I acknowledge the significant contributions Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians have made to Australia and highlighted the failure of the Closing the Gap initiative, with only 4 out of 17 targets being met, with some even worsening.
I recommended that resources should be directed straight to communities, bypassing the various entities within the Aboriginal Industry that thrive on perpetuating the Gap for their own benefit.
Despite receiving $4.5 billion for the 2022-23 year, the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) has little to show for it. It raises questions about where the money has gone.
I questioned why the Albanese government is refusing to conduct a full audit of government spending in this area. What are they trying to conceal?
Transcript
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are hugely talented in the NRL, the AFL, arts, business, science, sport and politics, with a higher proportion of Aboriginal people in the Federal Parliament than across Australia. I’ve driven to all Cape York communities twice and some three times. I’ve flown or boated into Torres Strait Island communities where people really care for each other, but government control removes meaning from life and suffocates that care. I have enormous faith in Aboriginal and Islander people. Why doesn’t the government? Aboriginal people are resilient after surviving Australia’s harsh environment for thousands of years. They don’t need mollycoddling.
The Closing the gap annual report is clear—a total failure in closing the gap. Only four of 17 targets have been met or have achieved goals, and some gaps are actually worsening. Labor-Greens and Liberal-Nationals governments fail to listen to or meet people’s real needs. Patronising paternalism and top-down approaches suppress, torment and destroy Aboriginal people. In reporting to parliament on closing the gap, successive prime ministers and opposition leaders duck and weave, using broad, fluffy motherhood statements to portray vague, insincere aspirations devoid of data and specifics—lies. The governmental view that it knows best is clearly wrong.
So where’s the solution? For the 2022-23 financial year, total resourcing for the National Indigenous Australians Agency, the NIAA, was $4.5 billion on programs. The result was rank failure. Where did the money go? This government continually refuses to audit government spending in this sector. Why? What’s being hidden from scrutiny? Last October in Senate estimates hearings, I asked whether money would be more effective if it went directly to Aboriginal communities. I meant it. The NIAA said that it sometimes allocates money to communities. I meant directly to communities, bypassing agencies for direct allocations to communities via a transparent, objective formula.
When I travel across communities in Far North Queensland and the Northern Territory, listening to local Aboriginal people, it’s clear they know the answers. I was told that many, many activists, advocates, consultants, lawyers, academics, contractors and public servants rely on keeping the gap wide open, because they work the system, and their livelihoods depend on the program’s ongoing failure. They depend on the gap being maintained, not closed, to perpetuate the need for their roles and accompanying salaries.
Reportedly, Mr Ian Trust chairs Empowered Communities, an Aboriginal organisation and alliance of 10 Aboriginal regions that lobbied hard for the opportunity to review funding decisions with government. In 2017, more than half of the funding considered was found to be duplication and misdirection. Of $1.98 million spent, $1 million was wasted. With sensible local representatives in charge, this model develops responsibility and ownership. Mr Trust supported the cashless debit card and objected to the Albanese government’s capricious decision to take it away without consulting the people. Despite extensive evidence of alcohol related harm to Aboriginal children, the McGowan Labor government ignored his calls for severe alcohol restrictions in his home town. Why won’t governments listen and learn?
The Australian people spoke decisively when we overwhelmingly rejected the divisive Voice referendum 60-40. We, the people of Australia, do not want race to decide rights that should apply to all Australians, yet some states and territories are still actively considering introducing voices and/or treaties. That’s a big middle finger to the Australian people’s decision. South Australia’s One Nation MP, Sarah Game, is sponsoring a bill to repeal the South Australian voice legislation, which clearly has no public mandate. I applaud Sarah Game’s initiative.
When will this government accept the advice from grassroots Aboriginal groups as to what does and does not work based on real-life experience and go beyond that to give communities real autonomy? It’s time that leeches and bureaucrats sucking on the teats of the Aboriginal industry realise that their time is up and that we’re coming for them. Senator Pauline Hanson opened this debate 27 years ago and remains at the fore of pushing for equitable treatment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, the same as for all Australians. Now in the Senate we have Senators Nampijinpa Price and Kerrynne Liddle joining us in speaking common sense and truth.
The government needs to consider bypassing state and agency grants to fund communities directly to develop autonomy for real improvement. As a senator to the people of Queensland and Australia, I serve the people of Queensland and Australia. I support it as the quickest and most powerful way to develop responsibility, ownership and progress. This solution is based on autonomy, human community and responsibility being keys to closing the gap.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/P1D7wFk9mPg/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-04-04 18:16:332024-04-04 18:16:38Audit Needed on Closing the Gap Spending
I spoke in support of Senator Hanson’s motion for an inquiry into Native Title.
The problem many of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders we speak to have continuously raised with us is that under Native Title the land is locked up and can’t benefit from it. That’s about half of Australia locked up under Native Title and held with the government. Is it any wonder the United Nations is so interested in Native Title?
The white and black aboriginal industry consists of lawyers, consultants, activists, academics, politicians and bureaucrats. They all claim to be ‘closing the gap’ between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders’ standard of living and other non aboriginal Australians. The fundamental flaw in this system is that those running the industry are parasitically living off the money that is given to the aboriginal communities. It is a self-perpetuating problem.
Every year the billions of taxpayers’ dollars poured into solving the problem is being syphoned off by the same individuals who “claim” to be helping. Very little of the money makes it through to those in need.
