Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate is of the view that the declaration of the opening of Parliament should be preceded by an Indigenous ‘Welcome to Country’ ceremony.

I seek the Senate’s support for the declaration that the opening of parliament should be preceded by an Indigenous welcome to country ceremony, which would take place at the first meeting of a new parliament after a federal election. The Rudd Labor government is committed to working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to progress reconciliation and it is a key element of the government’s objective of closing the gap in Indigenous disadvantage. Increased investment and reform are important, necessary steps. But they are not sufficient for closing the gap.

We came to government knowing that change was needed on emotional as well as practical levels. We knew that for too long Indigenous people had felt like outsiders in their home. We recognise the great importance of pride in identity in shaping aspirations and choices. That is why the Rudd Labor government’s first official business in coming to government was to deliver the national apology to Australia’s Indigenous peoples, in particular to the stolen generations. The apology created the opportunity for a shared future and a fresh beginning for Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

Being welcomed onto country by traditional owners is now acknowledged as an important gesture by many Australians. A welcome to country is performed by the traditional owner of the land on which we stand. It is the act of welcoming others onto your traditional lands, to wish them safety and honour the history of a place. It is a long time honoured Indigenous tradition that pre-dates the arrival of Europeans to Australia and was used between different groups of Australia’s first peoples.

Australia is a great nation and part of our greatness is our ancient and unique cultural heritage. We can feel proud of this. It is part of who we all are as Australians. It is a shame that the opposition do not seem able to support this resolution. Welcome to country recognises the role of Australia’s first peoples as custodians of the oldest continuing cultures in human history. It is a simple act but, at the heart of it, it is one of respect. I urge the Senate to support this resolution to formally commit to a welcome to country being part of the opening of a new parliament.

We were very proud to have a welcome to country to open this parliament, an event which received bipartisan support. At the event on the 12 February 2008 the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, said:

Exactly 100 years ago the land on which we stand was chosen as the site as the nation’s first capital. Eighty years ago, we built an old Parliament House and 20 years ago, we built this new great house of the Australian democracy. Yet the human history of this land stretches back thousands of years through the dream time. Despite this antiquity among us, and despite the fact that parliaments have been meeting here for the better part of a century, today is the first time in our history that as we open the parliament of the nation, that we are officially welcomed to country by the first Australians of this nation … let us resolve here, as Members and Senators and Members of this great Parliament of the Commonwealth, that whoever forms future Governments of the nation, let this become a permanent part of our ceremonial celebration of the Australian democracy.

That was the government’s commitment to try and enshrine welcome to country as part of the start of the new parliament to reaffirm that connection with the traditional owners and with our first peoples.

I note that then opposition leader Mr Brendan Nelson said at this event:

I join in supporting the remarks very strongly of the Prime Minister. I don’t think the openings of our Parliaments will ever be the same again and that is good … I assure you on behalf of the alternative government, in supporting the Prime Minister, that whatever happens in future parliaments, so long as I have anything to do with it, that we will have a welcome from Ngunnawal and their descendants.

Matilda House, the elder who delivered this welcome to country, said it was one thing: proper respect. So I hope that all senators will support this motion and support giving a welcome to country ceremony a formal place in the opening of all future parliaments.

Those of us who have visited the New Zealand parliament understand the important role the Maori culture is given in the operation of their parliament. One of the few things that are unique about our democracy is our Indigenous people. The connection with them in the opening of parliament reflects the development and the continuity of Australian democracy.

This is an important motion for the Senate to support. The last opening of parliament was a much more significant event for the inclusion of the welcome to country. I urge the Senate to support this resolution that commits us to supporting such a welcome at the opening of every parliament.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I indicate that the coalition does not support the resolution. In saying that, we will not be opposing it by a formal division in this place. It is somewhat astounding that in the government’s time today at the end of a very heavy legislative agenda—having criticised, as the Prime Minister has, the Senate delaying the government’s legislative timetable—the Leader of the Government has gotten up in the Senate to take up time that could have been devoted to going through with the government’s legislative timetable.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you’re not opposing it, just let it go through.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is quite clear now what is more urgent for this particular government. I cannot help but think that the urgency of dealing with this motion today comes from the government’s embarrassment at having voted against the wild rivers legislation yesterday. We on the coalition side listened to the Indigenous people of Cape York and we supported their aspirations—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The mad right-wingers are in charge! The zealots are in charge!

