Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate notes the failure of the Rudd Labor Government to construct a single new house in remote Northern Territory Indigenous communities due to their mismanagement of the $672 million Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program.

On the first full day of sitting of the parliament after the last election, we will always remember the carnival atmosphere of that very special day in Australian history when the Prime Minister of Australia delivered his apology speech to Indigenous Australians. I, along with most Australians, recognised the importance of this symbolic gesture to the stolen generations. Notably in his speech, the Prime Minister said:

I said before the election that the nation needed a kind of war cabinet on parts of Indigenous policy, because the challenges are too great and the consequences too great to allow it all to become a political football ...

He went on to say:

I therefore propose a joint policy commission, to be led by the Leader of the Opposition and me, with a mandate to develop and implement—to begin with—an effective housing strategy for remote communities over the next five years.

Clearly from these statements, the Prime Minister was saying that housing was an absolute, fundamental problem and that it was the very first issue to be tackled by his government, and so a war cabinet was set up to fix the problem. The tough talk on practical issues gave hope to Indigenous Australians. The Labor government was going to continue with the work commenced under the intervention to deliver the housing that is critical to fixing so many of the other problems in Indigenous communities that are linked to health and educational outcomes.

I think we would all understand that it is pretty hard to listen in class—it certainly was for me—if you have not had any sleep because you are sharing a home with 20 people who are bumping around the place, having showers and so on. I think just that number of people would make it very difficult for anyone to get enough sleep at night and then be able to listen to their lessons. It would also be very difficult to avoid things like ear, nose and throat infections if you could not have a shower. The basic elements of hygiene are simply not there in so many of these communities, and that has an inordinate impact on the health and educational outcomes of the people who live in them.

Indigenous people welcomed the Prime Minister’s commitment. They were prepared to take the Prime Minister at his word, that he was all about action and not just talk. That was the tenor of the speech. Indigenous people agreed to support the government on the basis of practical results. We knew that the practical results were coming down the line, and Indigenous people were certainly not going to rely on platitudes and symbolism alone. But Indigenous Australians, as we know now, have been let down in the most callous way. The tough talk of the Prime Minister has now been replaced with complete incompetence and neglect. The TV cameras have been packed away and copies of the apology speech have been distributed. The Prime Minister, wherever he travels, is very proud of his apology. However it seems that now the spin and the media opportunities have disappeared, the focus of this government on Indigenous housing has also disappeared. The housing task force appears to be a distant memory. Remote Indigenous Australians have been left behind and forgotten in the fiasco that is the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program.

A lot of money has been spent—we still do not know how much—and many people have been making a tidy income from implementing these schemes. Yet after so much time, few houses have materialised. There has been so much time, so much money, yet no houses. Even those Australians who have not been following this issue would have to think that, if there are no houses—that is, zero—out of the 750 houses, that benchmark is one that we have probably failed. But we are told time and time again by the government that things are on track and that everything is going to be okay. No minister with responsibility for delivering on Labor’s housing program should dare raise their head. This is a shameful outcome, delivered as a result of the government’s mismanagement of the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program. It seriously exposes the way in which the Kevin Rudd government operates. We have heard in this place in answers to questions the words—obviously taken from one of the government’s focus groups—’swift and decisive’. That certainly has not applied to this program. I would say ‘slow, indecisive and completely hopeless’. There are no houses out of 750. It beggars belief that such an important undertaking of ‘we will fix this’—a compact with the Indigenous people of Australia—was made by the Prime Minister in his first speech in the new parliament, and here we are, many, many months down the track, and not a single house.

One of the things I have noticed that the government are quite good at is manipulating the media cycle with stunts and announcements. It seems that whenever the government have a bit of problem they simply make another announcement. They just have another media release. They have a bit of a press gathering. They might even roll out another tax. This program is a perfect example of the government’s reliance on spin over substance. There have been announcements made over the months. There have been full-colour, roadside media releases announcing bigger and better sums of money and espousing the commitment of this government to address inadequate housing. Yet not a single house has been built.

I rang the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and relayed the concerns of some community members who are very disappointed. They had exposed the fact that they had walked through raw sewage in the community of Ampilitwatja and had walked off. There would not be many Australians who would not have heard of the Kalkaringi walk-off. I spoke to the members of this community at an old soak outside of Ampilitwatja when I visited there a few days ago. The entire sad scenario was played out in the national media. These people said, ‘We are protesting. We are walking away from this community. We would rather live in the bush than live in this community.’ Astonishingly, not one person from the Northern Territory Labor government and not one person from the federal government had even bothered to go and see them. The community was waiting. I explained these circumstances directly to the minister. Given that the minister has charge of this portfolio and given that the situation had been broadcast across the airwaves, it should have been well known to her.

At that stage, I would have generally expected action. The minister’s only response to all of this was to have her spokeswoman say, ‘They’re committed to improving conditions on Territory Aboriginal communities.’ That is almost as pathetic as the answers given by the Leader of the Government, Senator Evans, in this place today in question time. It is just pathetic. The minister’s words—‘We’re committed to doing this,’ and ‘We’re committed to doing that’—are supposed to make people think that they are actually doing something. But what people want is practical outcomes, and they certainly have not had that.

I read with some interest the other day the ANAO report, where Mr McPhee, on the subject of the importance of effective implementation in achieving policy goals, says:

Amongst other things, implementation requires effective governance, risk management, procurement and contract management, the right type and quantum of resources, oversight and review.

This would be a litany of how not to do it. None of those things have been organised. We have Senator Crossin on the other side shaking her head. She is part of the government. She looks after the interests of Territorians, she purports to look after the interests of Indigenous Territorians and I have not heard a peep from her about this. I have not had media releases from her office saying that this is an outrage. I have not read any of that. Out of how many houses—750? Zero. Just give me a moment; let us weigh that up.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What you say is wrong.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Crossin, I see your name on the speakers list. You will have your chance.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The policy idea, and it was a great one—it was a coalition policy idea, and I was proud to stand in this place and make those announcements as part of the intervention—was that the money was allocated. It is very interesting, because I suspect by some of the interjections coming from the other side that Senator Crossin is actually going to say to us, ‘No, they have been built.’ This was the spin of six months ago, when I started talking about this. But when I went to estimates and said, ‘Yes, the houses have been built,’ but, asked whether that was programs that were actually going on at the time or whether it was part of the new program, they had to accept that not one house had been built as part of this new program. It is a complete and utter outrage. I have been trying for months to get some answers on these very serious questions as to the status of—

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are not asking the right person.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have got more and more mutterings from Senator Crossin. I do not know if you pay any attention in question time, but the questions were asked again today and the government came up with absolutely nothing. There was not one answer. How much had been spent? How many houses had been built? Nothing—there is no answer. You know why? Because they do not know. This has been the worst managed, most horrifically bungled bureaucracy in the history of Federation. I am sure, as more of that comes out, we will have more spin from those on the other side.

There are a number of things we have asked for. I have written to the minister. We have said that we would like the budget to be released. That is similar to many of the questions we asked the minister today: where is the expenditure? Of course, it cannot be released because, as I have said, I suspect people do not understand what is going on. It is a complete disgrace: $672 million and not a single house. So what they have promised is a program of around 750 new houses, including new subdivisions; 230 new houses to replace houses to be demolished; 2,500 housing upgrades; essential infrastructure to support new houses; and improvements to living conditions in town camps.

I was just visiting a friend of mine, Queenie—I was dropping off a couple of kangaroos at a town camp last week. I said, ‘How’s this accommodation going?’ This was in the town camp. It is a piece of tarpaulin, an old spring bed and half a car body. Of course, there is an Indigenous organisation for that that charges them for that luxury—they charge them rent. There is no shower; there is no toilet; there is no power. Each one of the five people in that shelter gets charged $50 a fortnight for the privilege of being able to use a tap that is out on the flat. They are the circumstances that Senator Crossin’s government is quite happy with. The situation is normal! Nothing has changed. Everything is okay! It is an absolute outrage, and I will continue to attack the government on this matter until some changes are evident in these camps.

We have had a number of media releases. We had one dated 28 October that said an additional $6.5 million is going to be spent on new housing in Tennant Creek—that is above and beyond the $30 million that was provided by the previous government in other promises. That was going to help stop the overcrowding across seven community areas. That was, as I said, in addition to this money. There have been a couple of refurbishments at Tennant Creek, I understand—a new fridge or something like that—but the media release also revealed, ‘Civil works will begin next month.’ That would have been in November 2008. The media release also said, ‘Housing construction and refurbishment works can begin as planned in early 2009.’ Well, it would have been a very cold and cramped Christmas, Senator Crossin. Did you enjoy your Christmas pudding, Senator Crossin? They did not. They were there that entire time, and they had absolutely nothing done.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Crossin interjecting—

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Scullion, please address your remarks through the chair. Senator Crossin, would you cease interjecting.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course, nothing has happened. It was a very cold and crowded Christmas. In February, we started asking some questions again: ‘What’s happened now?’ The Northern Territory News on 25 February said that construction had not commenced on a single house, but what the government did was to put another media release out. Territory Labor decided that this was all getting a little bit awkward for them, so the Chief Minister decided to release the first annual report card on the Closing the Gap initiative. It says how much money they spent. It talks about the recruitment. But there is not a single benchmark outcome in health or education or anything like that. Labor believes that if they spend a lot of money—if they put a dollar sign there—it equals an outcome. Well, we can see there is no outcome. There are no houses. The parlous state of the welfare of our first Australians in the Northern Territory remains largely the same.

Whilst they are delivering illusions of actions, and broken promises, we can see that there is now a very clear series of steps. We fast-forward to May 2009. A further announcement was made by the government on the construction of houses. Again, it was an admission of a delay in construction. We were told that work was due to start in a few months time, in May 2009—seven months after the announced start date. I have to say, the Tiwi Islands inform me that there are still no houses today. I had a photo of a 50-millimetre peg in the ground. That is the sum of the new housing construction.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Rubbish.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

‘Rubbish’—again there are interjections from those on the other side. I have been there and I have not visited a brand new house on the Tiwi Islands. If the senator would like to correct me on that when she is on her feet, I would be delighted. If she can give me a name and an address, that would be very useful.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You don’t understand what SIHIP is about.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you do not mind, I will take that interjection, through you, Mr Deputy President. What we understand, Senator Crossin, is that those on the other side promised 750 houses and they have not delivered one. They should be ashamed of that. We have a complete series of spin that continues to roll out. One of the things those on the other side should really think about is that you cannot protect your baby son from the freezing desert wind with an announcement; you cannot keep the rain off your children’s heads with a press conference or a promise. We need action. We have had enough symbolism, we have had enough rhetoric, but we actually need action. This is one of the most shameful events in the history of Indigenous affairs.

I acknowledge that this is a very hard area. Today in question time, Senator Evans said we should show some bipartisan support. We did. We supported it in the intervention. Galarrwuy Yunupingu said he supported the intervention, but he said to me, ‘Senator, the problem is that we have had all the painful bits. We’ve had our income quarantined. You can’t take grog into the community. You can’t do this and you can’t do that. But, on balance, we thought it was okay because there were some good bits too—infrastructure, houses, better conditions.’ Of course, none of that has happened.