You may recall when the Western nations were called upon to donate to ease the famine in African nations, very little of that aid often didn’t make it past the greedy government bureaucrats. This is what’s going on in Australia now. The pressure to scale it up is significant, but it will only increase the size of the industry and make it worse. What is needed is a solution to the Native Title problem that’s locking up the land. A sunset clause in the Native Title act should also be included. We need accountability within the white and black aboriginal industry.
Autonomy and accountability is what the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are hungry for, yet they are being blocked by those who are living off the industry in the cities, both aboriginal and non-aboriginal.
It’s time to close the gap for good. We need this inquiry.
Transcript
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia I speak to Senator Hanson’s motion, which I’ll read for clarification. It states:
That the following matter be referred to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 4 June 2024:
(a) the establishment of a sunset date in relation to submission of claims of native title, after which no further claims of native title can be made; and
(b) the effectiveness of the operation of the native title system, options to improve economic development resulting from native title, and options to improve certainty over the claim process.
We want an inquiry.
Since the concept of native title was accepted by the High Court in the case of Mabo there have been mixed views from Indigenous and non-Indigenous commentators as to the benefits that have flowed to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. The extent and nature of these was spelt out in the now rather complex Native Title Act 1993 and some further decisions of the High Court, including the Wik case in 1996. The act sets out a bundle of rights, some exclusive and some non-exclusive. Some exclusive rights relate to traditional activities, including the rights to fish, hunt and gather within the determined claim area—and I note as an aside here that Minister Plibersek’s latest piece of legislation seeks to take that away from Aboriginals, according to Aboriginals in northern Australia—but those rights cannot be transferred or on sold. Native title is extinguished by subsequent freehold and suppressed by leasehold, although that may revive at the expiry of the lease. Recent figures from the Native Title Tribunal indicate that determinations comprise more than 50 per cent of Australian land mass, more than half of our country.
One of the features of the Native Title Act is the attempt to balance the rights of all parties. The use of Indigenous land use agreements is a way of establishing possible land use, including mining leases and other means of gaining some commercial benefit, registered for the traditional owners. These can be varied at some later time through the National Native Title Tribunal.
When we were last in Cooktown we met with a local community leader, an upstanding man, who shared with us his views on native title and its impacts on his community and on many communities across Cape York. He said that native title was important from the aspect of recognition of the Indigenous perspective of their relationship with the land and recognising that Indigenous people were the first inhabitants of Australia and that they have inherent property rights in the land. His view was that the Native Title Act was not providing Indigenous people with something tangible, because they could not use native title to advance any individual interests. Land under native title cannot be mortgaged to help build a home or be used as collateral to support a business loan. The land is essentially locked up and not used to support small projects.
It’s really about seizing the land, holding it and not giving it to anyone to use. It’s no wonder that we see the words ‘United Nations’ so frequently in the Native Title Act preamble. This is a land grab and the Aboriginals are not benefiting. Because the land is not freehold, nobody is able to work towards owning their own home because the property is now locked away out of reach. No-one is getting this land. The Commonwealth government are able to reclaim native title land and convert it to freehold, and some compensation is then paid to the traditional owners, but this does not benefit any individuals. People in the cities think that this was all fixed years ago. They don’t realise that the No. 1 complaint in remote Aboriginal communities across the north of Australia is that they can’t get access to land to have their own houses and their own businesses. With land ownership prevented, there is little incentive to work towards beneficial goals. My friend said that he wished to own his own place in this community. He cannot own his own place in the community. He wishes to build up and expand his small business as a shop owner but he cannot buy the premises. He must hope that he can lease the shop from the local traditional owners.
These comments were echoed right across the cape by constituents, council mayors and council members, and in the Territory and, we’ve heard also, in Western Australia. It was universal. Not one person to whom we spoke had a good thing to say about native title, other than that it provides some recognition of them as First Australians.
When asked about the government’s closing the gap policy, he made the telling comment that the government was not serious about closing the gap because that would be contrary to the white and black Aboriginal industry that thrives on keeping Aboriginals dependent. With the exception of two Aboriginal members of parliament, Senator Nampijinpa Price and Senator Kerynne Liddle, Aboriginal senators—the other nine—don’t talk about the white and black Aboriginal industry that consists of lawyers, consultants, activists, academics, politicians and bureaucratics who are living parasitically off the money that is given to Aboriginal communities. They’ve stolen it from the Aboriginal communities. The billions of dollars that are poured into solving the problem are siphoned off by those supposed to be assisting, and little of the money and other handouts makes it to those in real need. That’s what’s going on in this country. It’s important for many people to keep the gap wide open.
I listened to a councillor on Badu Island, up in the Torres Strait, about closing the gap. I’ve been across the cape twice, and to some communities three times. In every community we asked, ‘What about closing the gap?’ Some people said, ‘What’s closing the gap?’ Others said, ‘It’s useless.’ When we asked this particular councillor on Badu Island, he said to me, ‘Malcolm, the point about closing the gap is that it will never be closed because there are people feeding off the maintenance of the gap.’ The parasitic white and black Aboriginal industry are feeding off closing the gap.
My friend went on to say that one of the biggest problems in communities was the lack of decent community housing. There were 19 people living in one of the local houses, and many people were homeless. In his community, 70 per cent of the residents were receiving welfare. Many were not coping. Mental health issues were climbing. What my staff have seen on Mornington Island is disgraceful. It’s caused by the white and black Aboriginal industry. They perpetuate the misery so that they can get the funds. As I said, this was a common comment across the cape and up into the Torres Strait.
Further north, a mayor told me that the problems also involved how grant moneys were divided up between the various interest groups, and again highlighted the housing and employment crises. There were no jobs and there was not enough housing.
