indigenous stolen wages. The committee also recommended that the Commonwealth government, in regard to the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory, urgently consult with Indigenous people and conduct some preliminary research of their archival material. It is not that complex.

I do not know why it should take nine months to respond, even if the response is ‘No’. No response at all is contemptuous, particularly given that the committee itself emphasised that this is an urgent matter—not that the federal government or state government need to be told this because they already know it. Many of the people who were victims of this injustice are very old and they and, of course, their descendants want justice and recognition in relation to this issue. It is totally unacceptable for the federal government to have failed to respond. They have failed to respond to that Senate resolution—which was as polite as it could be. The resolution was in June, six months after the report was tabled. The federal government should already have responded.

The Senate specifically passed a resolution requesting that the government table a response by 7 August. I know the government have a lot of things on their minds with regard to the Northern Territory, but how this could not have been done at the same time is beyond me. It is not that complex, and it really signals to me a show of bad faith. It is a show of bad faith in an area where, frankly, the vast majority of blame in this area is on the state governments. In the current context where we are seeing the federal government grasping any opportunity to point out failures of the state governments you would think that the government would be onto it. But it seems that any issues regarding Indigenous people where it is matter of recognising clear-cut, undisputed injustices of the past which clearly have a link to the poverty and dysfunction of the present—I am not saying it is the sole reason, but there is a clearly a link there—do not fit the mantra, so there is no response. It is hard for me to come to any other conclusion. I am extremely disappointed that the federal government is yet to respond on such an important issue. It was a unanimous Senate committee report. They are not complex recommendations. There is a clearly identified injustice and a clearly identified expression of the fact that it is an urgent issue.

I welcome the Western Australian government’s response. It notes that the Western Australian government has made a commitment to examine the stolen wages issue and to determine its position by 30 June next year. It is a bit unfortunate that it will not be sooner, but at least it has made that commitment, and I accept that it does require an examination of the archives. That is time consuming and it is painstaking to look at the full extent of the evidence that is there. From the evidence that was provided to the Senate committee inquiry regarding government and commercial entities and other institutions in Western Australia, there seemed to be prima facie evidence that it was very likely that similar practices regarding stolen wages had been acknowledged as having occurred in Queensland and Western Australia. It is good that the Western Australia government has made a commitment to examine the issue. I think it is testimony to the Senate committee’s process and to the report that they helped provide that catalyst—and I am pleased about that.

I note the response to the recommendation about the ministerial council on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs to agree on joint funding arrangements for preliminary legal research. I think they have written to the Senate committee, but I will not comment on that ministerial council as I do not think it has been made public yet. The Western Australia Premier has reflected the view that each jurisdiction should undertake their own education and awareness campaign. That is fair enough as far as it goes, but I do believe there was a role for the ministerial council to take that leadership position and recognise this as a national issue, rather than have people having to fight the battle over and over again under each state jurisdiction. I think it is unfortunate that that recommendation has not been fully implemented. At least we are getting some response from the Western Australian government, even if not from the government at the federal level, on whether the recommendation was considered. It has been put on the agenda and has been flagged with the relevant state ministers. It is a welcome response from Western Australia and it is now a matter of continuing to monitor that process to see what happens. The one thing I would emphasise and urge the Western Australia government to do when they are examining the issue is to make sure that, whatever evidence they find, there is a comprehensive response so that we do not have the abysmal, insulting response that we had from the Queensland government.

I draw the Senate’s attention to the Hard labour, stolen wages report that was released by Dr Ros Kidd last week with the assistance of ANTaR, Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation, which details the situation and collates some of the evidence, including evidence that was provided to the Senate committee inquiry, which outlines the facts. It is very stark and very clear that there is more detail in some states than in others, and that is why more work needs to be done in going into the archives, but there is a clear case in most states of the gross injustice done.

To return to Queensland: for the state government to still pretend that offering four thousand bucks—maybe a bit more depending on what they decide to do with the leftover—offering just $50 million as a ‘gesture of reconciliation’, to use their words, as compensation for a lifetime of withheld earnings is an insult; it is not satisfactory. We all know that today Premier Peter Beattie announced that he is retiring. This is a key opportunity for the new premier, who I assume will be Anna Bligh, to make a difference and go that extra step to remedy the failure of the state government in Queensland to address this clear injustice, to make a proper redress and proper reparation. As part of that, I repeat my urging to all other state governments to respond to the Senate resolution and particularly urge the federal government to show some basic respect if nothing else. (Time expired)

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I listened very carefully to what Senator Bartlett has just said. I do not have ministerial responsibility for the response to this report but I will undertake, Senator Bartlett, through you Mr Acting Deputy President, to pursue this urgently with the relevant minister.