We would really like to know what is happening in the Northern Territory government. There seems to be a bit of a mess there at the moment. The Northern Territory government is expected to take about $76 million out of the $627 million. They only contributed $100 million and out of that they have apparently, at the moment, taken $76 million. That is not bad, is it? They cannot make a house but they can put the hand in the skyrocket of the taxpayer, just like that, and knock off their $76 million. We do not actually know if any money has been spent on houses. We keep asking and we are not getting any answers at all.

It really is important to understand that, in the context of the apology—which I know was supported in a bipartisan sense by this entire parliament; it was a great day for Australia—symbolism alone is not going to help the lives and the welfare of our most vulnerable and our first Australians. A message to the Prime Minister—I do not think there is any mischief in this; I am not saying that Prime Minister Rudd was saying things he did not believe would happen—is that he needs to get a minister on the ground who is capable of delivering to our first Australians. Clearly she is not at the moment. Under any measure, this program is a complete and utter failure. Senator Crossin will try to put a case that houses are there. As I have said, those in the media are requesting: ‘What we’d like from her is a name and an address.’ Announcing programs, posing for pictures and wearing hard hats is no substitute for action and results. I again remind Mr Rudd that, in terms of symbolism, our most vulnerable Australians cannot shelter from rain, cold winds or the elements under an apology. We acknowledge the importance of symbolism, but, without the backup of some practical changes on the ground, our first Australians are never going to have the opportunity to be able to embrace the lifestyle that the rest of Australians take for granted. The government stands condemned.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this afternoon to provide a contribution to this MPI. I actually welcome the opportunity to provide some history on this program, some completeness about the rationale for this program, and to fill some gaps that have existed, certainly in the last couple of weeks and in the last few days, in the emotive tirade of Senator Scullion. It provides an opportunity to put some facts and history on the table about this. I want to try and bring back the Indigenous housing issue that confronts all of us in this country in what we had hoped would be an unemotive but bipartisan way, but obviously that is not the way Senator Scullion wants to play it.

SIHIP stands for Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program—and I clearly want to emphasise ‘infrastructure’. This is not just about housing; this is also about infrastructure. It is a jointly funded program between the Northern Territory government and the Australian government which was instigated under the Howard government in 2007. So this is a program that is the making of the previous federal government. It has been progressively rolling out new and upgraded service land and related infrastructure, as well as new, replacement and upgraded housing in communities across the Northern Territory. It has a budget of $700 million, which will be spent over five years. It is one of the largest investments in Indigenous housing to be made by a government. SIHIP is about much more than building houses. It is also about creating healthy homes, real training and job opportunities for local residents.

There are some fundamental differences between what has been done in the past and what we want to achieve under this program. The SIHIP vision is to provide Indigenous Australians with adequate, appropriate and sustainable housing, whilst creating opportunity for employment and workforce development in Indigenous communities. So SIHIP is different from every other housing program that has been delivered. That is the cornerstone of this program and is the very essence of what Senator Scullion has failed to grasp—in fact, does not want to grasp. This program is fundamentally different and I am going to spend my time outlining why that is the case.

Under this program we will work closely with communities to build homes that will work for them, unlike in the past. Those homes will be safe and robust and are designed to last for decades, not just years. They will be well designed and they will link construction to the delivery of real training and unemployment opportunities for locals.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Eighteen months!

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to remind the Senate, Mr Deputy President, that it is unparliamentary for a senator to yell out in this chamber while not sitting in their designated seat. You might want to remind Senator Scullion that if he is going to interject he should do it from his own chair, not somewhere else in the ether of this chamber.

SIHIP is a complex program representing the largest investment in Indigenous housing that has ever been undertaken in the Northern Territory. That is why it is essential that this program is properly established with careful management and coordination. SIHIP has set the direction for investment in housing for Indigenous Australians for the long term. It has in fact provided a basis for the new National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, which will now cover all Australian jurisdictions. The perception that the program is faltering, that the collective resolve of governments is wavering, is clearly wrong. The truth is anything but that. Breaking Indigenous disadvantage in this country does require long-term effort on behalf of governments, and that is what the Commonwealth and Territory governments have committed to.

In the debate on SIHIP, some have claimed that there have not been any new houses built in the bush for over a year. Over the last 18 months the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments have built 90 new houses under programs that overlap with SIHIP. Those claims about no new housing are misleading. What people do not fundamentally understand is that SIHIP replaces all previous housing programs—it is a new program. What underpins this program? Property rights, geography, low levels of employment and economic activity and other factors have meant that the private sector has never moved to address the supply of housing on the Indigenous estate. Those same factors have complicated the delivery of government housing and infrastructure programs for over 40 years.

Before some activity occurred in 2007, for 11 years Indigenous housing was in a state of inertia in this country. For 11 years the previous government sat on their hands before they decided that they would provide the injection of money that was needed to address this problem. What developed over that time was an Indigenous-specific housing system, which was allowed to morph under the Howard federal government, comprising a large number of Indigenous community housing organisations that only managed to build a small number of dwellings—on average, about 100 homes per organisation. Funding for the construction, maintenance and management of those housing organisations came from 12-month grants—let’s get this right—to a collection of programs. We had a mishmash of grants right across this country getting doled out to Indigenous housing organisations on a yearly basis. What progress could possibly have been made under that structure? The answer is very little.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You’ve done nothing. You are a failure.

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Under your government, Senator Scullion, very little progress was made. These programs include the longstanding Aboriginal Rental Housing Program, the Community Housing and Infrastructure Program—or CHIP—the National Aboriginal Health Strategy and some smaller niche programs. It was a complex network of programs to navigate. Annual grants did not encourage long-term planning and the management of the housing was further complicated by the Indigenous community housing organisations not actually owning the assets, as most discrete communities are located on inalienable communal land. For these housing organisations, property and tenancy management was difficult, sometimes poor, and rent revenues were often low. SIHIP actually demands that housing amongst the Northern Territory Indigenous population living in remote communities be effectively addressed by governments.

For 2007 the backlog for housing and related infrastructure in the bush was around $2.7 billion. When we came to government, we inherited from the Howard government a backlog of $2.7 billion. That figure was indicative of the chronic overcrowding experienced by many households across the Territory. It was and still remains a daunting prospect, and big changes are clearly needed for housing in the bush. We knew that in the Northern Territory housing of course underpins the creation of new markets in remote communities—it could be a source of sustainable economic development for remote townships and entire regions. With housing, jobs and skills can be created, enterprises would grow, markets in land and housing would emerge and private investment in communities would increase. SIHIP is the first housing program to set meaningful targets in addition to bricks-and-mortar targets. Community involvement and jobs now and for the future are critical, as is securing the value of assets with leases.

In September 2007, the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments struck up a memorandum of understanding for Indigenous housing, accommodation and related services that would see the Commonwealth—

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That’ll be helpful. Will it keep the rain off your head?

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

September 2007, Senator Scullion, was actually under your government, the previous federal government, so why don’t you just try listening for a few seconds? That saw the Commonwealth contribute $793 million to improve housing for Indigenous people in the bush over the 2006 to 2010 financial period.

The work with Connell Wagner examined the remote housing supply chain in great detail, and made clear why small programs could continue to fall short of the objectives. The traditional grant programs were never going to achieve the necessary economies of scale: the mobilisation costs were too high relative to such small returns; the logistical costs reduced the value for money that we were getting and construction programs were too short; and employment and training outcomes were rarely mandated. It was a chronic situation that was being strangled and needed to change. So both governments determined that the alliance contracting model was the best way to deliver SIHIP—both governments: the previous federal government and the Northern Territory government. This is an alliance model that we have inherited and we have accepted and it will continue to deliver this outcome.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How much did they get paid for that? What’s it going to cost?

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It outstripped traditional management contracting against all of the NT’s and Commonwealth’s evaluation criteria. It had transparency, whole-of-life costing, stakeholder involvement, local employment, flexibility, quality and continuous improvement to name a few. Strategic alliance models have proven successful across a range of projects where government and the private sector work closely and collaboratively to reduce and manage risks, achieve time and budgetary savings, and deliver objectives that are normally difficult to quantify.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You haven’t built any houses!

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So SIHIP is actually a federal government, Northern Territory government and private sector partnership. Parsons Brinckerhoff is actually managing this project, not the Northern Territory government. It is a key fact here that has been lost—

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh yeah, blame game! Who does he work for?

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and it is a key fact, Senator Scullion, that this is the model that your government put on the table, your model that we have all agreed to, your model that everyone has signed up to.

So, both governments set about formulating SIHIP under an alliance model. On 12 April 2008, just after we came into government, the Chief Minister and Minister Macklin launched the $647 million landmark housing project that covers 73 remote communities and some urban areas. As we know, SIHIP would deliver 750 new houses, over 230 new houses to replace derelict structures and upgrade 2,500 existing homes. It would also provide essential infrastructure to support the new housing developments, and better conditions in town camps. At that time the program took in 3,500 houses. Absolutely nothing has changed. Each and every one of those commitments holds true today.

The preliminaries for SIHIP were completed on schedule. A commercial manager was engaged in March 2008. The alliance participants were contracted and awarded the tender in October 2008. There are three alliances: New Future Alliance, Territory Alliance and Earth Connect Alliance.

In November 2008, the alliance groups for the Tiwi Islands, Groote Eylandt and Tennant Creek packages of work began engaging with the communities in question. The programs at those locations are now in full swing, with over $145 million worth of work already being delivered. The next tranche of $355 million is being scoped for 47 communities and 25 town camps, so that will be $500 million in housing programs—not all new houses: upgrades, refurbishment and infrastructure by the end of 2009. On the Tiwi Islands, with the first phase of work, overcrowding will be reduced by around 60 per cent. The program will achieve this by building 29 new houses for 170 people, putting extensions on 25 existing houses so that they can accommodate a further 50 people and refurbishing 155 homes. Ninety houses will be constructed on the Tiwi Islands over the life of SIHIP. We have set an Indigenous employment target on the Tiwi projects of 20 per cent—something that has never been done in the life of Indigenous housing upgrades and builds in this country before.

The Territory Alliance has already employed 10 local people at Nguiu, and another 15 are being trained for work. That is an outcome I would have thought Senator Scullion would applaud.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But they haven’t got a house to work on. That’s not a job!

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The alliance is also working with Tiwi Enterprises to establish a local labour hire company and has held a skid steer, backhoe and heavy truck driving course for eight Indigenous trainees so that they can work on the refurbishments at Pirlangimpi and Milikapiti. Because what we do not want to do is go into the communities and build houses anywhere that are totally inappropriate and walk away without any local people trained or engaged in work. This is a new model that will redesign the way in which Indigenous housing is delivered out bush, but Senator Scullion does not want to know about it. He does not want to know about the facts and he does not want to talk about some of the positive elements that this program is starting to deliver.