Why will only two Aboriginal members of this Senate discuss the white and black Aboriginal industry? I have to commend Senator Nampijinpa Price for doing so with vigour. She points out that that white and black industry is destroying accountability, and things in Aboriginal communities won’t change without accountability. The people in the communities that I’ve listened to are hungry for autonomy and accountability. They want it.
I understand that in 1998 John Howard, as Prime Minister, attempted to amend the Native Title Act by putting in place a sunset clause. John Howard, I’m advised, moved to put in place a sunset clause. As Prime Minister, what advice did he get on the legality? Senator Cash would get some answers to clause (a) if there was some form of inquiry. What’s wrong with having an inquiry? Why do you keep blocking Senator Pauline Hanson wanting simple inquiries into basic, fundamental questions?
As I understand it, before Cook arrived the Torres Strait Islands had some form of property rights, handed down from generation to generation, where the holder of the land was clearly recognised. But the mainland not so, I’m advised. We were reminded by Senator Rennick that the High Court decision on Mabo was very close: four to three. We need an inquiry to see how it’s working and to go back to fundamentals. ‘Thirty-one years,’ Senator Rennick said. ‘We need an inquiry. We’re the house of review.’ I concur with Senator Rennick.
Senator Ayres raises the point about Aboriginal Warren Mundine possibly entering the Senate. I don’t know, but does Senator Ayres not want Aboriginals in the Senate because of their views? No-one tonight has offered a solution to the native title problem of land locking, although revisiting Indigenous land use agreements and considering leases for individual housing projects may deserve further consideration.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/M-mQHa0z0hM/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-09-14 08:16:272023-09-14 08:16:31Native Title Inquiry Needed Now
Yesterday the ABC berated Peter Dutton for talking about the abuse of children in the Northern Territory and claimed he had no evidence to prove his claim.
If the ABC had done their job (a bit of research) and looked at the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare statistics they would have found the data that shows the NT is 5x worse than any other state.
This is exactly what the voice will be. Belittling and silencing anyone who raises the real issues remote and aboriginal Australians are facing.
Instead of treating people differently because of race and entrenching racism, we need to ensure Aboriginal Australians can access the same opportunities given to all people within our beautiful nation. We are all Australian.
Transcript
As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, I propose there should not be a new body called the Voice. The Voice, if a referendum approves, would constitutionally enshrine differential treatment based on skin colour or on identification with a race. I’m completely opposed to introducing such a divisive, discriminatory concept that is racist.
At this stage there has been no detail telling voters how this Voice would be exercised and what obligations would need to be met, nor by whom. Locking the Voice into the Constitution would perpetuate parasitic white and black activists, consultants, academics, bureaucrats and politicians in the Aboriginal industry. It’s known that activists want the Voice to have significant influence on creation of laws. It’s not known how much consultation would be needed before the laws would be made. It’s not known how much it will cost to implement a run. It is clear this detail will not be in the referendum question put to voters.
I’ve travelled widely across remote Queensland and listened to many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, from Deebing Creek in the south, across Cape York and to Saibai Island in the Torres Strait. Few of the people I spoke with or listened to had even heard of the Voice.
Last week I met with a delegation of Aboriginal leaders strongly opposing the Voice because these real Aboriginal leaders say it’s racist. They fear the Voice will divide the community into two distinct groups: Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. When they say, ‘In reality we are all Australians,’ doesn’t proposing the Voice admit that the current 11 Aboriginals in federal parliament and the current National Indigenous Australians Agency are failing to represent Aboriginals?
I oppose perpetuating the Aboriginal industry suppressing Australians. Instead of treating people differently because of race and entrenching racism, we need to ensure Aboriginal Australians can access the same opportunities given to all people within our beautiful nation. We are all Australian. We are one nation.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/0ReFdwKIGSE/hqdefault.jpg360480Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-03-29 08:35:252023-03-29 08:35:31“The Voice” is pure racism
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I wish to indicate some concerns I have about this Bill which is both divisive and mostly unnecessary.
Our country is Australia. Our country consists of people from many nations, cultures and religions and from many racial groups providing a rich tapestry of positive contributions to our Australian nation.
What we do not want or need is legislation that picks out a particular cultural group and make laws aimed at that particular cultural group, driving a potentially divisive wedge between aboriginal Australians and other Australians.
It does not matter where a person comes from or what that person’s cultural or racial background is. “I am, you are, we are Australian”, are the words of a well- known theme song.
It’s true. We know that and we do not need legislation that is geared to a “them and us” mentality.
This Bill is intended to affirm into Australian domestic law the contents and intention of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.
This is a requirement necessary before the UN Declaration provisions become enforceable In Australian law.
Aboriginal Australians, as Australians, already have the same rights as any other Australian right now.
If there are gaps in services available to Indigenous Australians these gaps are due to poverty and remoteness, issues that affect many isolated people across Australia.
It is the failings of successive governments to adequately address health, housing, education and infrastructure that have led to many persons, aboriginal and otherwise, to fall into the poverty gap.
I call on the government to address these issues with priority before considering this Bill which is unnecessary and does nothing more than acknowledging what already is in place for all Australians.
This Bill perpetuates the victimhood of aboriginal people. It places blame on past cultural divides for the current lack of support for aboriginal minorities.
There are many aboriginal people in Australia who have accessed free education, worked hard and prospered as Australians in the broader community. They do not need this Bill.
There are many indigenous Australians who would be offended by the content of this Bill which virtually enshrines a “them and us” mentality.