As Senator Bartlett knows, I sat as a participating member of that inquiry at its Brisbane hearing, and Senator Bartlett rightly points out that the recommendations were unanimous. Senator Payne, whom I see in the chamber, chaired that committee with great efficiency and penetration, if I may say so. It is not an exaggeration to say that all senators from all parties who participated in those hearings were absolutely appalled at the injustice that had been perpetrated, over generations, on Aboriginal people. As you rightly say, Senator Bartlett, this was largely, though not exclusively, at the instance of state governments on both sides. I remember, Senator Bartlett, as you will also recall, being absolutely appalled at the behaviour of the Queensland state government in dealing with proposals to settle these claims for what you rightly say—I agree with you—was an insultingly small amount of money. I also remember being appalled at the behaviour of Mr Beattie, who, mercifully, is not going to be among us as a practising politician for very much longer, in the way he treated these people with contempt. It seemed to me, Senator Bartlett, that Mr Beattie, who was briefly a solicitor many years ago, should have known that some of the conduct in which he engaged, or for which he was responsible in trying to force a settlement on these people, came pretty close to, if not beyond, the legal definition of duress and undue influence.

So, Senator Bartlett, I share your concern about the urgency and the significance of this report. This is not just about the rights of a group of disadvantaged people; it is also about property rights. If the people or their ancestors—their parents, grandparents or great-grandparents—were entitled to the wages and, through well-meaning but nevertheless wrongful conduct of state governments at the time the wages to which they were entitled were not paid to them, then they have a property right just as good as anybody else in the country to have those wages restored to them, to have the governments concerned make restitution. Senator Bartlett, I undertake to you to pursue the matter urgently. I think you know how strongly I feel about it as well.

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

I welcome Senator Brandis’s commitment that he will follow up the recommendations. I too was a member of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs and heard the stories about stolen wages that people throughout Australia told.

I would like to acknowledge that my home state of Western Australia is now picking up this issue. I very strongly continue to push this issue in Western Australia. I know that members of the Aboriginal community in Western Australia who had their wages stolen—those who are still with us, that is, because many people are passing on before this issue is resolved—will be looking to government for reparation. It is not good enough for the Western Australian government to just say, ‘We are looking into this.’ In June next year the people of Western Australia will be looking for a commitment from the state government to address this issue. The government needs to provide the compensation due to the Aboriginal people of Western Australia who helped build that state. Other states need to follow the Western Australian government’s leadership and investigate these issues.

I also think the Commonwealth needs to look to itself and to its records, because the Commonwealth knew something of this. Some of the evidence indicates that the Commonwealth was advising states—in particular my home state of Western Australia—about how to avoid giving all the child endowment and other payments that were due to Aboriginal people. The Commonwealth also needs to look at its own records to see if it has a case to answer. As yet I have not heard the Commonwealth acknowledge that that is an issue and that it also needs to take some action. So I ask Senator Brandis to, if possible, also raise that issue with the minister.

As Senator Bartlett indicated, last week in Melbourne Dr Ros Kidd launched the report Hard labour, stolen wages in Melbourne. I would like to remind people of what we are talking about here by quoting the speech she gave at the launch:

We are a wealthy nation today in large part because for decades we did not pay those workers whose labour was said, again and again, to be essential to the pastoral industry on which our national development prospered. We are a wealthy nation today in large part because governments around Australia used the savings and entitlements of Aboriginal families for their own profit. We are a wealthy nation today. We have a budget surplus of $17.3 billion. Please read this National Report. Please urge others to read it. Please join the fight to force the men in charge to settle this long overdue debt.

I think that sums it up: Australia was built on the back of the work of these people. White people—non-Indigenous people—whom they worked alongside have prospered. They have built houses. They have managed to create wealth for their families. Continuing generations of people have prospered and live much better lives than the Aboriginal people whose wages were stolen. If the wages that they earned had been paid to them in the first place imagine how that money could have been invested and what it could have done for the circumstances of those people and their families now.

This is an issue that needs urgent attention because these people are passing on. During the inquiry, one of the senior elders of the Kimberley who is affected by this actually passed on. This is so relevant to people’s lives right now and can make such a difference. As I said, I welcome Senator Brandis’s commitment to follow this up, but I add this plea: could the government also look at the Commonwealth’s role, what it knew and whether perhaps the Commonwealth, even to a small degree, has a role to play in helping to recompense peoples whose entitlements were stolen.

Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the same topic, I wish to support and endorse the remarks of the three senators who preceded me—Senator Bartlett, Senator Brandis and Senator Siewert. Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, I would like to direct a request to Senator Brandis—in view of the commitment he has just given—that anyone who has had their wages stolen, particularly when they were below the age of maturity, should be the subject of government attention in the manner and with the feeling that Senator Brandis has described. In these remarks, I refer to the over 500,000 children who were institutionalised in the last century. There were three cohorts: firstly, the Indigenous Australian children; secondly, the foreign children, who were the smallest group, of British, Irish and Maltese migrants; and, thirdly, and the largest group, Australian non-Indigenous non-foreign children. There were over 500,000 children. Vast numbers of children were used as employees. Their wages were supposed to be paid into trust funds and many of them did not receive their due recompense.

This matter was first referred to during the Senate Community Affairs References Committee inquiry into child migrants, the report of which is entitled Lost innocents: righting the record. It contained unanimous recommendations, and the issue of stolen wages was raised therein. I make these remarks so that Senator Brandis can note that the issue does not just apply to Indigenous children and adults, as important as that is. Whoever had this happen to them should, I think, have restitution and inquiry made on their behalf. I urge the government to take that up if they are of a mind to look at this issue in the depth and with the seriousness that Senator Brandis indicated.

Question agreed to.