Patrick Dodson (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Senator Scullion. I refer to the Australian National Audit Office audit on the Indigenous Advancement Strategy, which points to the deep flaws in the strategy, including substandard design, poor risk management, inadequate consultation, sloppy record keeping, breaches of Commonwealth probity requirements and no evidence of improved outcomes for Indigenous peoples. Will the minister now admit the aim of the strategy was to slash $534.4 million in funding and not to improve services to Indigenous Australians?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

First of all, I would like to acknowledge that it is a very comprehensive report. It is a historical report. It is a report about matters that took place 2½ years ago. I am sure the Auditor-General would not appreciate the senator both misleading the Senate and verballing him when he says that the report said that there is no evidence to show improved outcomes. The report says nothing of the sort. You cannot continue to just say things and expect people to believe them. He says we cut out of Indigenous funding $536 million. I actually had to write to Linda Burney and I am not sure, brother, if I am going to have to write to you. But we have said time and time again in this place that that is simply not correct.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, the senator should refer to people in the other place by their proper title.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, that is correct, Senator Cameron. I will remind senators that you do need to refer to members of the other place by their correct titles.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My apologies for that, Mr President. I cannot recall from this place what the name of her electorate is. I thought Ms Linda Burney would have cut it. I am genuinely not—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just call her Ms Burney.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Burney, thank you for that.

If I could just correct the record again, the cuts at that time were less than five per cent. It was half of that number. In fact, the amount of money that you have quoted, listed in your speech, is the half of the total amount of the cut that was used to provide this report, to put that in context, Senator. This is bureaucratic report, a very important report for bureaucrats about what box was ticked and what box was not ticked. One of the most important omissions in this report, which we will be talking about in the months to come, is the omission of how we actually judge the outcomes on the ground. This is about how the bureaucracy behaved. What is really important to me is what actually happens to the people on the ground and how we make that assessment. (Time expired)

Patrick Dodson (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to ask a supplementary question, Mr President. Why should Aboriginal people believe the strategy benefited their communities when the audit found:

…administration processes fell short of the standard required to effectively manage a billion dollars of Commonwealth resources.

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The communities should have some confidence that the services have improved, because the administration of the choices of which programs you have and how you make sure you write those contracts on the ground has very little to do with the actual outcomes. The ANAO only deals with the bureaucratic process of selecting the programs and ensuring that those programs are on the ground. It makes very little commentary or evaluation of the success or otherwise of the programs on the ground. This is a historical document. Since then, Senator, you would know we have already released revised guidelines, we have given a stronger role to the regional staff in the network and we have established a strengthened Assessment Management Office. We have accepted those recommendations of the ANAO report, and they have all, by and large, already been adopted, because it was historical. (Time expired)

Patrick Dodson (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to ask further supplementary question, Mr President. When will the government abandon the idea that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people need to be managed, and start working with communities, leaders and organisations?

Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Dodson, that is exactly what happened here. When the ANAO made their recommendation, they said: 'Well, you weren't given the right information. You didn't get enough information, Minister, as you said last night.' They did not take into consideration the other information we had in making these decisions. That information came from communities, came from the people receiving the services, came from the organisations that represented those communities. If the ANAO had come and seen me and said, 'What were the other issues you had to actually make those determinations?' we would have said, 'Because of the change in our approach of working with communities instead of doing something to communities.' So yes, this is a fundamental change about how governments have done things for decades and decades. I can assure you this is the best way to do things with communities, by ensuring that they have a bigger input into this process than the administrative processes of Canberra.