The first phase of work at Groote Eylandt and Bickerton Island will improve the housing situation for more than 600 people. There will be 26 new houses that will have a collective capacity for 184 people, and the capacity for 80 visitors. This feature was requested by the community. What we are doing in this program is consulting with Indigenous people. You see, you cannot stand up here and say, ‘Don’t build houses anywhere, don’t build designs that are inappropriate, don’t talk to Indigenous people,’ and then say, six months later, ‘But you’ve got no outcomes.’ We have gone into communities and engaged with them and consulted them. Because the local population swells during the wet season, 75 of the 152 existing houses that are not up to standard are to be upgraded as requested. That is what the community wanted. Eighty new and replacement houses will be constructed over the life of SIHIP. And they are specially designed because the people at Groote Eylandt suffer from the Machado-Joseph disease. So there has been time taken to consult with the people about the design of the house that they want that suits their disability.

In Tennant Creek, the New Future Alliance is working closely with Julalikari Council and local subcontractors, who are doing the majority of the work in the town camps. As I mentioned, all 78 houses in the town camps will be refurbished and new homes will follow. There will also be an upgrade of power, water, sewerage and road infrastructure.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When?

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is an Indigenous employment target of 30 per cent at Tennant Creek, and the New Future Alliance thinks, at this stage, that they can improve that. To total those figures: these initial alliance packages will deliver at least 55 new houses in the first instance—

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When? Where?

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

308 refurbishments, significant infrastructure upgrades, real jobs and training opportunities and reductions to overcrowding, and they will drive local economies by engaging local people and local businesses. Before any of the work has started under the strategic alliance—

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When?

Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Scullion keeps saying, ‘When?’ You obviously failed to hear that I said contracts were not actually signed until November of last year. This was under your model, the strategic alliance: ‘Let’s get out there; let’s have three alliances; let’s actually advertise for tender, get expressions of interest, award the tender and sign the tender contract.’ That was done in November of last year under the model your government put forward.

But, before any of that work is actually started, the alliance group is engaging with the community to bed down an important range of issues. There is land tenure: all of this sits on a 40-year lease. It has to be negotiated with the Land Council. There is land use and planning of the area, housing design, priorities, options, jobs and training opportunities, and how local businesses can benefit—experience tells us that the cookie cutter approach does not work for Indigenous housing. We have established in each community Indigenous housing reference groups that actually provide advice and recommendations on the community and cultural issues affecting housing work. We have listened to Indigenous people, who have said to us, ‘Don’t just come in here and build houses and upgrade our houses. Talk to us.’ So we have set up Indigenous housing reference groups in communities to advise this work.

This is a comprehensive package for Indigenous housing in this country and it has never been done in any way like this before. It is a package that was put on the table by the Howard government. It is a package that we have picked up and refined—we have asked for Indigenous employment and training targets—but, by and large, it is the same package that both governments committed to in September 2007.

The first round of packages has reinforced the importance of meaningful engagement. As I said, on Groote Eylandt the engagement was to ensure that the houses that were built actually met the needs of the people who suffer with disability in that community. As I said, some people have questioned the wisdom of investing in existing remote housing stock rather than directing all SIHIP funds to new construction. I would say this: to not invest in existing stock would represent a waste of our resources. Refurbishment has not just meant a coat of paint. It has meant a complete upgrade. (Time expired)

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

I rise to make a contribution to this discussion over whether the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program has actually begun delivering. I am hearing a bit of hypocrisy from both sides of this chamber at this time. Federal and territory governments of both persuasions have failed over many years to deliver housing to Aboriginal communities throughout Australia—particularly the federal and Northern Territory governments in the Northern Territory.

In 2007 the Howard government suddenly decided that, almost 12 years into their time in government, it was time to deal with Aboriginal issues—particularly in the Northern Territory—and foisted onto the Northern Territory Aboriginal community the Northern Territory intervention. They spent hundreds of millions of dollars, they overrode people’s rights, they exempted their discriminatory measures from the Racial Discrimination Act and they never intended to build houses. There was money in the budget allocated but that was to provide housing for government employees.

During that time, and prior to that time, they spent an inordinate amount of time reviewing various housing projects and then came up—as Senator Crossin pointed out—with the SIHIP project. That was the previous government’s design. At the time, the Howard government was requiring 99-year leases. At the time, the then opposition spokesperson, Jenny Macklin—now the minister—made some very strong statements in the other place around opposing 99-year leases, how that was obstructing progress and how it meant that it would slow down building houses. Now this same minister is requiring communities to sign—admittedly they are not 99-year leases—40-year leases. And she is saying that, unless state or territory governments can get the communities to sign away their land, they will not get housing.

One of the key areas that is currently holding up building houses is the fact that this government—contrary to statements they made in opposition—is now requiring people to make the choice to give up their land so that they can have houses. The classic example of that is what is being done in the Alice Springs town camps, where in May the minister came out with announcements saying she was abandoning negotiations and she was going to compulsorily acquire the leases. She was not prepared to negotiate them anymore because the Tangentyere Council and the town campers would not agree to everything that she wanted. This is despite the fact that the town camps had actually agreed to sign 40-year leases, but they were concerned about having to hand over management of the houses.

Then, in July, the Tangentyere Council agreed finally that they would in fact sign an agreement for housing money to be provided to town camps and they would agree to the government’s conditions. However, I will quote from a letter that Tangentyere Council wrote to the government and which has been reported in the media. Tangentyere’s lawyers, Gilbert and Tobin, wrote to Minister Macklin, saying:

The housing associations have agreed to enter into sub leases for the simple reason that you have threatened them with compulsory acquisition if they do not …

They go on to say:

The loss of tenure to these lands is something that is abhorrent to the housing associations and they could not run the risk that it might occur.

Gilbert and Tobin added that it was:

… in the overriding best interests of the associations and their members that their interest in these lands be maintained rather than completely forgone.

Acquisitions of these lands would not allow the associations or members to have any input into protecting their rights or interests.

This ultimate risk of compulsory acquisition has hovered in the background throughout the protracted negotiations.

On the public claims by the minister that the time for negotiation had ended, Tangentyere’s lawyers noted:

It is simply incorrect to assert that time has run out. The timetable is completely within your power to set, as indeed you have done throughout these negotiations.

This is one of the reasons why housing is not being delivered in the Northern Territory. The government is still requiring people in 2009 to give up rights to their land and when they do not do what the government says the government comes in with its big stick and says, ‘We’ll take your land away.’ This is happening again; they have been through it once before. They have lived with it for centuries with people coming and taking away their land. After hard-fought battles they have won back their land but then the government comes in and says, ‘We’re going to take it away again to give you what everybody else in Australia expects and gets, which is access to housing, access to infrastructure and access to sewerage and municipal services.’ So this government says, ‘We’re not going to give you that unless you give up your land again.’ So, as the lawyers from Tangentyere Council point out in that letter, they could not allow that to happen again so they ended up agreeing to the government’s conditions. How is that fair? It is not. How is that meeting our requirements under any international conventions on treating people equally? It does not. Yet this government has proceeded with that approach.

It has also been reported widely in the media that during 2008 the minister was informed by a colleague—a parliamentary secretary who, as I understand it, sent a briefing note to the minister—that everything was not plain sailing with SIHIP and there were some problems. As I understand it, Senator Stephens wrote to Minister Macklin, after meetings with people in the Northern Territory, to say that under SIHIP there would be little chance of a house being built before 2011 and that the entire project was really worthy of a review before too much more money was wasted. The original funding pool that was announced was $700 million but it was now down to $634 million yet no houses had been built for Aboriginal families. The model was likely to lead to high-level corruption because it lent itself to an insidious process that was the subject of a royal commission in New South Wales in the 1980s. The alliance model was supposed to reduce the cost of building houses through economies of scale but it would in fact ensure a race to the top rather than competitive pricing. The claimed promise of 20 per cent of Aboriginal employment throughout the SIHIP was in fact aspirational. The government bureaucrats running the SIHIP were commercially naive and had no genuine knowledge of how the construction industry actually worked. There were a number of other points: the only winners under the model would be lawyers and consultants; the building industry was flabbergasted by the approach being considered by the government.

Clearly, there were deep problems with this program, yet the government has continued with it and still no houses are built. We will take a step back to the intervention. Under the intervention, as I said a couple of moments ago, housing was to be provided for government business managers and other government workers in town and also, as I must add here, as safe houses. Some of the safe houses are still not operating. They have not got their staff there. They have only just been made available over the last couple of months and operational two years down the track. The houses, and admittedly they are largely prefabricated houses, were put in place in communities within months. Within months those compounds were up and running and were liveable and operational. So within months they could move to put houses in place for government business managers and government employees, but still no houses have been built in any of these communities for Aboriginal families.

We have this program being mismanaged with no new houses being built for Aboriginal families. We have also got the situation whereby the intervention was foisted on these communities, their income support was compulsorily acquired—in some communities that has been going on for two years—and their control over their townships was taken away from them. They have raised many other concerns about the intervention. They have had alcohol bans. In some communities they have been more successful than in others. But at the same time they had all that, they did not have the funding put in place to have adequate rehabilitation. Ask anybody as you go throughout the Northern Territory, ‘Are there enough resources for safe houses, for rehabilitation and for counselling?’ and they will tell you no. So they copped all that expecting that at least they would get adequate housing delivered. They would get either new houses or maintenance done on their houses. So they suffered the intervention and all of the income quarantining and the shame—and many people feel shame—that goes with that and all the problems that go with that because they thought, ‘At least we’ll get housing.’

But now the government has come along and changed its mind and not everybody in the communities subject to the intervention is going to get access to housing. While there are 26 communities Australia-wide, the government has decided that only 15 communities are going to be the focus of the provision of maintenance and new housing. So you can understand why many people in these communities are upset. They have copped what they think is the bad side of the intervention, expecting they would at least get something out of it, but they are going to get nothing out of it. Not only are we not seeing houses built under SIHIP, we are also seeing the situation where many of these communities are not going to see any houses at all. On top of that, they are being asked to sign 40-year leases and give up control of their land. You can understand why the people in the Northern Territory are mighty annoyed.

This is not only happening in the Northern Territory. In all the states the provision of housing for Aboriginal communities under Commonwealth funding is now dependent on communities and their people signing 40-year leases. Yet again, they see that as signing away their land under something that Canberra or their state wants to impose on them. It is not good enough. It never was good enough and it is certainly not good enough in 2009. It is certainly not a way by which we should be delivering houses to members of the communities.

Going back to Alice Springs, we had a situation where it seemed to be going okay for a while. Negotiations did seem to be going okay. The minister funded the community to develop a community housing model. They were using the top standards for developing that model. The actual entity is not in place yet, but it is moving quite rapidly towards getting established. The community was very clear that they wanted to maintain control of housing decisions. It would be under the government’s guidelines but they wanted to maintain control. But the government was forcing, and wants to force, the community to agree to Northern Territory Housing making the decisions and doing the day-to-day management of those houses. Northern Territory Housing has a very bad record of involving and providing housing for Aboriginal members of the community in the Northern Territory. So you can understand why that community was very nervous about handing over control to Northern Territory Housing, when Northern Territory Housing has not proved they can provide adequately for members of the Aboriginal community. Instead of the government going, ‘Okay, we’ll try to come up with a solution,’ which a number of other organisations were working on trying to come up with, the government goes, ‘No, we’ll compulsorily acquire your land. You’re not doing what we want.’ They bring in the big stick yet again. Of course, the community, ultimately, backed down because they did not want to be in a situation where their land was taken away from them—as I have already expressed by reading out the excerpts from the letters that the Tangentyere Council wrote.