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This, allegedly, was to be a debate that was going to lift the parliament, and the Leader of the Government, with his very divisive interjections, is just showing what this debate is all about from the government’s point of view. It is to try to put a wedge into the Australian community over this issue. We in the coalition believe it should be a decision for each government to determine from time to time—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That’s not what Brendan Nelson said. Brendan Nelson committed to it.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This has just been a barrage of non-stop interjections from an embarrassed Leader of the Government in this place, out of control with his legislative agenda, trying to blame us for delaying procedures and then bringing on a motion such as this for no real reason. This is about the opening of the next parliament. Aren’t we resuming in August? What is the urgency of bringing this up on the very last day, in effect, that this Senate will be dealing with legislation?

You have to ask: what was the urgency of bringing it up today? I suggest the urgency is that the government knows that it is very much out of touch with the practical aspirations of the Indigenous people in this country, who wanted and want this parliament to pass the wild rivers legislation. We in fact have lived up to the expectations of the Indigenous people. We have sought to deliver for them in a very practical and real way which will benefit their communities in the Cape York area.

Yet the Labor Party and the Greens deliberately voted yesterday evening to seek to deny the aspirations of the Indigenous people in the Cape York area. They rush in here today to say, ‘Aren’t we really good fellows for you, because we want to have a welcome to country at the beginning of each parliament?’ What will be for the true long-term welfare of the Indigenous people: a welcome to country on each occasion the parliament opens or giving the wild rivers back to the Indigenous people so that they can actually live with their country and get some economic benefit and return from their country?

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Your position on native title?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hear an interjection, unfortunately, from one of the Labor senators. As a former chair of the Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, I know the very good work that I was able to do with my good friend and colleague Senator Minchin. He put through this parliament the Indigenous land use agreements. They were fought by the tokenism of others in this place, but they have been of very real, practical application and benefit to Indigenous communities.

If we want to talk about the aspirations of the Indigenous community, I ask those opposite to listen to the views of an Aboriginal leader who is their former federal president in relation to the impact on Indigenous employment of their mining tax. Being confronted with Mr Mundine pointing out to them the difficulties that will be visited upon the Indigenous community by the mining tax and being confronted with having voted against the wild rivers legislation—both major issues in the Indigenous community absolutely undermining its right to self-determination and to fulfil its aspirations—what does the Labor Party do? Rush in this morning and say the issue of the day has to be a welcome to country ceremony once every three years.

I think the Indigenous community and the vast majority of Australians will see through this motion by the Leader of the Government in the Senate when it is seen in the context of what Labor has been doing in relation to Indigenous aspirations just yesterday with the wild rivers legislation and also in relation to the mining tax. I do not seek to delay the Senate any further.

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Moore interjecting—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have a Labor senator laughing about that. I am entitled to speak on this, Senator, for 20 minutes. I will not even take half my time because I am concerned—the government actually has convinced me about this—that there is a legislative agenda to get through and that is why I have truncated my remarks. Our view on the opposition side is this: we are not opposed to welcome to country ceremonies per se, but we believe it should be a decision for each government to determine the appropriateness of the ceremonies and other things before the opening of each parliament without actually having a resolution from this Senate.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Finance and Debt Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Congratulations, Mr Acting Deputy President Ludlam. You are looking very proper up there. The National Party represents a large section of the Indigenous community. In fact one of our seats, namely the electorate of Parkes, has a larger number of Indigenous people than any other electorate. We are very aware of the fact that we want an engaged relationship with the first occupants of this nation. I have a great desire for the greatest form of inclusion of the Kamilaroi people and to the north of me the Mandandanji people but I do have an immense sense of cynicism about how this has found its way onto the agenda today.

What opportunity do I have to go back and talk to the Kamilaroi or Mandandanji people about this and deal with the issues? Maybe they would like to be involved in this process in some way, shape or form. But it is not about that. This is yet another form of tokenistic approach to Indigenous issues. I am sure that Indigenous people like the Murri people of my area would be far more engaged if the Labor Party were to come forward with a distinct program of regional development, with the securing of water rights so that they can have employment or with programs to economically advance them. Those are the sorts of programs that people want. Those are the sorts of programs that have a real aspect of bringing improvements to people’s lives.