The most divisive clause in this Bill is clause 7 which throws blame on colonisation for all the ills that prevent their right to develop in accord with their own needs and interests.
All this in the face of facts that include:
Determined indigenous Native Title claims now cover approximately half of the Australian land mass.
Aboriginal Australians represent approximately 3.5% of Australia’s population
All aboriginal children are entitled to scholarships to continue education through high school and beyond.
Assistance to aboriginal families has now become an enviable but divisive issue within small remote communities where other minorities in similar living conditions are not able to access assistance at the same level.
This is where the true problem lies.
Treating Australians differently on the basis of race is racist, scientifically false, legally questionable, morally condemnable and socially unjust. Simply wrong.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/WzigaYH9KxU/mqdefault.jpg180320Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-08-01 14:03:312022-08-01 14:26:23Treating Australians differently on the basis of race is racist: The UN declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People
Despite billions of dollars in funding and endless virtue signalling from inner-city lefties for Aboriginal and Torres-Strait Islanders, the state of healthcare services being provided by Governments on Mornington Island is close to third world.
You should get the same government services regardless of skin colour. If the government can’t take care of the basics, why should we allocate more funding?
Transcript
Senator Roberts : Thank you all for attending today. I’d like to ask some questions about Mornington Island, following my questions last year, and then perhaps some general questions. How did the federal government allow the Mornington Islanders’ situation—their health and wellbeing—to slip into one of a Third World country’s?
Ms Rishniw : Mornington Island—I think we provided some answers to questions on notice that we took last time. As you are aware, we work closely with ACCHOs and with the communities. With Mornington Island in particular we worked very closely with the Queensland health and hospital services there, and we are working closely with them to make sure that the services on the island are improved over time.
Senator Roberts : Can you tell me how you are working with the government?
Ms Rishniw : Mr Matthews?
Mr Matthews : There are a number of arrangements. It’s a very broad question when you get to health because you can’t differentiate the health and wellbeing from the broader people, social and environmental aspects around that.
Senator Roberts : I agree.
Mr Matthews : Probably the headline way I would respond to what is happening is through Closing the Gap, which is the framework for the government and states to work in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people around improving outcomes generally. That agreement was signed and struck around the middle of 2020. It’s been in place about 12 months. Its aim is to reset the relationship. It is looking at a broad range of factors to work with. Rather than doing things to people, it’s the concept of doing things with people and bringing them to the table and then looking at how the overall investment across the range of things, from education, employment and housing through to health and health outcomes, come together around that situation. That is probably the nutshell, the main context of the answer to your question about how that’s going to progress into the future from here. Health is a part, but it isn’t the only part in relation to that question.
Also, when you start to get into the provision of hospital services on Mornington Island, they are delivered by the Queensland government, as are a range of education services and those sorts of things, so it’s not a simple Commonwealth Department of Health question; it’s a very broad question. In that context, it’s about understanding the landscape through the lens of where Closing the Gap is resetting that and also some of the other mechanisms—for example, when Senator Dodson was asking about the development of the voice, that is geared towards empowering and encouraging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to be more in charge of their future, which will hopefully lead to improved outcomes over time.
Senator Roberts : There were some wonderful points there that I’d like to continue with. First of all I endorse and value your comments about needing an holistic approach. Health is just one part of it. Health is an outcome of the whole way of life, so I understand that. That was a very broad statement, but what are the current initiatives for working with the Queensland government and doing things directly? The Premier of Queensland and the Queensland health minister promised to visit the island last year or early this year. Have they done so?
Mr Matthews : I couldn’t comment on anything about the Queensland government or their ministers and their intentions around that. We don’t have visibility or necessarily monitor or track that, because that’s obviously a matter for the Queensland government.
Senator Roberts : More specifically, how do you work with the Queensland government?
Mr Matthews : From a health point of view—and my colleagues from the National Indigenous Australian Agency may be able to talk more broadly from a broader Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs perspective—from the Health perspective, there are two mechanisms. We have what are called partnership forums in each jurisdiction, including Queensland. They are regular meetings that usually happen a couple of times a year between Queensland health officials, Commonwealth health officials and officials from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health sector in Queensland. They’re largely geared towards trying to increase the alignment between the Commonwealth, the state and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander stakeholders, many of whom are delivering services there, to ensure that we are aligning our policy and delivery as far as possible. I’m not talking about Mornington Island specifically, but there are a range of things that will happen through that. Many of the programs we talked about, including things like our syphilis program, will deliver services into Queensland. Over the last two years we have also been looking to increase investment in our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health services, where we’ve increased investment in the Aboriginal community controlled health system by a bit over $160-odd million.
Senator Roberts : Specifically doing what?
Mr Matthews : The investment we’ve lifted into the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health service is really around increasing the primary resourcing that goes to primary health care delivered by Aboriginal and community controlled health services in communities. That is different from Mornington Island, which doesn’t have one; it does have some servicing through the Mount Isa service into the community, but a lot of services are delivered by the Queensland government there. What we’re looking to do is increase the resourcing for primary healthcare services delivered by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations because they know their clients well and will put in place a stronger framework around comprehensive primary health care. That is something we’ve been doing across the country, not just in Queensland, and will continue to do over—
Senator Roberts : Is that funding for nurses or doctors or—
Mr Matthews : It’s for both really. It funds the resourcing of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health clinic and the health clinic will use that for a range of things—it could be used for an Aboriginal health worker, for a doctor, a nurse or other things it may do from a comprehensive healthcare point of view. It is really about the patient coming in and having their needs understood and looking at their broader circumstance and spending an increased amount of time. It’s a little different from a normal visit to a GP. We will bring them in, spend more time with them, look at their other issues and try and provide some of those wraparound supports. That’s how comprehensive primary healthcare works within an Aboriginal community controlled health setting. One of the things we’re doing is increasing our investment in that over time and working with the sector in particular to expand that and look to improve how they service over time as well, which is their intention.