It is about time the Australian government and Australian governments of all persuasions provided adequate housing to the Aboriginal community. They have gone down the path of a flawed model. I acknowledge that SIHIP was not this government’s model in the first place; it started off with the previous government. Concerns were expressed from the beginning about the nature of actually forming alliances—the way of deciding that companies making up the alliance would be the ones that get to tender. There were concerns expressed from the communities where they thought that decision-making in the communities would be overridden—that some of the enterprises that were already existing in communities, such as provision of building materials, would in fact be overridden by this model. It is quite clear that it is very bureaucratic. I know the government is saying that the original level of funding would still be made available, but some level of funding has simply gone into the bureaucracy and is funding bureaucracy. There were promises from all levels of government that that would not happen. Yet here it is happening yet again.

There are questions that I ask in estimates that go unanswered about whether they have reviewed the model, where they were willing to, whether they had any advice that it should be. Other people have asked these questions. I have put a few on notice, but other people have been asking much broader questions. These questions remain unanswered. To proceed with a model that is clearly flawed, that is taking 18 months to build houses, is not good enough. Fair enough, we do want provision of Aboriginal employment for these houses. We do want good design. Absolutely, because design in the past has been completely inappropriate: three-bedroom houses, one bathroom when we know it is going to be used by a number of occupants. Designs that simply are not appropriate for the environment in which they are placed or to match the situation. It is completely inappropriate. But, instead of working out how you could do a stage process to get to the perfect model, we have not built any houses. Yet we can build houses for government business managers. How is that fair? How is it fair that we are requiring communities to sign over 40-year leases? That is also holding up the program. We are making them sign 40-year leases. People do not want to. But the government is not prepared to come up with another model or to look at how we can get around that so communities feel comfortable that they do not have to sign 40-year leases or sign over control, because that is how it is seen—that they are signing over control again. It is simply inappropriate.

It is time the government looked at SIHIP and it is time it actually provided housing on the ground and it did not just restricted to those 15 communities that they have decided on. The government made that decision without, again, consultation. ‘They are the communities we are going to focus on. We have subjected everybody else to this discriminatory intervention, but we are only going to focus on those communities.’ Those communities do not have houses. Those communities do not know what is going on. They have not been consulted. It is a mess and it is time it was fixed. It is continuing. We just have a series of messes when we are dealing with these issues and nobody seems to be able to get it right. It is not rocket science. We should in 2009 be able to get it right—end discriminatory practices, end taking away people’s land and actually provide decent living conditions. We have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the intervention. We have got a bit better, I will acknowledge—we have police in some communities, and everybody likes that. But, besides that, we have nothing to show for it—nothing, other than we have taken away people’s rights yet again. We still have not got it right. We still have not got members of the Aboriginal communities living in decent living conditions—and they still have their rights taken away. It is time we did better.

Judith Adams (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this afternoon to speak to the motion moved by Senator Scullion. I would like to commence by saying that, as a member of the Senate Select Committee on Regional and Remote Indigenous Communities, I have, along with my colleagues, made quite a lot of visits to these communities that my colleagues have spoken about. I would just like to start by saying that the Rudd government’s implementation of the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program has been an abject failure. SIHIP was established with the best intentions to construct houses in Aboriginal communities to address the chronic need which currently exists. As a member of that committee, I have heard very good evidence of it. It is a positive policy that was instigated by the previous coalition government and was a key part of the Northern Territory intervention. Mr Rudd agreed. In his apology speech, the Prime Minister stated that housing is the single biggest issue which needs to be addressed.

The policy is not the problem. It is Labor’s lack of consultation and delivery of the program that has made this a complete and utter failure. When the Rudd government announced the new housing program in April 2008, it was described as a landmark joint program between the Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments which would bring construction, infrastructure and, very importantly, jobs to 73 Northern Territory Indigenous communities. The government announced that work was scheduled to commence in October 2008. The Australian government would establish the program and provide support in the developmental stages of the program and the Northern Territory government would deliver it. The program is large and the Rudd government said that it would build approximately 750 new houses and subdivisions, build over 230 new houses to replace existing houses which need to be demolished, refurbish over 2,500 houses, provide essential infrastructure to support the new houses and make critical improvements to living conditions in town camps.

Wherever the committee went, the biggest complaint was: ‘There has been no consultation with us. We are the people this is affecting; we are the public who want these new houses. But no-one’s been to see us.’ I would like to quote from the second report of the Senate Select Committee on Regional and Remote Indigenous Communities. This 2009 report was presented to the Senate last month. Recommendation 3 states:

The committee recommends that the Commonwealth government review its overall communication strategy for regional and remote Indigenous communities with the view to making information available to communities on an ongoing and regular basis and in an accessible way. In the instance of the SIHIP program the communication strategy should provide information on how the decision to fund housing in the priority communities was made, as well as regular information on how the construction of this new housing is progressing.

Unfortunately, they are being told nothing. Senator Siewert has already commented about the 15 communities in the Northern Territory that will be receiving new homes. Unfortunately, no-one knows on what basis these communities were chosen.

Contrary to the boasting and spin of the Rudd government of houses being constructed, when you go to these communities where the houses are supposed to have been built there is nothing—not a single new house. It is disgraceful. After 18 months, nothing has been done—except, of course, a multitude of media opportunities. Both governments should be working jointly on the program, but are clearly failing to do so. The Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Ms Macklin, has no idea about where the program is currently and the resignation last week of the Northern Territory Minister for Indigenous Policy, Alison Anderson, who was responsible for the program, speaks for itself. She resigned because the housing program had not been implemented.

It is totally unknown by the government how much of the allocated $672 million—$572 million from the Commonwealth and $100 million from the Northern Territory—has been spent to date. Most shamefully, they do not have a single house to show for it. Statements suggest that approximately two-thirds of funding will be spent on administration of the program and a third on bricks and mortar. Reports have been circulated that up to 70 per cent of all program funds will be spent on administration. The Northern Territory government alone is expected to receive approximately $100 million of the $672 million just to administer the program. With the entire Northern Territory government contribution to SIHIP being $100 million, this smacks of the Northern Territory putting money in for the sake of a media release and then taking it straight back to run their department. I can definitely see why Minister Alison Anderson removed herself from the government.

This is a good old-fashioned case of Labor bureaucracy and mismanagement channelling money around departments but doing nothing. The Australian and Northern Territory governments have appointed senior public servants to review the entire situation, yet the same people who were there at the commencement of the program are still in place. No-one seems to know anything. The government has not been able to answer questions from the coalition and has no idea how much money has so far been spent and who is being paid. This is the worst possible mismanagement of taxpayers’ dollars and the real people whose suffering is ultimately being neglected as a result are some of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in the Australian community. Ms Lesley Podesta from the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing has made this comment:

... reality if there is a capital works project that is funded by the Australian government, the prices go crazy. We try to keep the market honest and reasonable about this. We try not to put billions of dollars into it because it just increases the prices everywhere. We try to be very realistic and pragmatic about building, keeping the costs within a contained environment, so that we just do not do this kind of: let us spend this much money here and have a Taj Mahal and the next one will be a Taj Mahal, and the tradies know that we are funding it so they increase the prices. We do try to be very tough about containing those costs and we get a good deal now.

I hope that Ms Podesta does get a good deal now. But when is all this going to start? It is very disappointing to think that the department is trying but not succeeding. How hard are they trying?

Following the original announcement, the government announced even more money to build more houses. There has been a lot of talk and a lot of money promised, but still not one house has been built. As I said, when I tour around these remote communities and see firsthand the plight faced by residents, it is sickening to think that out of all these funding announcements and hype nothing has yet been delivered to these people, who are in such desperate need. Senator Siewert talked about the town camps in Alice Springs. I suggest to those senators opposite that, if they go to visit Alice Springs, it would be a very good exercise for them to go to places like Hoppy’s Camp and the other town camps under Tangentyere Council, because they are an utter disgrace.

Years ago I was in Vietnam when it was a country at war. There were refugees and very, very hard conditions and I can assure you that the town camp in Alice Springs has exactly the same conditions. It is just a disgrace. Probably not even two kilometres from the main centre of Alice Springs we have these terrible conditions. I would have thought that, with the money that has been offered, they would have got on with doing something, but unfortunately it seems to be a stalemate. The people who are suffering are the very vulnerable and a lot of elderly people who have nowhere else to live. It is just a disgrace.

Indigenous communities are saying the government has promised but failed to deliver. The government is failing. It has failed remote Indigenous communities and it has failed the Australian taxpayer. As with so many other Rudd government policies, it is all talk with nothing being done. The whole debacle is littered with statements of progress by the government which have led the community to believe something is being done. Unfortunately, however, this is not the case. Despite the government saying in April 2008 that work would commence in October that same year, by the end of October no work had started. Instead of new houses being constructed on the ground, a new media release was issued by the minister promising there would be even more houses built in Tennant Creek. That media release of 28 October 2008 said that the government would provide an additional $6.5 million for new Indigenous housing in Tennant Creek to tackle the serious overcrowding in that community. It stated quite clearly there would be new housing for Tennant Creek. Where are those new houses in Tennant Creek?

It was also claimed by the government that these additional funds would help to ease overcrowding in the seven community living areas of Tennant Creek. This was in addition to the $30 million already committed for those community areas as part of the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program. The same media release also stated that civil works would begin the following month, that being November 2008. The housing construction and refurbishment work could begin, as planned, in early 2009. This same work, of course, had initially been announced to commence in October 2008. In February 2009, questions were being asked about the progress of the SIHIP. In a Northern Territory News story dated 25 February 2009, it was revealed that construction had still not commenced on a single house. The original April 2008 announcement had stated that 750 new houses were to be built. By June 2009, nothing had eventuated in Tennant Creek from the promise of new houses, and on the Tiwi Islands the promise of 90 new houses and a 62-lot subdivision at Nguiu had turned into a revised 25 houses and no subdivision. The Northern Territory Chief Minister says that this is all wrong and that the promised 750 houses will still be built in the Northern Territory. With so much conflicting information being spread, how can the Chief Minister or his Labor colleagues be believed on anything they say about this project?

After the Prime Minister’s apology statement in the first week of the new parliament, which stated that housing was a key priority of the government, and after nearly two years of the Rudd Labor government, nothing has been done and the process is a complete shambles. All the work from pre-existing housing programs has now ended and no new houses under the replacement SIHIP have commenced. This is nothing but failure and hundreds of millions of dollars are going to waste in bureaucracy. SIHIP has failed and the Closing the Gap program has seen millions of dollars spent with no assessment or measurement of improvements or advancements. While all this mismanagement unfolds, living conditions in Indigenous communities continue to go backwards under Labor. The Rudd Labor government and the minister have failed Indigenous Australians. They have failed taxpayers by spending hundreds of millions of dollars without achieving a single stated or publicised outcome and they have neglected some of the most disadvantaged members or our communities.