The National Party senators, such as Senator Scullion, Senator Nash, Senator Williams and me, who actually live in communities with Indigenous people, who do not live in the suburbs and just talk about them, would have appreciated more time to have a consultative engagement in this process. But this has been brought in today not to help the plight of Indigenous people—and I acknowledge that there is much that needs to be done especially around empowering Indigenous people—but as a political stunt. By bringing it in as a political stunt you are actually ridiculing the whole process. Why did you do this? Why do we not have a more complete debate about the mechanisms and ways we can take the Indigenous people forward? I would like to see that.

What Labor governments around our nation have done is to use Indigenous people in many instances as a whipping post, locking up their access to the development of their wealth with things like the wild rivers legislation. What consultation did the Indigenous people of the Gulf have on that? What have you left those people except destitution in perpetuity? There is no point in having a welcoming ceremony and a sorry day and then in the next breath doing things like that to them. In my area you have created uncertainty over water rights. The greatest mechanism of social advancement for Indigenous people in my area has been compromised.

I would have liked the opportunity to go back and have a yarn to the elders in my town, including Poddy Waters, about this and ask him in what form and in what fashion he would like recognition of Indigenous people at the start of parliament. I would have liked the opportunity to have that discussion with him. But I do not. The National Party will be supporting this motion, but we will be supporting it in a fashion under duress because we are playing into your little political game, your little argument of division. Once more you are trying to use a foisted motion to garner a view that is not a true reflection of your actions.

This will be called for what it is. It is yet again a stunt because there was no form of wider engagement with the key stakeholders, the Indigenous people. I would like to know what sort of engagement you had with them prior to this. I would like to see the discussions with the key stakeholders on this motion but there were none. You know the game you play. If we vote against it because we call it a disingenuous stunt, you will play the wedge politics and say the coalition does not have the views of Indigenous people at heart. You have been very mischievous in the process that has brought this motion about and you will be called as such.

We would like to say to the Indigenous people of my own area—to the Kamilaroi people, the Mandandanji people and the Murris in general—that we want to have a form of engagement that goes beyond the tokenism to social advancement over the long term, because that is essential unless you want the ‘sorry’ statement and this statement to be the only things that you offer Indigenous Australia. Is that it? A highfaluting tokenism and a form of wedge politics is what the Labor Party intends to offer Indigenous Australia, and it thinks that we are all foolish enough to fall for this eleventh-hour, 59th-minute piece of wedge politics before the parliament rises.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Greens wholeheartedly support this motion for there to be a welcome to country at the start of parliaments. I am pleased to hear, even though I note the argument that went with it, that the Nationals will also support it. I was disappointed to hear that the Liberal Party will not. That said, I think the overwhelming support nationally for the ceremony which took place at the start of this parliament is an indication of the huge welcome there will be for this move that is being made by the government in the parliament today.

Senator Abetz said that the government should determine such matters. I would have thought that a Leader of the Opposition in the Senate would know that we are a democracy, where parliament makes decisions on its own processes. That is not a right, and never should be, handed across to the government executive. We are being asked here to mark the start of parliaments with a welcome to country from the first Australians. It can be seen as a ceremonial without effect on the true wellbeing of Indigenous people, but I believe that such symbolism, such recognition and the pride in country that comes from that are of themselves essential and important for all of us in recognising the extraordinary and at times devastating and harrowing history of the Indigenous people of this country since 1788. The welcome to country preceding parliamentary procedures is a very fitting way to take another step towards doing the best we can—though we can never make amends—to change the course of history from the past into a new future.

So the Greens welcome this proposal. It is a matter for parliament. While the government has brought forward this motion, it will be widely accepted by the public, including—if we take that reaction to the welcome to country back in 2007—Indigenous Australians. I think it is a pity it is being turned into a political debate. Maybe it is a pity that it has come so late in the procedures from the government, almost as an afterthought, but it is a very important and good afterthought. The process is right. It is the right thing to do. My colleagues wholeheartedly support this move, congratulate the government for bringing it forward and look forward to the next ceremony to begin the next sessions of parliament in this great democracy of ours.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have no problem with welcome to country ceremonies—in fact, sometimes they are initiated by the National Party when the Aboriginal community want to do them—but what I do have a problem with is that this is a masterpiece of mistiming. How can the Labor Party and the Greens support this after trying to remove every right of the Aboriginal community in Cape York, depriving them of their land—not only native title land but deed of grant in trust land that was given to them by Joh Bjelke-Petersen when he was Premier? They came in and said: ‘You can’t use that land anymore. This is under wild rivers legislation. Sorry—you can’t even put in a market garden and clear land if it’s in a high-preservation area.’