Senator Roberts : How would you characterise not just the quality of the relationship but the actions and behaviours that come from the relationship? Are you a money provider? Are you a resource provider? Are you someone looking over their shoulder in a helpful way that identifies shortfalls in the Queensland government’s approach? Are you advisers to them? How would you describe it?
Mr Matthews : Are you referring to the Queensland government, or to the Aboriginal health services?
Senator Roberts : The Aboriginal health services, with the Queensland government—not just Mornington.
Mr Matthews : I hope the Aboriginal health services wouldn’t characterise us as looking over their shoulder.
Senator Roberts : I mean in the sense that you are working with them.
Mr Matthews : Our intention is very clearly to ensure that we have a partnership approach with Aboriginal health services, which is one of the priority reform areas in the Closing the Gap agreement as well.
Ms Rishniw : Senator, we take the Closing the Gap agreement very seriously. It talks about a partnership with Aboriginal people and Aboriginal services. The money that Mr Matthews outlined goes directly to service delivery by community controlled health organisations. We provide funding—
Senator Roberts : It doesn’t go through the state government?
Ms Rishniw : No, it doesn’t. It goes directly to the sector. It’s deliberately flexible to allow them to address the particular issues around health and providing holistic health services to their community. We work very closely with the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, and all of the services, to make sure that what we are achieving is a collective set of outcomes that everyone has agreed to around improving health and wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Senator Roberts : It was wonderful to hear Mr Matthews talking about a holistic approach—not just health but health as an outcome of lifestyle. What about personal accountability? Two or three people in my office and I visited all the Cape York communities. Although the communities are quite different in their needs and their backgrounds, they have some commonalities. Mr Matthews mentioned Closing the Gap. I put it to all the communities that Closing the Gap perpetuates the gap, and they resoundingly said yes. First of all, the underlying intent is to focus on the gap which perpetuates the gap. But putting that aside, there is also what some people call the ‘Aboriginal industry’ and it consist of whites as well as Aboriginals, who are consultants and lawyers et cetera that feed off this and they perpetuate the gap, because without the gap there is no Aboriginal industry. Any comments on that?
Ms Rishniw : I don’t want to speak for Mr Matthews, but our job is to make sure that we can provide comprehensive health care for all Australians. The government invests significantly in the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as First Nations peoples because of the disparity in health outcomes to date, and that is what the closing the gap agreement is about. We have worked tirelessly. The community-controlled health sector has been a major part of the infrastructure of delivering health outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people for over 50 years now and to suggest in any way that that is not a necessary and evidence based investment—
Senator Roberts : I wasn’t suggesting that—
Ms Rishniw : I just wanted to clarify—because asking Mr Matthews for a comment on that. It is evidence based. It is clear. It is a government commitment.
Senator Roberts : You would agree, I would hope, that personal accountability has a lot to do with managing people’s health?
Ms Rishniw : Everyone, I think, across the country wants the best health care and the best for their family and themselves. Personal accountability is one element. We recognise social determinants of health and a range of historical factors as well.
Senator Roberts : So you’re agreeing with me that personal accountability is important?
Ms Rishniw : I think I said it was one of the factors.
Senator Roberts : It is one of the factors so it has a part to play. What we’ve done in this country, under both Labor and Liberal since 1972—people in the communities have told me we have created a sense of victimhood, not beggars but of victimhood, and that’s the opposite of accountability. What I’m trying to do is to get an understanding of the environment in which you work, because if that accountability is not there—these people in the communities are wonderful. There are a diverse range of them, as you know. But they seem to be held back by the ‘Aboriginal industry,’ maybe not deliberately, maybe subconsciously, but that is what’s happening, and lot of it has been caused by state and federal governments, particularly since 1972.
Mr Matthews : We are probably limited to speak from the health perspective. It is where our responsibility is. Just to repeat Ms Rishniw, it would not right be to characterise the community controlled health sector, that is delivered and run by Aboriginal people for Aboriginal people, in a negative connotation around an ‘Aboriginal industry.’ We fund them because of your point around getting good services delivered by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We are talking about the provision of health services. There is clear evidence that it is effective in delivering it because it comes from an empowering place of empowering people to do it—
Senator Roberts : That is what I was after.
Mr Matthews : That is why we are growing the sector strongly, investing in it and trying to work very closely with the sector on the way through. I think if you were listening to Dr de Toca’s evidence around our response to COVID we’ve also centred that 100 per cent with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and experts for that very reason.
Senator Roberts : What I’m interpreting—it is very welcome if I am interpreting it correctly—is that you’re giving more responsibility to the communities for their health and managing that health?
Mr Matthews : This is always very difficult to verbal, but I would imagine from our colleagues in the community controlled health sector that they would say they are services that are—that their membership is the community and their boards are elected from their community, so they would say they are in and of the community. They would express their view very strongly around that in terms of providing services to their own people.
Senator Roberts : That is welcome news. Is there a plan within your organisation that is part of an overall plan within the government’s—I don’t know what’s Ken Wyatt’s department name title is. The department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander or the—
Mr Matthews : The National Indigenous Australians Agency.
Senator Roberts : Is there a coordinated plan with the National Indigenous Australians Agency?