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is always pleasing to follow Senator Adams, particularly on a subject such as this motion of Senator Scullion’s on Indigenous housing. Both Senator Adams and I, and I am sure other members of the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs, are quite familiar with the needs of Indigenous communities, having travelled into those areas. From memory, I think it was 1974 when I first visited the Northern Territory and had my first exposure to Indigenous communities. In October last year, as a member of the Senate Community Affairs Committee, I attended an inquiry into petrol sniffing in Indigenous communities in the Red Centre and throughout the south of the Northern Territory. In March of this year I attended, with other members of the committee, hearings at Yulara in the Territory and other Indigenous communities in the follow-up to that inquiry. From memory, in addition to the Community Affairs Committee members in attendance was none other than Senator Scullion. He was representing the committee that he is responsible for and cooperating in sharing its interest in that inquiry. I am sure that, as a Northern Territory senator, Senator Scullion would be well versed in the Territory on this subject.

The national apology delivered by the Prime Minister in February of last year was directed towards building a bridge of respect and acted as a powerful healing symbol. This was a necessary first step in making amends for past wrongs. Housing is just one of the important measures that this government, in partnership with governments like that of the Northern Territory, is involved in. SIHIP is the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program and is the largest-scale Indigenous housing program ever undertaken. As the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Ms Macklin, has stated very clearly in recent weeks, the program will deliver 750 new homes, 230 rebuilds and 2,500 refurbishments of homes in remote Northern Territory communities by the end of 2013.

SIHIP is a new way of delivering housing in remote communities. It is much larger in scale than previous Indigenous housing programs and the alliance approach avoids separate individual procurement processes, with their attendant risks and delays, and encourages innovation and efficiencies in the costs and delivery of remote Indigenous housing. The program will also deliver sustainable employment and training outcomes for Indigenous people in remote parts of the Northern Territory, with a key focus on a target of 20 per cent of the total workforce across the life of the program.

It is worth looking at timelines, because it is important to put where things are heading in perspective. We have heard a lot of talk here in the chamber today about this government dragging the chain, not delivering and acting indecisively. That is far from the truth. I think it was Senator Scullion who indicated that the program announced in April 2008 was due to commence in October 2008. Between April and October last year the Northern Territory government completed a major tender process to select the alliance consortia of companies that will deliver these works. It was essential that this process was done properly. This is a five-year program delivering over half a billion dollars worth of capital works, and government needed to ensure that the best possible companies were engaged for this work.

Governments also worked with communities in areas such as the Tiwi Islands, Groote Eylandt and Tennant Creek to secure land tenure arrangements to underpin this significant investment. Since their appointment in October 2008 the alliance partners have been working with communities to deliver these works. Over the wet season a detailed scope of works was completed for the first three SIHIP packages in Tennant Creek, the Tiwi Islands and Groote Eylandt, including the necessary community consultation. Work on repairing existing houses began in the Tiwi Islands, Groote Eylandt and Tennant Creek at the start of the 2009 dry season. Work on the construction of the first new houses has started at Groote Eylandt, and construction of new houses will start at Nguiu later this month.

On the Tiwi housing numbers, Senator Scullion also said that the promise of 90 new houses at Nguiu had been revised down to 25 houses. I can assure the people of Nguiu that both the Australian and Northern Territory governments are totally committed to providing them with 90 new homes under this program. There are 29 homes being delivered under the first stage of SIHIP and a further 61 homes will be built over the life of the program. These 90 homes are additional to the 25 homes the Australian government has already built at Nguiu as part of its undertakings around the 99-year head lease.

The issue of no new homes being built at Tennant Creek needs to be challenged. It has been stated that there have been no new houses built in the Tennant Creek townships under SIHIP. In fact, Julalikari Council Aboriginal Corporation and town camp residents have been very clear that upgrades of existing houses and proper essential service infrastructure is their first priority, and government has listened to them. All of the existing houses in the town camps in Tennant Creek will be refurbished to as-new condition and, as Tennant Creek residents have sought, the town camp areas will be revamped to the same standard as other suburbs of the town. While the investment has been focused on upgrades, as requested, at least two new houses will be provided as part of the initial work in Tennant Creek.

On the overall subject of their being no new houses built in the Territory since the Rudd government was elected, can I say this will be the largest amount of housing works ever delivered across remote communities in the Northern Territory. Both governments and the alliance partners are committed to making that happen. Both the Australian and Northern Territory governments understand that implementing a new program with over twice the amount of funding that has previously been allocated for Indigenous housing in the Northern Territory has to be done properly. That is why we continued to build houses in remote communities in the Northern Territory while the SIHIP program was being developed, the tenders were being let and the scoping of the first packages of work was being done. Despite what Senator Scullion claims, since November 2007 over 90 homes have been constructed in the Northern Territory using funds from the Australian government’s and the Northern Territory government’s Indigenous housing programs. Now that SIHIP is underway, the number of houses that will be built will increase dramatically to achieve its target of 750 new houses by the end of 2013. Senior Australian government officials are working in Darwin to ensure everything possible is being done to achieve this objective.

The Australian and Territory governments have each appointed a senior official to work with the SIHIP team to make sure housing construction, rebuilds and upgrades are delivered as quickly as possible. They are going through the program line by line and will make any improvements that are required. Having this level of flexibility is one of the reasons the government is using an alliance approach with SIHIP. In just a few weeks an update will be provided to the Australian and Northern Territory governments on the performance of the program. This will ensure that the governments’ housing priorities are addressed as a matter of urgency. The costs of administering the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program are currently tracking at 11.4 per cent, and we are looking to reduce this further.

We cannot keep making the mistakes of the past. Old housing models have not served Indigenous interests. Over the decades, many millions of dollars have been poured into housing and the outcomes have been simply abysmal—run-down, overcrowded houses where no one has clear responsibility for looking after the house, for paying or collecting rent or for doing necessary repairs and upgrades. We are fundamentally shifting the delivery of housing in remote Indigenous communities to achieve broader policy outcomes like rebuilding social norms and creating Indigenous jobs. We are pleased that the housing upgrades that are part of the first three SIHIP packages on the Tiwi Islands, Groote Eylandt and Tennant Creek town camps began in May as scheduled. The upgrades involved the total refit of what are often uninhabitable homes and will efficiently deliver new houses at half the cost. Construction of new housing has recently started on Groote Eylandt and will start soon on the Tiwi Islands.

I will give a bit of background on this package. The total funding for the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program is $672 million, comprising $572 from the Australian government and $100 million from the Northern Territory government. An announcement of $793 million of Indigenous housing funding was made in September 2007 by the previous government, following the signing of an MOU with the Northern Territory government. Of these funds, $527 million was for the delivery of capital works, later known as SIHIP. Increases in funding after this announcement brought the Australian government commitment up to $572 million. The Northern Territory government contributed $100 million. This program will see the construction of around 750 new houses, 230 rebuilds of existing houses and 2,500 upgrades by the end of 2013. The Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program will provide capital works in 73 targeted communities and a number of urban living areas.

We have been through the timeline. Between the September 2007 signing of the MOU and April 2008 the Territory government reviewed the strategic alliance contracting methodology, in light of the increase in funding available; the Australian and Northern Territory governments worked together to develop the funding allocations and identified the 16 high-needs communities; lease negotiations progressed for Tennant Creek and Groote Eylandt; and the Northern Territory government established a design library and commenced work on SIHIP design guidelines. Between May and November 2008, a comprehensive procurement process was undertaken to select alliance partners for the delivery of SIHIP. The successful alliance partners were announced in October 2008. They were: New Future Alliance, Territory Alliance and Earth Connect Alliance.

This initiative presents a wonderful opportunity to create real and sustainable jobs in remote Indigenous communities. The program underpins the government’s commitment to closing the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. It is an example of the type of practical, on-the-ground measures which will improve health and safety in Indigenous communities.

Northern Territory Chief Minister Paul Henderson said this was the Territory’s largest ever remote housing program. He said:

Overcrowding and disrepair of houses in remote communities is rife, contributing to significant health and education problems. We must improve housing standards if we are to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage.

This is a new era of delivering housing in the bush.

For the first time, government, industry and communities will work in partnership to ensure that benefits are delivered where they’re needed the most.

Importantly, the jobs and training offered through the program will open the door to future job and economic opportunities for Indigenous Territorians in remote areas.

The Northern Territory government will deliver the program and the Australian government will provide support in the development stages to establish the program. Security of tenure will be a key element in allocating this funding. Communities receiving capital works under this program will need to enter into a lease for a period of time appropriate to the life of the capital works being funded.

In respect of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, COAG has committed $1.94 billion over 10 years, commencing this year, to reform housing and infrastructure arrangements in remote Indigenous communities. This will address significant overcrowding and homelessness, poor housing conditions and severe housing shortages in remote Indigenous communities. Improving housing conditions will provide the foundation for lasting improvements in health, education and employment and make a major contribution towards closing the gap in Indigenous disadvantage.

This will bring a total investment of up to $5.48 billion over 10 years, allowing for the construction of up to 4,200 new houses in remote Indigenous communities; upgrades and repairs to around 4,800 houses in remote communities, with a program of major repairs and improved tenancy management services; increased local training and employment opportunities in construction and housing management, providing up to 2,000 new jobs; and access to affordable accommodation options in regional centres to support employment, education, training opportunities and access to support services in regional areas of high employment. This investment will support up to 9,000 families in accessing safe and healthy housing.

Reflecting back on the apology given in this parliament on 13 February 2008, this government’s approach in part to Indigenous policy is:

Addressing Indigenous disadvantage is a national responsibility that will require the energy and commitment of all Australians. Working with all parts of the Australian community, the Government is determined to drive real improvements, focused on outcomes and guided by evidence. Central to the Government’s strategy is a new partnership with Indigenous Australians, based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility.

On the important area of housing, COAG’s commitment of $1.94 billion over the next 10 years brings funding allocations to $5.48 billion, which will be fundamental to improving outcomes for Indigenous Australians living in remote communities. Quite clearly the assistance provided through the SIHIP by both the federal Rudd government and the Northern Territory government are addressing Indigenous members of our communities in this country.

I have dug up some contemporary information, because there has been a lot of talk about what has not been happening. If you go to the Northern Territory government’s web page, you can see contemporary information about what is happening out there in these communities now, putting aside all the folly and the comments that have been made that no houses are being built and nothing is happening out in those communities. That is just not true. A media comment dated 31 July this year indicates that the keys for newly refurbished homes on Groote Eylandt have been handed to families. Also, Earth Connect Alliance General Manager Andrew Schroth said that refurbishment works on 18 houses are underway right now. Mr Schroth said the refurbishment program was currently two weeks ahead of schedule. So they are on track; they are actually two weeks ahead. They are well ahead of schedule in making sure they deliver on their promises, and that is what we are doing as a government along with the Northern Territory government.

He went on to say that this is because of good planning, supervision and skilful work by the mostly local workforce. He said they are focused on employing local Indigenous workers not only to build the homes but also to develop skills that they can use throughout their lives. He said, ‘We want to give local people skills and opportunities to help them plan for long-term working lives within their own community—not just for this program.’ That is real-life information about what is happening on the ground in the Northern Territory.

