Jacinta Nampijinpa Price (NT, Country Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak about some deeply troubling issues that have come to light with regard to the Northern Territory's land councils. Very possibly these troubling issues may well extend across the country more broadly, but we don't know without an inquiry to understand better. The land councils in the Northern Territory were created by the Northern Territory Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976 legislation. Their purpose was to represent traditional owners, to advocate on their behalf and ensure that their views as to what was done on their land were heard and acted on accordingly. However, the current situation is something that is much different, particularly the behaviour becoming apparent within the Central Land Council.

The council, which operates in my home town and throughout Central Australia, is disturbing at best. It is the behaviour of those at the executive level who have a lot of power in the council that seems to be the most problematic. I doubt that these issues are isolated to this particular land council. However, it is the situation that is most familiar to me. With respect to the Central Land Council, I personally wrote to Minister McCarthy last week to notify her that, at a meeting of the council on 18 July 2024, a no-confidence motion was moved by the chair of the council against its CEO. As far as the chair is concerned, it was successfully passed.

The fact that there was a no-confidence motion of this nature in the first place is a red flag in itself. I might add that the CEOs of land councils are paid quite a significant salary in order to conduct their job and to see to the needs of traditional owners who, at the best of times, would struggle to earn a six-figure salary of their own. This red flag should indicate that things are wrong at the Central Land Council and are not as they should be. In addition to the movement and what the chair thought was the passing of the motion, I've been told that, in fact, no record of the resolution was recorded in the minutes of the meeting nor have minutes been produced or seem to exist. Why? It is because of allegations of bullying and intimidation. To add insult to injury, the council then held another meeting without the chair present at which they reportedly decided on the version of events that they prefer to have occurred at the full meeting held on 18 July 2024 and to reprimand the chair. The chair was not afforded the opportunity to defend himself against allegations of breaches of code of conduct, nor was it highlighted to the chair what elements of the code were in fact breached or the supposed breaches of the act.

The possibility that minutes of the first meeting were not taken and the possibility that there is intimidation and behaviour such as this is completely and utterly unacceptable. This is not the way that land councils should be operating. I remind this chamber of what I said at the start: these councils were set up for the very purpose of their members. Section 23 of the Land Rights Act, the act which established these councils in the NT, specifically states, that these councils are 'to express the wishes and the opinion of Indigenous people living in the area and to protect their interests.' The act itself is clear. These are bodies which are meant to represent them, protect them and be on their side, not attack, bully and intimidate them.

Let me be clear, land councils are not inherently evil as some would like to suggest that I suggest. Functioning well, they could be a helpful part of the economic advancement of Indigenous Australians, but in their current state, if the Central Land Council is anything to go by, they are doing far more harm than good for their members.

It's all very well to try to address Indigenous disadvantage and encourage, from the outside, the economic development of Indigenous Australians, but, if these allegations are true, we have a much bigger problem on the inside that must be addressed. We must fix the functioning of our land councils if we have any hope of giving Indigenous Australians, particularly our most marginalised, who don't speak the language as well as their CEOs do, a chance to progress and become economically independent on their own land so they too can perhaps earn themselves six-figure salaries.

The other issue which needs to be raised in this chamber and is also deeply, deeply troubling is the treatment, by the Left, of conservative Aboriginal women running in politics. For all their talk of championing Aboriginal people and their interests, the Left have absolutely no regard for Aboriginal people, particularly women, who are conservatively aligned. Yanja Thompson is a young woman living in the Northern Territory, a hardworking woman who is raising her children as a single mother and wanting to contribute to her community and to society at large, and she's trying to do so by standing as a candidate in the bush. You'd think that this would be a characterisation that Labor would be delighted with, but no—not when she is a conservative, not when she is a woman who has seen through the empty words of the Labor government and who dares to stand for something different. I say 'dares' because she is a perfect example of what happens to you if you refuse to subscribe to Labor's ideology—in that case, like in Yanja's case, you deserve to be attacked and brought down.

It's ironic that the very vulnerabilities that would otherwise make her a hero if she was aligned with Labor are used to destroy her and reduce her chances of success in the Territory election. She's endured bullying, false accusations, damage to her personal property and threats—even threats of violence—in the course of her campaign. An attack has been actively launched against Yanja, and it must be called out.

Just to bring things full circle, back to the start of this address, what entity has found itself linked to this unjustifiable attack on Yanja's character? It's a senior member of the relevant land council who is doing Labor's bidding. All of this is typical of Labor when they are feeling threatened. They have nothing to resort to other than playing dirty games, but, in the event that they didn't want to get their own hands dirty, they've used people in land councils, pitting Indigenous people against one another. I'd like to know what Labor's definition of 'reconciliation' really is. Is it reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous? Do they care about ensuring the unity of Indigenous people amongst ourselves? This kind of behaviour suggests that they don't.

On the contrary, situations like this demonstrate that they feed into the disunity and they feed into the violence in communities when families are pitted against each other. It's abhorrent behaviour. It's abuse of power, and it requires condemnation in the strongest terms. This is a vigilante type approach to politics. It is not appropriate no matter where you are, but it is certainly inappropriate for a democratic country like Australia. If we let behaviour like this fly under the radar, we allow the slow and steady degradation of our democratic process.

Standing in this chamber reminds me of how privileged we are to live in a place like Australia that is built on values of democracy and, of course, the rule of law. It's my respect for those foundational values that drives me to speak up for those people like Yanja, people like the chair of the Central Land Council, people whose first language is not English, people who don't have resources behind them like these organisations have, people who are not treated the same as how those on the Left are treated. This is the reason why I have spoken on this in this chamber today.