The Aboriginals were told that this was wild rivers legislation. Wild rivers legislation became wild basin legislation, and wild basin legislation took in every creek, every river, every stream and every spring. It became not wild rivers—

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Finance and Debt Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just wild!

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was just wild, and people have been deprived of their capacity to earn. I will get this right, because I do not want to mislead the parliament: the Bligh government has ruined the economic opportunities of Indigenous people by ignoring their rights and imposing unilateral development constraints across vast river basins covering 80 per cent of the cape.

You must totally underestimate the Aboriginal community. You want to give them beads and mirrors. That is past: they want education and they do not want welfare. They have had 80 years of welfare, and all it has led them to is total misery. You have deprived them of their livelihoods; you voted against them yesterday. You have deprived them of their livelihoods, you have deprived them of their land, you have deprived them of their rights and you want them to sit there and, as Noel Pearson said, pick berries in the sunset. That is what you have locked them into. Only yesterday you locked them into that, and today you come in with a mealy-mouthed proposition to have welcome to country ceremonies. If there was ever an empty, clanging gong, that was it.

I do not know how you can have the audacity to put this proposition to the parliament after you completely took away every right that the Aboriginals had in Cape York. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. What makes it worse is that you are rubbing salt into the raw wound. If only you had any thought for Aboriginals; if only you ever considered Aboriginals and not just the preferences organised by the Wilderness Society and the Greens—you have lost the right to call yourself the political home of Aboriginals. You walked out on that last night. You do not deserve it and the Aboriginals will wake up to you. You give them clanging gongs and symbols. You do not give them a right to earn their own living. You do not give them a right to own their own land. You give them a right that is frozen in time—that they can have a ceremony on the land, they can fish and they can hunt.

That is all they can do with those millions and millions of hectares of land that were given to them by various governments. You have walked away from native title. You do not deserve ever to get another Aboriginal vote. You have sold out to the Wilderness Society for 30 pieces of preferences. You know, and it is well known and well documented, this Wild Rivers deal was done by the Wilderness Society to get preferences for Queensland Premier Anna Bligh. What a betrayal of the Aboriginal people. Do not come in here with this stupid, mealy-mouthed welcome to country, which we have no objection to. What you are trying to do is give them beads and mirrors and take away their right to earn a decent living.

You have closed down a mine that would give them 400 to 500 jobs if they wanted them. That is not going to happen overnight, but there has to be a start somewhere. But you are driving them backwards. And you come in here and put forward a mirror and symbols. I cannot believe that you would ever do this, that you would have the audacity to do it. Surely you could have put this off for a couple of days or addressed it next term. The Labor Party and the Greens have no right to call themselves the friends of Aboriginals ever again.

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy President Ludlam, this is the first time I have addressed you as that in your role and I congratulate you. I have a lot of regard for Senator Boswell—he is the father of the house—but, with the greatest respect to Senator Boswell, I think he is being unfair in the way that he has characterised this debate. This debate is about a welcome to country ceremony. The Wild Rivers legislation is a completely distinct issue and I would like to think that Senator Boswell may consider some common ground in relation to this. I think it is appropriate that the first Australians be acknowledged and be part of the opening ceremony of this parliament, and Senator Boswell agrees with that. Another important factor in relation to this, if it is passed as I hope it will be, is that it will drive home to each and every representative in this nation’s parliament the importance of having Indigenous issues at the forefront of our minds because we know so much needs to be done.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But we’re not doing it.

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Boswell is right in part in that we need to do much, much more. I think a welcome to country ceremony is not only appropriate from a symbolic point of view but also appropriate from a practical point of view because it will ram home every time this parliament opens the role of the first Australians in this nation’s history and the role that we need to play to ensure that levels of poverty and levels of deprivation in Indigenous communities are addressed as a matter of urgency. I support this motion, I believe it is appropriate and I would like to think that there is common ground in the chamber to say that this ceremony will have both symbolic and practical effects. I think that is a good thing

Question agreed to.