The Minister for Housing in the Northern Territory, Rob Knight, has indicated:

$672 million has been committed over the 5 year program to construct 750 new houses, 230 rebuilds of existing houses and 2500 upgrades … 

This is all readily available contemporary information on what is happening in the Territory. There is no smoke and mirrors; this is live information that people can download from the internet. Rob Knight went on to say:

The Australian and Territory Governments are determined to address the appalling living conditions in remote Indigenous communities.

               …            …            …

The Territory Government is committed to getting this program right and delivering 750 new homes. We cannot repeat the failings of the past.

It is important that people reflect on what is happening in their communities and what the contemporary situation is on this subject. Around 166,000 of the 700 million households in Australia are Indigenous households, which is a very low proportion of the total number of households, but something that this government is acting upon. 

Senator Scullion’s motion is nothing but a cheap political stunt, which follows his comments on ABC news yesterday that not a single house has been built in the Northern Territory in 18 months. That is pure folly from a desperate senator from an out-of-touch opposition. (Time expired)

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is interesting that Senator Furner chose to end on name-calling, if you like, about political stunts. Having determined that to be an art form on the other side of the chamber, most particularly in the last week or so, that is unsurprising. The most disappointing thing about the consideration of this motion from the other side of the chamber is that apparently there is a continuing view that rhetoric and numbers add up to results. It is patently apparent to the residents of the communities that Senator Scullion spoke about in his remarks at the beginning of the debate on this motion, if people are realistic about the situation in the communities of which we speak this afternoon, that rhetoric and numbers are not adding up to results.

It is disappointing to see references invoked to the apology that began this government’s engagement in what they have described as perhaps a new relationship with Indigenous Australians. In some very small and probably, ultimately, not particularly relevant way, I took part, as many of us did, by way of a small contribution in this chamber in relation to that apology. It was very important to me personally at the time. I know that, for every other individual member and senator who chose to engage in that discussion in this chamber and in the other place, it was personally very important to them as well. I do not believe a single individual chose to participate for any other reason.

But what we are talking about this afternoon in this debate about the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program is something very different. It is actually something as fundamental in this country as bricks and mortar. If bricks and mortar are not the most appropriate building materials, I am happy to be advised by someone far more learned on these matters than myself about what should be used. But that is the colloquialism, isn’t it; that is what we are talking about—bricks and mortar. That is pretty simple really, when all is said and done. But it is not simple to try to get to the bottom of not only where the money is and is going but where the homes are or actually are not.

I do want to put on the record some of the history of this program, because it is something that I have been exploring for some time through the estimates process. It did begin its life, as others have said, under the former government, and at that time I certainly believed it held great promise to dramatically improve living conditions for Indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory. In September 2007 the coalition government signed an MOU with the Northern Territory government to deliver the SIHIP. But it seems to me that, with the arrival of the Rudd government in November of that year, the program is at best at this point drowning not waving.

On 12 April 2008 the now Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Jenny Macklin, announced that the Rudd government would contribute $547 million over four years to the program, with an additional $100 million coming from the Northern Territory government. It was described as a landmark joint housing program that would deliver vital construction, refurbishment and infrastructure developments as well as jobs in 73 Northern Territory Indigenous communities and some urban areas, to come to that total. Then it was said—and these numbers have been repeated by a number of contributors this afternoon—that the funding would deliver around 750 houses in 16 communities, over 230 new houses to replace houses due to be demolished, over 2½ thousand housing upgrades, essential infrastructure to support those new houses, and improvements to living conditions in town camps. One would have thought that equated to bricks and mortar. But since then the value of the program has risen further, to $672 million, which is a very, very significant amount of money in anybody’s language and an amount that has, one would hope, the potential to transform remote Aboriginal housing in the Northern Territory.

Despite those promises, despite the rhetoric, despite the words, under this government SIHIP has been a disappointment from the very start. Let me go through the deadlines—we have examined these in estimates—to assist us with this information. In the first announcement which I referred to earlier, in April 2008, the minister said that work would begin on the 750 new houses by October 2008. That seemed a reasonable proposition.

By the end of October no work had started, but they had built a new time frame—which I do not think you need bricks and mortar for—and the commencement of housing construction and refurbishment work was said to be planned for early 2009. But, in February 2009, construction still had not commenced. So in May there was another announcement, which said that construction work would finally begin in the Tiwi Islands later that month. At the same time, we had reports circulating about the sucking up of program funds in administration—up to 70 per cent—with the Northern Territory government alone expected to take around $100 million simply to administer the program. That matter was raised in question time this afternoon. Ironically, it is very close to the amount they had originally agreed to contribute. In June of this year, one of the construction firms involved in SIHIP was reported as saying that they would have to build fewer houses than originally promised, due in part to increased costs and GST.

So almost every day we see new reports of the failure to actually deliver bricks and mortar. In fact, just yesterday it was reported again, I believe in the Australian newspaper, that the Northern Territory statutory body in charge of housing, Territory Housing—which was much vaunted by Senator Furner, if I recall correctly—has allowed new homes on the Tiwi Islands to sit vacant for five months while local community members continue to live in overcrowded, virtually condemned houses because of unnecessary obstruction by the bureaucracy. So the government has allowed SIHIP—a vital infrastructure program in these communities—just to fall over or, to go back to my previous metaphor, to drown in a mass of mindless bureaucracy, it would seem.

When you look at the combined failure of both the Northern Territory and federal Labor governments, it does not simply represent a really unimpressive waste of taxpayers’ money; it is also a real failure for the people they are meant to be serving in these communities. We endure hundreds of minutes of criticism of us on this side and then we endure hours of rhetoric and tons of documents from those opposite touting and lauding their own achievements and their own aims—and for what result? There is not very much to show for it unless you want to start counting the sorts of properties that Senator Scullion referred to earlier: overcrowded, in many places described as squalid, with rubbish contaminating communities and with all of the concomitant challenges.

It is a complete failure on any assessment, and it is a story which is repeated in more than one area, particularly in the Northern Territory. In fact, Senator Scullion referred to one community which has attracted a great deal of public attention—a small community which made the national news for possibly the worst reason you could imagine. The elders were so sick and tired of the appalling state of their community that they were actually considering abandoning it and moving to traditional lands outside the control of government. Their community was unliveable. They had poor housing—including a number of people who were consigned to living in houses made completely of tin in an environment which is clearly unsuited to that—they had malfunctioning septic tanks, they had uncollected rubbish and the list goes on. The ongoing problem also includes the fact that those sorts of communities, due to the media attention that they attract and the engagement that people have with the colour of that sort of story—the absolute frisson that is attached to that sort of powerful story on a newspaper front page in this country—end up being labelled, and labelled in the worst way. It is absolutely unfair. The people who live there are labelled, and children who do not choose where they are born are labelled as well.

It seems to me that one of the most important aspects of this debate today is that the government can no longer ignore the fact that people are noticing this problem. The government cannot just commit over half a billion dollars to make these much-needed improvements in remote Indigenous housing and a year and a half later not have anything to show for it. They cannot expect accolades and praise. We need to be realistic about this. I do want to acknowledge those particular members of communities and of the media who have gone out of their way—in sometimes, I would imagine, extraordinarily challenging circumstances—to point out these problems, to expose these issues and to expose the failure of the government to deliver on its commitments on remote Indigenous housing. They bring national attention through the pages of the newspapers—most particularly, it would seem to me, of the Australianto what is really a national disgrace.

But you do not have to listen to me or to Senator Adams or to Senator Scullion. It is not like we are the only people in Australia who are saying that this is a very significant failure of government. Happily, in the byplay of the political process in this place, I would not necessarily expect the average listener to say, ‘Well, because the opposition says it’s so, it must be so.’ Let me cite a few other very concerned Australians who have drawn their concerns to the attention of the government and the Australian people. I start with Professor Marcia Langton, who has called on the government to establish a watchdog to ensure that the money of the Australian taxpayers which is going to the Northern Territory is dealt with appropriately. Professor Langton, a very well respected academic in this country, has criticised the rise of what she calls a Territory ‘consultancy class’, which she says is growing large on the profits of Indigenous housing programs. She calls it a ‘hopeless gravy train’ in the Northern Territory, where the mates of the Australian Labor Party were appointed on six-figure salaries to manage Indigenous social programs. When asked about reports that the SIHIP funds were being consumed by the Northern Territory government bureaucracy, Professor Langton said:

This will end in disaster ... everybody knows that housing is at the heart of the Aboriginal health situation, and we can’t go any further because of the hopeless gravy train prop of the Northern Territory administration.

Cabinet ministers are resigning from the Northern Territory government over this state of affairs—cabinet ministers from the Labor Party—and so the list goes on.

I do not want to unnecessarily politicise this discussion, because, as Senator Evans said in question time this afternoon, it is important to have a degree of bipartisanship on this particular area of policy. We have previously, as a government in fact, explored the opportunities for the emergency response and the intervention. That was a very important part of that process. But it seems to me that the government cannot pretend to be blithely unaware of these problems or conveniently ignore them. I am not sure which category we are looking at.

The minister has said that she does not want to buy into the politics of the Northern Territory but is confident that the Northern Territory government is working hard on the implementation of the scheme. I would have thought it more obvious that the Northern Territory government was working on saving itself, but that is neither here nor there. The minister has also said, ‘It’s just not right to say that nothing’s happening.’ Again, the minister is perhaps one of the few people left who think that that is the case.

SIHIP was defended some time ago, with the minister claiming that 96 houses had been built in the Territory in the last 18 months, but it then became obvious that they were not built under SIHIP but under pre-existing programs to improve remote Indigenous housing in the Northern Territory. We wait to see what will ultimately be delivered under SIHIP itself. It seems to me unlikely that we will get any clear indication from the government at the moment. The only thing that we hear repeated is the government’s good intentions. We know where the road that is paved with good intentions goes; we know where rhetoric and empty numbers take us. They do not seem to be taking us to bricks and mortar. Rhetoric will not build a single house either.

It is in fact quite difficult to obtain information on these issues through the processes of the parliament. As I said earlier, I have been asking questions during the estimates process, as have my colleagues, about how this will work, when the houses will be delivered, how much it will all cost, how the program will actually deliver on its promises and what is happening on the ground on training, employment and so on—there are lots of commitments under this program. I am sure departmental officers are trying their very best. I mean absolutely no criticism of departmental officers, but I am disappointed with the answers I continue to receive, and they are, of course, signed off at ministerial level, particularly when they are answers to questions on notice.

At the estimates of October 2008 and February 2009, in answers to questions about the cost of the program, departmental officials were unable to provide specific information and said they would not be able to until the package development reports—which is apparently an official name for a plan to deliver housing—were finalised. In October 2008 they said they would be finalised in February or March 2009. In February 2009 they said they would be ready by April 2009. When we asked again in February this year about whether construction or even upgrade work had commenced under the program, the officials effectively said no, but that ‘detailed planning, and community consultations’ had commenced in October 2008. That is an enormous relief! That is around six months after the program was announced. Why it took six months between the announcement of the project and the commencement of detailed planning is a mystery to me and a question for the government—one on which I will not hold my breath waiting for an answer.

