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

Yes, I heard that intervention. For those that didn't hear it, they mentioned Jenny Macklin. And, yes, Labor did make a mistake. I have said that many times in this place. But they have now looked at the evidence and seen it doesn't work. So I give them an enormous amount of credit for that. Certain Labor senators have been opposed to this all along. They knew it wasn't going to work. They've looked at the evidence—or should I say lack of evidence? That is, in itself, evidence, I suppose you'd say. It doesn't work. The final evaluation of the Northern Territory Intervention clearly showed that. It met none of its objectives.

The government keeps changing what the objectives of the trials are. The Intervention was originally supposedly about ending child abuse and putting food on the table, and then the trials morphed into addressing alcohol and drug abuse and gambling. And now they seem to be morphing back into being about putting food on the table. This is flawed ideology about the way that you achieve change. Do you know the way you achieve change? You address the underlying causes of the disadvantage that exists in First Nations communities. You address the social determinants of health. You address the fact that this is still stolen land. We have never, ever acknowledged that as a nation. You address the intergenerational trauma. You address the fact that children are still being inappropriately taken from their families. You address the fact that there's not sufficient housing. You acknowledge the intergenerational trauma and finally address that.

Instead, what do the government do? They take an ideological approach. That's the only conclusion you can draw. Despite the fact that there's no evidence, they still proceed and they send in the warriors to argue that this is the way to go. A certain billionaire puts up the idea that income management is the way to go, despite the fact that the final evaluation of the Northern Territory Intervention showed that it did not meet any of its objectives. This is the time where we knock this failed, flawed, ideological, punitive approach, this racist, discriminatory approach, on the head.

When this comes up for a vote next week, this chamber has the opportunity to say no permanently and end this abusive card which for 13 years has been in place in this country. Knock it off. I beg crossbench senators to knock this off finally. Say no. Don't let them do this permanently, and don't negotiate any form of extension, which is what has happened in the past; they've said: 'Oh, let's just extend this a little bit longer'. No. We don't need any more extensions. It's flawed. It's failed. The government haven't produced their evaluation. They've had it for quite some time now—it makes you wonder what's going on with it. Perhaps it doesn't say the things they want it to say, just like the ORIMA evaluation didn't say the things they wanted it to say, and just like the Auditor-General's report. The ANAO's report found that there was actually no evidence to show that they could claim there was a reduction in social harm. Knock this legislation off, and let's focus the resources, the time and energy, that are wasted on this flawed approach on something that works. Let's genuinely commit to walk with First Nations peoples—in fact, to walk behind them. We need to have First Nations-led decision making here. The government runs the line: 'We did talk to First Nations peoples.' Well, they didn't talk to communities. Let's walk the talk of the new Closing the Gap agreement with First Nations peoples. The cashless debit card is not walking the talk. Knock it off for good—permanently—when this comes to a vote next week.