Mr Matthews : This is something that’s easily googled. If you google ‘national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health plan’, you’ll find the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan that was released on 15 December last year, which is now a new 10-year national plan around Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health, worked up very extensively by, and predominantly led by, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health experts in the sector around the development of that plan and refreshed to be consistent with Closing the Gap and many of the things we’ve learnt over the last few years. As I said, it was released in the middle of December.
It has at its very heart the concept of how the broader social determinants, linked with health, bring in a dimension around the cultural determinants of health, of how culture plays out for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and impacts on their health and how health needs to respond to that landscape. So that’s been recently refreshed. If you are looking at where the national plan is, that is probably the prime and most important one to have a look at. I’d encourage you to do that. We can provide the link on notice, if you like, just to refresh. If not, that’s okay. That would be well worth having a look at. I also note that it’s endorsed by the majority of the states and territories. It forms a plan now that is developed in and of through the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander sector, agreed by the Commonwealth government and endorsed by the majority of the states and territories.
Senator Roberts : Thank you. That’s welcome news, too, because there are a lot of outstanding people with a lot of potential in those communities who are somehow stymied by an invisible hand. It’s varying from, say, the Lockhart River, where they are really going ahead, to other parts of the country.
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, just quickly, we are very close to time, and I have one question that I would like to ask the officers before we finish up.
Senator Roberts : Last question, then, Chair. Thank you for that notice. Has there been a drop in the death rate from suicides in the last year? What’s the overall trend in suicide, because it’s quite alarming?
Ms Rishniw : I might go to my colleague online, Mr Roddam, who can talk about speak suicide data and prevention activities.
Mr Roddam : Overall, in 2020, there was a 5.4 per cent reduction in suicide for the whole population. Unfortunately, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, suicide remained the fifth leading cause of death that year, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people continue to die by suicide at more than twice the rate of non-Indigenous people—27.9 per 100,000 population compared with 11.8 per 1,000 population.
Senator Roberts : Can you tell me the overall trend? Relative to the rest of Australia, it’s high. Thank you for that. What’s the overall trend? Is it increasing, decreasing, flat—
Mr Roddam : It did increase slightly in 2020. I’m just trying to get the figures for 2020 compared with 2019. I know that it was a little higher, while the whole-of-population rate fell.
Ms Rishniw : Senator, given the time, we can take that on notice and give you the data around the trends. But it also goes to why we are investing heavily in suicide prevention and mental activities across Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We have a 24/7 crisis line that’s about to be launched—and we’ll start services from 24 February—and a range of other activities that Senator Dodson well knows we’ve been undertaking around suicide prevention.
Senator Roberts : And just like physical health, mental health is an outcome of cultural and social factors. I think those were Mr Matthews’ words.
Ms Rishniw : There are a range of social determinants that impact on an individual’s health across the board.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/csXTj8VTf9E/0.jpg360480Harriet Blackhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngHarriet Black2022-03-04 11:21:232022-03-04 11:21:36Billions spent on the Aboriginal industry for third world healthcare
The Greens profit from division and discrimination. You cannot label someone an oppressor without making a victim, so it is not in their interest to actually save victims.
Transcript
I want to refer to speeches that you gave yesterday and also Senator Thorpe. In your speech, you mentioned the term far-right extremist or extremist, every third or fourth line that enshrines separation. Five times in just 18 lines. Senator Thorpe used the term white privilege 11 times on average every fourth line, driving hate and conflict.
Now in private talk with Senator Thorpe, and not meant to be kept private but personal talk, she recognises to me that the Aboriginal Industry is doing enormous damage, but she doesn’t say that in public. What we’ve got is gutless, woke bureaucrats shovelling money continually to keep the gap open so that the people in the Aboriginal Industry, both black and white, can make money off it.
Care requires data and facts, not emotive slogans and labels. Care requires understanding. Senator Thorpe talks about climate and Aboriginals, the UN and Aboriginal, property rights and Aboriginals. They are not the same. These very things are hurting the Aboriginals, but not as much as the resort to labelled. Keeping people locked in victimhood makes them dependent so that The Greens can control them.
I’ve never heard anyone condemn you for your race, your gender, your background, only for your incitement to division and hatred. You have the privilege of being in the Senate and representing Australians. But your rhetoric is dividing on basis of race. Yet every Australian recognises we all have red blood, regardless of our skin colour. We all have a human spirit that we share with every human regardless of ethnicity, regardless of background, regardless of prejudices. And it’s about time that people in this Parliament, especially in The Greens, started to recognise that we should be united, we are one people.
Mayor Yanna has identified multiple problems with satisfying the needs of Mornington Islanders. After the closure of the canteen which served safe light beer, many of the people addicted to alcohol turned to poisonous home brew which destroyed their kidneys and is killing many.
It’s just another example of how despite billions of dollars in funding, the complaints of inner city activists are not helping indigenous people in their communities at all.
Transcript
Senator Roberts.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you Chair, and thank you for being here today. Six months or so ago in response to one of my constituents on Mornington Island. One of my office staff visited the island and he was shocked with the outright squalid conditions that the Islanders are forced to endure, absolutely through no fault of their own. We’re planning for me to visit with all the aboriginals in the coming dry season, right across the whole of the Cape, including Mornington Island. It’s recently been the subject of interest in the Queensland media due to the poverty and poor health the islanders living there. And I understand the Queensland Premier and the Queensland Health Minister have both said they will visit the island to see the conditions for themselves, so they’re obviously aware that it’s shocking. So my first question is, with the dwindling population of less than 1200 residents in Mornington Island why is the medical centre only manned by nurses with no resident doctor, to look after the needs of the residents when 50% of the population are reportedly having chronic diseases?