I asked again in June 2009 about employment outcomes under the SIHIP packages. I was unable to obtain any information on two of them. In other words, I could not find out whether SIHIP in Tennant Creek and on Groote Eylandt had actually resulted in any Indigenous employment at that stage. Given the importance that was placed on the employment of local people under the program, I had hoped for better.

When discussing the views of people around Australia on this particular program, it is interesting that we have in the chamber this afternoon Senator Stephens, who I think has a very acute understanding, if I might put it like that, of the particular difficulties associated with this program. Last month there were reports of a leaked memo, which the senator produced in April 2008, soon after the funding for SIHIP was announced. The senator had the opportunity to attend a SIHIP industry event in Darwin, attended by apparently over 500 people. I think that memo, sent to Minister Macklin, is best described as a damning indictment on this over $650 million program—so much so, it was apparently kept secret for over a year, until a media outlet managed to obtain it one way or another. One never knows with these things.

In that memo were some warnings to the minister which may have been appropriate for her to note. For example, it said that no houses would be built under SIHIP until 2011—three years after the start date—and that it is unlikely to meet its 20 per cent target for Indigenous employment. It is said that lawyers at the gathering said that the tendering process was anticompetitive and possibly in breach of the Trade Practices Act and that not even the construction industry, which stood to gain from the project, thought it was a good idea. Representatives of the industry were said to be ‘flabbergasted’ by the approach and likened it to a ‘shoddy defence procurement model’. What is extraordinary is not that Senator Stephens, a person of great integrity and character, was so frank and honest; what is extraordinary is that no-one appeared to take any notice.

When the memo finally became public, the minister responsible—and I use the word advisedly—for the program did not give us an explanation about why it had been kept a secret for so long and just denied that there was anything wrong with SIHIP at all. In the face of calls for greater transparency from its own members, the government is apparently unmoved. I used the word ‘arrogant’ in a debate earlier in the week in relation to another issue—the proposed emissions trading scheme that Minister Wong was advancing—but ignoring that sort of advice, by someone who made the effort and took the time to be on the ground, is arrogance of the worst kind. None of this is good enough. The men, women and children of the Indigenous communities of the Northern Territory deserve to know when, if ever, they will receive their long-promised homes.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish to make a contribution to this debate and talk about the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program. This is a very emotive issue and I have been in the chamber to listen to the contributions of all senators, except that of Senator Scullion, who led the debate and whose speech I listened to in my office. Some of the contributions were very informative; some were heartfelt; some were absolutely shocking. Senator Scullion was on a rant and in typical Senator Scullion style he thinks he has to yell at people. Apparently, the more emotive he becomes the more that Australians might think he knows what he is talking about on this issue.

I would like to touch on a few of the contributions from other speakers because I have a very vested interest in this topic. It is not that I am a senator from the Territory—I am not—I am a senator from Western Australia who has spent a lot of time in Indigenous communities, both in my role as a truck driver delivering teachers, police, furniture to a new school or whatever it might have been and in my role as a duty senator running throughout the Kimberley, Pilbara, Gascoyne and Western Desert lands. There is nothing sadder than to see the plight of Indigenous Australians in the squalor that they do live in. It is absolutely heartbreaking. It is disgraceful, it is embarrassing and it is nothing short of disgusting.

In her contribution, Senator Payne mentioned the apology to the stolen generations. I do not think for one minute that she was anything short of sincere in her appreciation of that apology. Senator Scullion also mentioned the apology and I heard him do so. But I was in this chamber and had the misfortune to listen to some of the bile that came out of opposition parliamentarians, mainly Western Australian senators and members, when the parliament debated the making of that apology. I remember standing in the Member’s Hall for the very first welcome to country to acknowledge the traditional owners of this land. It was a very moving experience, but for some reason I looked up and saw the member for O’Connor, Mr Tuckey—I think the opposition refer to him as Uncle Arthur or whatever it may be. There was Mr Tuckey, who proudly goes by the name of ‘Ironbar’. Why? Because he proudly belted a few Aboriginals in his hotel in Carnarvon, as I think the legend goes, with an iron bar. It is pretty easy being tough with an iron bar in your hand, mate. Anyone is tough with an iron bar in their hand. But there was the member for O’Connor, with a face on him like a lemon, perched up on the first floor with his arms folded in absolute disgust that we were not only making the apology to the stolen generation but having a welcome to country, as we should have a welcome to country every time we stand on this land.

Senator Scullion got one thing right. He said that everywhere you go you hear about the apology to the stolen generation—and it is true. I have had the good fortune to be a part of some overseas delegations since the apology. It does not matter if we are in Europe or in Asia, the first thing that is usually put to us as visiting Australian politicians is how proud those other nations are that Prime Minister Rudd made that apology. Through you, Madam Acting Deputy President, I see a smirk on Senator Bernardi’s face—a smirk that looks like a split watermelon.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It’s not a smirk; it’s a grimace.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would suggest, through you Madam Acting Deputy President, that you are not doing yourself any favours, Senator Bernardi. In fact, you should stick to your day job of undermining some of those colleagues of yours in South Australia—because they need undermining. Our overseas friends proudly say how fantastic our Prime Minister and our government were for making the apology to the stolen generation.

I will return to the substance of the debate and talk about my ventures through Indigenous communities. I agree 100 per cent with Senator Evans, the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship. During question time today he made a big call, and his humble statement was to the point and so truthful: none of us—for those listening on the other side of this chamber—have got it right so far. They are very strong words and they are so true. That is why it is very frustrating when we are actually trying to improve the lot of our Indigenous brothers and sisters that we have to listen to some of the tripe that has come out in this debate today from senators opposite.

When you go into an Indigenous community there is nothing worse than seeing some of these—let’s call them buildings for want of a better word. No windows, no doors—

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What’s he said so far?

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just more dribble.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dribble? Through you, Madam Acting Deputy President, it is dribble, is it? When was the last time you were in an Indigenous community, Senator Bernardi? Through you, Madam Acting Deputy President, when was the last time Senator Williams, that intelligentsia of all things political in the National Party, was in an Indigenous community? When have you ever stood and said in this chamber how disgraceful the way our Indigenous brothers and sisters live on their traditional lands is? It is shameful, but our leader, the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator Evans, was man enough to say that no-one has got it right. I support Senator Evans’s statement because it is just so true.

To bring us back to where we are now, you hear comments in the hallways in this great building that Senator Scullion is just being devious in moving this motion, that Senator Scullion is being evil, that Senator Scullion—the former Howard government Minister for Community Services—is playing politics or that he is just being a complete and utter dropkick. I would not say that. Not for one minute would I suggest that Senator Scullion is being evil or devious. I would not even suggest for one minute that he is playing politics or that he is a complete and utter dropkick—I would not suggest that. I honestly think that Senator Scullion does have the interests of Indigenous people and their communities at heart. Being a Northern Territory senator, he should have. The sad thing is that I think Senator Scullion has been grossly misled. He is grossly misinformed. He can turn on the passion, as most on that side can when it suits them, but, quite frankly, Senator Scullion is way off the mark because Senator Scullion, as I said, was actually the community services minister in the Howard government.

For 11 long years—let us not forget, 11 long years—what did you lot over on that side do? Through you, Madam Acting Deputy President, this is the travesty: in opposition they can all start wrenching on the heartstrings about how concerned they are about Indigenous housing and Indigenous communities, and how dare we mention closing the gap in Indigenous health and education and housing. How dare we? So at every opportunity, all of a sudden, that mob on the other side of the chamber is the custodian of all things wonderful about Indigenous Australia.

When you go into the communities and you see the children—as Senator Payne said, children cannot help where they are born—one would think that that side of the chamber would do everything they could to work with us. One would think that we would hold hands as Australians, regardless of the colour of our skin, and say that we are going to do what is best for Australia, what is best for the next generations coming through, regardless of their skin colour, rather than just using it as a political football when it suits that side.

And as has been said, we inherited this SIHIP. We did inherit it, but we are going to make it work because one of the great things about spending over $1 billion of taxpayers’ money is that the Rudd Labor government is going to do one thing that that side of politics could not do in its 11 years, and nor could others before that—that is, we are going to do it right. I know that may give those on the other side grief—Senator Bernardi, Senator Williams, you know you can put your hands on your heads—but we are going to do it right. What has happened over the years, and it has happened in most of the communities I have visited, is that you might find the odd new home. Take the Dampier Peninsula. It is not the Northern Territory, but their living conditions are still squalid. You will occasionally see a wonderful new home. And I have said it on many occasions: ‘What a wonderful new home. How long did it take to build that?’ They say ‘six months’ or whatever. The way it was done under the Howard government it was mix and match; it was hit and miss. There was always a little bit of political pressure, ‘Let’s chuck a new home into this Indigenous community.’

And for some strange reason, if you wanted to build a home in an Indigenous community, they always had to add another zero on the end of it. I do not know how that happens, but I can understand it. When building companies tender for these one-off homes, it is costly for them. They have to get labour, they have to provide accommodation, they have to provide the wages and the travel costs, and then the trucks have to get the freight up there, and we know how that all happens. And we also know that in the middle of the wet season, forget it; it is not going to happen in the wet. So there is a window of opportunity, usually it is about eight months—I will stand corrected if the Northern Territory is seven months or nine months, or whatever—but it all has to come together very quickly.

But what actually happens if you have only one new home built in a community? Within a month or two there are 25 people living in that one house. But previous governments, who thought they had done their little bit because they had put one home in this community, one home in that community, would just say, ‘Oh, aren’t we fantastic?’ Well they haven’t been damned fantastic! They have been absolutely remiss in their service to Indigenous Australia.

The important part of the Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program is the way that it will be done properly. What has been said here, and I will not go into it too much because it has been heard, but I must reiterate for those opposite in case it did not sink in, and I do not think it did sink in on a number of occasions—

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We haven’t got long enough for it to sink in, Glenn.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have not got a big enough stick to whack it in! I believe three companies have formed an alliance. There has been a proper tender process. And rather than have one-offs here and there, these three companies in an alliance were asked to tender on building some 20, 30, 50 or whatever new houses and structures as well as doing up existing buildings in communities. But just as Australian taxpayers can get the best bang for their buck—it is a word that I hate, but unfortunately nothing else has come to mind at this stage—so can the Indigenous communities get the best outcome that they deserve. That it is why the tender process has gone in like that. That is why there has been not just one building here and one there. That is why there have been a number of tenders for buildings. I am led to believe of the 750 homes—Senator Bernardi sits there still shaking his head. Go back to your daytime job; undermine your South Australian colleagues, Senator Bernardi. You are good at that. You are not good at much else in this chamber when it comes to Indigenous affairs, but you are good at that.

Of the 750 homes these three big companies—I am led to believe one of them is Leightons, and I believe one is a very renowned and respected building and construction business in the Territory, Sitzler Bros, I think, but I will stand corrected; they are not fly-by-nighters. But the beauty of it is that not only are they tendering on large amounts, not only are they building and improving existing structures and building new structures, but, as part of the government’s package, we are also building communities. We are not just propping up one or two homes here and there; we are building new communities. And to make matters even harder for that lot over there to comprehend, we are consulting with traditional owners. We are consulting with the people who matter, the people who will be living in these homes. I know that is a revelation, but that is what we are doing.

