Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Community Services) Share this | Hansard source

I thank senators for their contribution to the debate on the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment (Township Leasing) Bill 2007. The Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act is an iconic piece of legislation, and any amendments to it always generate interest. But you would be forgiven for thinking that those opposite were continuing the debate that occurred 12 months ago when the substantive amendments to the act were passed by the Australian parliament. Those amendments enabled the creation of an entity to hold headleases over Aboriginal townships. The amendments also made provision for the Commonwealth to establish such an entity if required. This bill proposes a very simple amendment to establish the Office of the Executive Director of Township Leasing to manage the Commonwealth entity. It is a simple implementation step. However, the senators opposite used this debate to merely repeat untrue claims about the effects of the long-term leasing of townships on Aboriginal land in the Northern Territory. It has been claimed that townships leasing alters the principle of communal ownership of Aboriginal land and that the townships leasing scheme is being implemented without the consent of the traditional owners. That is simply not true.

The township leasing scheme was a policy put forward by the Northern Territory Labor government. It preserves inalienable and communal underlying title. Township leasing provides for all residents in towns on Aboriginal land to have a secure tenure, but only where traditional owners agree to a township lease. This is a voluntary scheme implemented with the consent of traditional owners. It provides real ownership to residents for the first time. The Australian government has completed negotiation with the traditional owners of Nguiu in the Tiwi Islands. They told Minister Brough that, for the first time, they would have real property rights. They will have a say about the development in town and they will get economic returns. Maintaining that the land rights act already provided for leasing in the town is misleading. These towns have not been provided with secure tenure over 30 years of land rights. The system was complicated, it was not working and it needed to be fixed.

It has been suggested that if a Commonwealth entity were established, it would be confusing if the Northern Territory government at some later date established its own entity. The government has made it clear that it is only going down the path of establishing the Office of the Executive Director of Township Leasing because the Northern Territory government has failed to deliver on its commitment to establish a township leasing entity. It was the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory who undertook to have this entity in place by 2006. She did not deliver. If, and when, a Northern Territory entity is in place, the government will move to transfer headleases to that entity and the Office of the Executive Director of Township Leasing will be abolished. There will be no duplication. It has been said that the Australian government has acted too quickly and that the Northern Territory government’s position is to negotiate on a model for the township leasing entity. Actions speak louder than words. The Australian government has listened to the traditional owners of Nguiu who wanted a statutory office and has delivered that in this bill.

Senators opposite have claimed that we have made land tenure reform a condition of funding basic services. I am sorry, Senator Siewert, but that is simply not true. Basic services are not part of the negotiations; the negotiations involve providing services above and beyond what would typically be provided. These reforms are an important part of our strategy to tackle overcrowding in remote Indigenous communities. We are providing $1.6 billion over the next four years to address the problem.

The new strategy will replace the failed Community Housing and Infrastructure Program. Labor is so out of touch that it believes that CHIP was a good program. There have been numerous complaints of nepotism, mismanagement and waste through the old ATSIC community housing model that those opposite put so much faith in. Over the last five years, despite spending around a billion dollars on this old ATSIC housing program, housing stock increased by only 2 per cent or 471 homes and there has been a marked deterioration in the state of that housing stock. The old ATSIC program was an unmitigated failure and we will abolish it and add more funding to create a more effective program. Home ownership will be an important part of the Australian government’s housing strategy and we have provided over $100 million for the new Home Ownership on Indigenous Land program, which is tailored to meet the needs of remote communities who opt for land tenure reform. Our approach to Indigenous affairs is about making a difference, not following the tired and failed policies of the past.

Those that speak against the bill seem to want things to stay just as they are. Local Aboriginal people are saying just the opposite to that. The traditional owners of Nguiu were the first to take advantage of this new opportunity. The traditional owners will retain underlying title to the land and receive formal compensation from other people using the land. This will assist them to establish an economic base. Residents will be able to buy a house or start a small business and be part of the broader Australian economy. The new arrangements will allow the Tiwi entrepreneurial capacity to flourish for the benefit of future generations.

The negotiating process for Nguiu started formally in December last year. Those opposite say that an agreement has not been reached yet. Again, that is simply not correct. On 9 May, Minister Mal Brough was advised by the traditional owners of Nguiu that they agreed to the package offered by the Australian government. The next step is for the Tiwi Land Council to follow the statutory requirements required before the lease can be executed. Other communities will recognise the benefits in time and will follow the lead of the Tiwi Islanders.

This scheme is the only way that people in these communities will be able to own their own home. Senator Crossin has said before that she believes that Aboriginal people do not want to own their own homes. She should not make such absurd generalisations; it is offensive. While Labor’s rhetoric on Indigenous affairs suggests new ways forward, their policies are simply stuck in the past. They do not want to reform land tenure which has kept Aboriginal people in poverty. They would deny Aboriginal people the opportunity to own their own homes and they would prefer not to talk about hard issues like domestic violence and child abuse. Labor does not want to deal directly with local Aboriginal people; they would set up a new government constructed representative body, just like the failed ATSIC, to speak for them. These are policies of the past.

Senators opposite quote selectively from those that oppose these reforms. Of course there will be those that do not want change. But, unlike Labor, we do not expect Aboriginal citizens to arrive at a consensus on every issue when we do not expect the same from other Australians. Sadly, Labor does not even bother to quote the positive statements from the people that actually own the land: the traditional owners of Nguiu. Those opposite prefer to deal with their mates who want to preserve the status quo. Senator Crossin in particular has been doing her best to unravel those reforms. She wants government to keep control of Aboriginal people rather than to allow them the sorts of choices that she and other Australians take for granted. After more than 30 years of land rights, the government is giving Aboriginal people real property rights in their townships. It is time for those opposed to this scheme to step aside and let Aboriginal people make decisions for themselves. This is a simple amendment that will allow the traditional owners of Nguiu to carve out a better future for themselves, other residents and future generations. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.