So well, it’s a very broad question.
[Malcolm Roberts] It is, yeah.
But I think, so in terms of provision of good primary health care for that then we don’t specifically mandate the requirements for each particular health centre that has to have X, Y, and Z. That tends to be the health clinics will tend to work out what they’ll need for that, most we’ll have arrangements where there is a nurse led post, which will deal with all of emergencies, and then that’s usually where they’ll connect up, and that is for a lot of the day-to-day provision of, for basic primary health care, for more chronic needs then most of the clinics have arrangements with, either they’ll have GPs visiting from time to time or they’ll connect people up on, in through other services in mainland to basically get that provision of GP service. So it depends, it varies a little bit from service to service, how that will be done. Mornington Island, I think we would need to go and check so I’m not actually sure whether that’s a community control clinic, it might actually be a Queensland Government clinic as well, possibly for that so we would need to go and find a bit more detail specifically around that but it does vary from community to community about how the clinics provide health care and how they will access into there for the GP services. But, nurse led processes are not uncommon in remote communities because they are a way of delivering good frontline healthcare and then connecting up with GP care…
[Malcolm Roberts] Yeah, I accept and understand that a lot of the nurses are wonderful, but why are so many residents of the island needing dialysis off island, and how many are treated this way? Now you probably have to give me that on notice.
We would need to, in terms of specific numbers about how many would be needed, the dialysis cohort on time I would absolutely have to go and check with that. And that dialysis is generally a state and territory provision through hospital and outreach services they’ve structured that, there are in various places in remote, you know dialysis chairs, and we did have some visiting services around that to return people in there, but obviously a lot of the people with dialysis can have other complex issues. So sort of being able to provide the dialysis in a setting that has that wider medical facilities is which is why quite often went out, why quite often dialysis occurs in hospital settings, and those sort of places. Although obviously there are some, there is a general movement in some areas to try and get dialysis back into closer to community, and that’s why we have things like Purple House and providers, particularly in the territory and some of the remote areas who will then provide dialysis closer to home.
Sorry Senator, we’ll probably have to take a lot of the detailed questions around Mornington Island specifically on notice, but certainly Mornington Island has a hospital and a healthcare centre run out of the hospital, that’s provided by Queensland Government, its staffing and its adequacy we’d need to talk to Queensland about as well.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you, so taking on from Mr Matthew’s point, it is more complex than just simple dialysis. Why is type two diabetes, for example, so common in the residents even including teenagers, and how many are treated for this? So you’d have to do that on notice.
We’d need to take that on notice.
[Malcolm Roberts] So with the chronic shortages of affordable fruit and vegetables and widespread malnutrition, have something to do with it?
I couldn’t comment without knowing the details Senator, but sadly chronic conditions and the incidents of chronic disease is high in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities…
[Malcolm Roberts] And even malnutrition?
Particularly, in remote communities.
[Malcolm Roberts] For such a small population, why is the death rate of residents so high? And how many deaths occurred last year, and why is the suicide rate in particular so high? Even extending to child suicides. And how many in the last year children and adults suicided?
Again, we would need to take the specific data, but I mean they’re obviously very multifaceted issues as well, that are not, you know there’s a range of factors across all of those that would lead to them that are not specific to a health intervention from a health clinic or something like that. There are any number of reasons what that would lead to those, outcomes is very complex.
[Malcolm Roberts] Yeah I accept that it’s complex, and we need to dig into the issue, and that’s what my questions are trying to do. Could the lack of quality accommodation be a cause when currently up to 11 people reportedly pack into small two bedroom houses, many people to the cramped rooms, or even are forced to sleep rough with no roof or protection from the tropical weather? So it’s not just health issue, it’s not just a suicide issue, it’s also a housing issue. So is the confusion about the native title status of the island affecting the health of that residence?
I don’t think we could speculate on that, I think Senator that would, yeah I don’t think we can speculate on that at all.
[Malcolm Roberts] ‘Cause we raised questions about native territory yesterday and it’s actually preventing, well we won’t go into that here. Is home brew a cause of the widespread kidney failure in the community?
We couldn’t comment without further information from Mornington Island.
[Malcolm Roberts] Perhaps I’ll ask several questions together and you can jump in if you can answer any, and I’m not criticising you for not being able, I accept the trustworthiness.
And a lot of these questions we may not necessarily be able to answer, that would be questions for the community broadly, as opposed to perhaps what, we will do what we can to answer them, but some of them it may not actually be appropriate for us to weigh the answer, or speak on behalf of the community…
[Malcolm Roberts] Perhaps you could let me know, yeah I accept that. Has the closure of the island canteen been an indirect cause of the overuse of poisonous home brew within the community? Would reopening of the canteen for managed and limited sales of low alcohol, mainstream alcohol be better than driving people addicted to alcohol to drive dangerous home brew? Would it be beneficial for the government to subsidise the costs of fresh fruit and vegetables for the community? Could the federal government fund and audit the commence but never completed market garden promised to the community by the government to assist the community to be self-sufficient in growing crops to feed themselves? Could the use of the once a week barge service be subsidised to lower the cost of bringing fresh fruit and vegetables, fresh milk and other healthy foodstuffs to the shops? There’s one grocery store there for the residents. But this is a really interesting question and again, I don’t expect an answer other than on notice. Why is there no fishing industry in a region rich with marine resources? There were three large tinnies that my staffer saw abandoned on the dump, because they needed simple welding repairs. Why is there no mechanical service on the island to keep machines, vehicles, and boats going? And this is the reason why many repairable vehicles and white goods stand abandoned across the island and at the dump. Why was the cattle herd that existed for many years in the island destroyed?