Another very positive part of SIHIP is that the tender calls for training of Indigenous workers. Training of those who not only will be living in the new homes or living in those improved structures, but will be in those communities with construction skills for ongoing maintenance. We are talking about a window of construction, from 2009 through to 2013, and those young Indigenous boys and girls and men and women will be trained. They will have those skills to continue the maintenance. This is a wonderful thing. On my travels through Indigenous communities, I have met so many Indigenous people who are trained to the hilt because it has been fashionable or groovy to throw a few bob out here and get TAFE to do some training. No disrespect to TAFE, but they have not been trained with the skills that they need. They have to train them with skills that they actually need. And what a wonderful opportunity for these young Indigenous men and women to gain construction skills, to have the ability not only to put into their community for the next four years while this program is going, but to do ongoing maintenance jobs to keep them on their traditional lands. What a wonderful opportunity.

In saying that, I remember watching I think it might have been Lateline prior to the last election. I heard one of the now opposition members, but a government minister at the time, and I think it might have been the Leader of the Opposition at the moment—if he is still the leader. When I last read the Australian, he was still the leader. But they have been quiet, so he probably has not been knifed yet. I remember him making this wild and ridiculous statement that we—being Australians, I gather—have to get Indigenous people to where the work is. That is probably one of the most condescending remarks that I have ever heard come out of a politician’s mouth. They had absolutely no idea why our Indigenous brothers and sisters live on the lands they do, of their connection to their lands because that is where their forefathers walked their sacred sites. That is where they want to be. This will actually deliver in 16 communities the opportunity for young Indigenous Australians to gain fantastic construction skills and have an ongoing job—a proper job. Not sit-down money, a proper job.

If we are to be condemned for doing it properly, I do not mind being condemned, because these are big-ticket items. As I said, there is over half a billion dollars of taxpayers’ money and it is going to be done properly. In saying that, there were a number of other issues that we have had to work through with the traditional owners. There have been all sorts of issues, like sacred sites. If we are going to walk into a community and we are going to build 20 or 30 homes, you cannot just plonk yourself on a plot of land and say, ‘Pour the concrete, boys, and let’s start building.’ You have got to do it in consultation.

There is a very important thing that I also want to raise before I run out of time. It is another issue that confronted us and it has taken a lot of the time because it is being done properly. It is security of tenure. It is a key element of SIHIP. On top of governments needing titled assets, secure land tenure will encourage the development of markets in land, private investment and home ownership in the longer term. For this reason, SIHIP is closely linked to the broader reform of the NT remote housing system, where mainstream and consistent housing management practices will be put in place.

We expect that leasing negotiations will continue to be productive. At the current rate, we believe leases will be in place ahead of time and we anticipate that SIHIP may now be completed ahead of schedule in 2013. In formulating SIHIP, both the NT and Commonwealth governments agreed to quarantining 15 per cent of the overall $672 million budget for program management and the Northern Territory government’s operating costs. I just want to reiterate that 15 per cent is the original figure. The government did so knowing that this percentage would be reduced over the life of the program as we implemented new efficiencies. Operational costs are presently running at 11.4 per cent—well below the 15 per cent threshold—and operations will run at 10 per cent by the end of this month. We will cut that even further to eight per cent by October 2009. That eight per cent will cover program management and staffing costs, planning and mapping, design coordination, quantity surveying, auditing for finances, probity covering insurance and legal matters, and other general operational costs that are directly related to the program.

SIHIP is the biggest, most ambitious integrated housing program in Australia’s history. It is says it all there. It is an entirely new approach, with governments actually working together with communities. Once again, I know that is strange for that lot over there but we are actually working together. Governments are also changing their behaviour and the way they interact with people in the bush. The opportunities at hand can capture the imagination. That is important because the vision is critical to ongoing success.

In reflecting on all this, though, it boils down to an effort to change the lives of people—the citizens of the Northern Territory, like the previous examples that were given. The reality is that any significant improvement to the health, welfare and productivity of remote communities and individual residents will come through generational change. SIHIP is not a panacea but it is the start we need for that. All of us on this side of the chamber are more than certain about that.

In concluding, it is very mischievous to sit and listen to some of the arguments that were put up in this chamber by previous speakers. As I did say, some were very good, some from the other side were very good too, but some were appalling. For those out there listening, this is ambitious, this huge and this is part of nation building but it is, more importantly, about doing the right thing—doing the right thing properly, doing it in consultation with the traditional owners of the land and those first Australians who desperately and deservedly need our help. (Time expired)

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In rising to contribute to this debate I feel compelled to respond to some of the allegations, comments and contributions that Senator Sterle has made. One of the incredible claims is that Senator Sterle said he will happily stand condemned for doing it properly. Senator Sterle has never, ever been condemned for doing it properly. No one has ever accused him of doing it properly. The government that he is a part of certainly are condemned for their lack of action in fulfilling their promises and providing the houses that they promised to Indigenous communities.

In reflecting on what Senator Sterle said, I will acknowledge that Senator Sterle is a true journeyman. His rambling, incoherent and, quite frankly, disingenuous attacks on members of the opposition, because we dared to disagree with some of the things that he said, did him no credit at all. Senator Sterle used a number of emotive words in describing the opposition’s contribution, questioning whether we had been to visit Indigenous communities, as he detailed his extensive travels around the world and into many other communities. This is not a chamber in which to boast of one’s travel logs or to boast about how many people you visited to promote the shameful emperor who has no clothes who now leads the Labor Party. It was a clamour to ingratiate himself with the emperor of the Labor Party—Red Rudd—because Senator Sterle, as I said, is a journeyman and he is interested in promotion. So he tries to ingratiate himself by abusing and attacking the opposition, rather than accept the very necessary facts.

The disappointment is manifest because the Labor Party clearly refuse to confront reality. I will tell you about the reality of this case. They made a number of grandiloquent promises, promises that they have simply failed to deliver upon. That is beyond deniability.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is beyond question.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, it is beyond question, Senator Cormann. We have a Labor administration in the Northern Territory in tatters, with their own former ministers resigning from Labor, saying they do not want any part of all this because it has been so poorly and shamefully administered. There are estimates of hundreds of millions of dollars being wasted on administration and bureaucracy and on feathering the nest of Labor mates. I am hearing these reports all the time. And what is the aim of these $673 million worth of funds? The aim is to build houses. The simple question is: how many houses do we have more than 12 months after they were promised? We have nary a one. As Senator Sterle and his comrades have been travelling around the world and have been visiting Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory claiming righteousness and saying they feel indignation over the opposition, he has never said, ‘Gee, why hasn’t a house been delivered there where it’s meant to be?’ Senator Sterle claims that one house is not enough and says that you have got to build a whole community. By goodness, I tell you what: you should start with one house. If you could get one house built in 12 months by the time you are out of government you will have three houses built—but clearly you cannot even do that. I see Senator Sterle smirking over there because he has done his bit. He has got this smirk going because he has got up there and he has tried to rough up the opposition. What Senator Sterle has done is simply muddy and grubby and it is to dumb down this debate.

That is a very unfortunate thing and it is something that I really want to resist getting into because this debate needs more attention than that. We have got to deal with some realities here. The realities are that hundreds of millions of dollars were promised to build homes and no homes have been delivered—none. We have a government in the Northern Territory in disarray. Quite frankly, we have a government down here in disarray because they do not know what to do. They are justifying it all through their spin and media releases. They are justifying giving $100 million to their mates to administer a program that is not actually operating or delivering anything that it is meant to. And they want us to feel guilty about raising this in the Senate! If anyone is to stand condemned it is not for doing the right thing; it is for doing the wrong thing. It is for misleading Indigenous communities. It is for misleading the people of Australia. Quite rightly, I will stand and condemn those whose lack of action and whose wilful disregard for producing actual results are disappointing so many Indigenous communities and letting down the hopes and dreams of these communities and of so many people who want to contribute to make a difference.

Make no mistake: there are many people in this chamber and in this parliament and all around Australia who actually do want to make a difference. There are some as well who reside on the other side of the chamber but they have been cowered into silence, it would appear, because under the Big Brother mantra of the emperor you are not actually allowed to criticise, you are not allowed to question and you are not allowed to stand up and say, ‘Hang on, maybe we’ve got this wrong.’ Otherwise, we would have heard from Senator Sterle, the noted climate sceptic during the debate on the CPRS. But we did not. He was cowered into silence. I only hope the camera is on him now when shame and humiliation are so apparent on his face.

But let us go back to the substantive matter here, which is the history of this lack of administration. Seven hundred and fifty new houses were promised including a new subdivision. How many have been delivered? None. Two hundred and thirty new houses were promised to replace houses that were to be demolished. How many have been delivered? None. Over 2,500 housing upgrades were promised. How many have been delivered? None. It is a shameful record that has failed to improve the living conditions of people in some very difficult circumstances. People in the Northern Territory and other parts of the country feel so strongly about this that they have actually resigned and quit from a Labor administration or a Labor cabinet in disgust over Labor’s lack of action.

What do we have when this is raised in the national parliament? We have the hubris, the ego and the arrogance of a government that believes it can spin its way out of anything. It believes that by putting out a few press releases and working 24/7, not in the interests of the Australian community but on managing the media cycle, it can actually achieve some sort of outcome. The only outcome this arrogant government wants is its re-election. It does not care who it has to hurt in the process. It does not care about the lack of results. It only wants to get itself re-elected despite more underperformance.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pratt interjecting—

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are a number of interjections from the other side. I cannot quite understand them, just more incoherent babble I guess.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Try listening to your own speech!

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I find quite fascinating is that the true journeymen of the Senate and those that are actually committed to making a difference were not asked to speak in this debate. We only get the abuse.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You haven’t talked about any of the real issues.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The interjection I can hear now and understand is that we are not talking about any of the real issues. The real issue—through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, to Senator Pratt, who is being quite a prat—is the fact that no houses have been delivered. Which part of zero don’t you understand, Senator Pratt? You do not seem to ‘get’ zero. You have spent $100 million on zero, on propping up your Labor mates. That is what has happened and you seem to be proud of it.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pratt interjecting—

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hang your head in shame because you do not belong in this place if you are proud of that. It is just abhorrent that you can be supporting such a waste of taxpayers’ money and the nondelivery of your promises. But if that is how you feel, you should go out and celebrate that and put out a press release saying, ‘We have wasted $100 million of taxpayers’ money and have not delivered a single house to where we said we would.’ It is incredible. It is quite extraordinary.

Before I was rudely interjected upon—which is something we all frown upon in this place!—I was speaking to this critical issue. Many of us are committed to doing everything we possibly can to help disadvantage in Indigenous communities, and I am one of those people. Contrary to what Senator Sterle alleges, I have visited Indigenous communities both in my state and in other states. I want to make a difference like so many of us here want to do, but in order to make a difference we have got to see some action. When we see some action, you might find there is a bit bipartisan support for this. The Labor Party has nothing to be proud of. The coalition will continue to fight.

Russell Trood (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being 6 pm, the Senate will proceed to the consideration of government documents.