Senate debates

Thursday, 16 August 2018

Questions without Notice

Indigenous Affairs

2:37 pm

Photo of Malarndirri McCarthyMalarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Senator Scullion. On 12 February, in answer to a question I asked on funding for remote housing, the minister said, 'We're certainly not walking away from funding remote housing.' Can the minister confirm that, despite asserting he's been negotiating with state governments for over a year, Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia have had no ongoing funding since 1 July?

2:38 pm

Photo of Nigel ScullionNigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | | Hansard source

What I can confirm is that the statements in the question were not only erroneous but mischievously misleading.

Photo of Louise PrattLouise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment and Water (Senate)) Share this | | Hansard source

Has there been funding? Show us the money!

Photo of Nigel ScullionNigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | | Hansard source

You may not be interested, Senator, but I'm sure a number of Australians are, in Western Australia, in Queensland and in South Australia. Let's start with Western Australia. Did you mention the $130 million I paid them four weeks ago, Senator? Maybe you're not really on the clicker phone with them. Forty million of that has yet to be expended. So the entire NPARIH was paid off in good faith, plus a $40 million payment. In Queensland, we've already made sure a similar amount has been paid. And I have already told you personally and this place that there is at least a year's ongoing work that is still part of the original NPARIH. We are well advanced in our negotiations in South Australia.

It's a very simple narrative, and I can just use the Queensland example. As I've indicated, I thought that the Labor Party, which first started off the NPARIH process—it was quite a wise process because it was non-subjective and quite formulaic.

Photo of Scott RyanScott Ryan (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Cameron, on a point of order?

Photo of Doug CameronDoug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | | Hansard source

Yes, on direct relevance. The question is about ongoing funding. The minister has not dealt with that issue of ongoing funding.

Photo of Scott RyanScott Ryan (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Cameron, as I've said, I take a very liberal approach to people restating the question, but it should be phrased in terms of direct relevance and not as a demand for part of a question to be answered when the minister is clearly relevant to the question.

Photo of Nigel ScullionNigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | | Hansard source

In the Queensland context, we have 387 houses that didn't meet the formula. That's why the Labor Party—and there's no mischief in this—didn't put a population growth indicator in that. We should have, at the end of 10 years, built so many houses for so many people in the population, but we're 387 houses short. Our deal with the Queensland government is that we'll pay for half of the houses and they'll have to pay for the 57 houses in the future from NAHA. It's a solid arrangement that I'm sure will be accepted. It has certainly been accepted in South Australia. We're well and truly ahead in our negotiations with Western Australia and Queensland. Any suggestion that there are no further funds is absolutely spurious and mischievous.

Photo of Scott RyanScott Ryan (President) Share this | | Hansard source

I remind senators to address their comments to the chair, particularly when answering questions. Senator McCarthy, a supplementary question.

2:40 pm

Photo of Malarndirri McCarthyMalarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

The Turnbull government has cut more than $410 million in annual funding for remote housing. Why is it that Minister Frydenberg can hand almost half a billion dollars of taxpayers' money to a private foundation in 11 days but that the minister has still failed to secure funding for remote housing?

2:41 pm

Photo of Nigel ScullionNigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | | Hansard source

I've just detailed the long-term security and the fair-dinkum approach that we've had both with the states and with the Northern Territory. We've actually doubled the amount of money going to remote housing in the Northern Territory in the next five years compared with in the previous agreement. I don't know where Labor get the $410 million figure. It's just a figure they've pulled. They say, 'By the way, Senator, you've cut $410 million.' It's absolute garbage. Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition should take a bit of responsibility and indicate where that figure might have come from, because it's absolutely without substance. I call on Labor to demonstrate where the cut of $410 million is. It does not exist. Let me tell you, in this very important area, the First People of Australia deserve the facts. They deserve more than the leadership that those opposite are currently providing.

Photo of Scott RyanScott Ryan (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator McCarthy, a supplementary question.

2:42 pm

Photo of Malarndirri McCarthyMalarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

The minister's failure to secure funding for remote housing means the Commonwealth's $5.4 billion investment over the past decade and the marked process in addressing overcrowding is being squandered. Does the minister lack the support of his colleagues or does this reflect the priorities of the Turnbull government or both?

Photo of Nigel ScullionNigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | | Hansard source

I will repeat, for the benefit of those opposite, that we are committed to ongoing funding and we are committing to working in partnership with the states and territories. We have advanced, as I have explained, the formulaic approach that has been agreed to by the jurisdictions. There are no cuts to housing. We will insist that, for the money we provide to the jurisdictions of states and territories for the most needy through our NAHA process, they hypothecate—and in Queensland forever it's only 15 per cent—to Indigenous First People so that the formula can mean that you will always have houses according to population growth from now into the future. As for the rest of the questions, you really need to study this more. I'm more than happy to give you a brief. You know, Senator—through you, Mr President—that that offer is always on the table.