Senator Roberts, I understand the validity of your questions, but I’m not sure if the Department of Health is the right agency to be asking them to.
[Malcolm Roberts] I think we’re looking at a multi-faceted, multi-layered health issue and we need to get to the core of it. These communities have been abandoned in many senses for a long time.
[McCarthy] Environmental Health that’s what your…
[Malcolm Roberts] Well, many yeah. Living environment, perhaps if I could. Well, there’s another one here Chair, could the creation of real jobs at the residents perhaps involve the hundreds of wild horses that roam freely on the island? Could it assist to alleviate the high mental health depression problems of the community or the fishing industry, the tourism? And here’s the really important question I’m leading to, why are the many programmes currently on the island to assist youth and the aged on the island missing? They’re just not visible on the island. So I suggest that a real audit of services not a paper audit, but a real audit be provided to the island, and that’s desperately needed. Where’s the federal money going?
So Senator, we’re gonna take, we’re gonna have to take the majority of the health-related questions on notice, and specifically drill down into the funding that goes to Mornington Island, what it’s used for, how it responds to particular health issues. Obviously, there’s a range of other portfolios. And the state government that’s involved in funding there as well, and questions around industry development and jobs obviously…
[Malcolm Roberts] And the problem is a difficult one for you because it’s not, I’m trying to paint a picture that is not as simple, give them a jab or give them something else. It’s a really serious issue.
We understand Senator.
[Malcolm Roberts] As Senator McCarthy said.
Senator if I could just, I’ll give you some information on the market garden issue of Mornington Island. There is an existing market garden initiative on Mornington Island, which is delivered as an activity under the CDP. And we are aware that, and we’ve been talking with the Mornington Shire Council and they’re interested in establishing a larger commercial market garden for the community. And there, my understanding is they’re trying to negotiate now with traditional owners to gain the use of a parcel of land, which is subject to no title to develop a larger scale commercial garden. So, there is some movement in terms of market gardens there.
[Malcolm Roberts] Good.
It’s interesting you say that, we’re quite happy to take the health questions, I think we may need to, as I’m sure the secretary, but you know we’ll need to work and a lot of those questions really get to the broader social determinants which are well beyond the health departments, so we might need to work out where those are best addressed, because otherwise we will not be able to answer a lot of the questions broadly about, particularly employment, housing, fishing industries.
Perhaps some of your questions Senator directed more generally rather than to the Health Department with respect to. I understand…
As Senator McCarthy said…
No, I’m not disagreeing with you, but some of the questions that you’ve asked while having that broader, as Senator McCarthy said, environmental health perspective, but some of them clearly go to some of the other indigenous programmes rather than the more health specific ones that operate in that community, and it might be that you can get more definitive answers to your questions by directing them in a different way.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you for that advice, I’ll take heed of it. I’m also concerned though that, the people on the ground in these communities are not getting the money that’s being poured their way, and people in the Aboriginal industry seem to be taking it along the way. And that goes to every federal government, I’m not saying it applies to every federal government initiative, but it goes to a lot of the federal government pathways for money, and the people who really need it are not getting it.
I think that actually goes to the point that I was making with respect to some of the broad programmes that are operated and how they might be perhaps coordinated, is that sort of gets to what you’re talking about.
[Malcolm Roberts] And Senator Colbeck perhaps I could ask you, the paternalistic and patronising approach, I’m not accusing you of this, of supposedly helping these communities over many, many years is probably, well I’m sure it’s hurting them, having visited a lot of the communities, and maybe that’s something, a change in direction, because we can’t keep going like this.
Senator I think from a government perspective, what we would like to see is programmes that are effective on the ground. A lot of the conversation, I think today has been quite constructive in actually seeming to achieve that, getting results. So again, my point about where your questions get directed, then going to interrogating the way that some of those programmes work, so that, and the term continuous improvement has been used a few times here today, and certainly my aspiration and clearly yours, and others sitting around the table would be that we continue to improve the circumstances of people living in communities and how they are engaged as a part of that process is, as you quite rightly pointed out very important, rather than necessarily being imposed.
[Malcolm Roberts] Can I just make one final comment in response?
[McCarthy] Is it a comment or is it a question Senator Roberts?
[Malcolm Roberts] It is a comment to Senator Colbeck.
This is more a forum for asking questions of ministers than making comments to them.
[Malcolm Roberts] Well I’ll frame it as a question. Senator Colbeck…
[McCarthy] Fine.
[Malcolm Roberts] I’m familiar with continuous improvement versus step change, and what I’m suggesting here is continuous improvement to the same old process is not going work, we need a step change, wouldn’t you agree?
Senator I was not looking. Yeah look, I won’t disagree with you, I think clearly the circumstances and conditions need to be improved. It is quite a complex area as I think has been demonstrated by your questions and by your statements. And that would align with I think, all our aspirations.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you Chair.
Thank you very much Senator Roberts. We are due to adjourn at 3. Senator Dodson how much longer do you have to go?
Oh look I’m not going to punish people any further today.
You’re happy to…
I’ll wait until health comes up tomorrow or next week.
[Matthews] And we will have all the answers on the Kimberly, Senator Dodson, ready for you.
[Dodson] Don’t worry, they’ll come.
Wonderful.
And just to finish up, probably with just the one thing, just to further to Senator Roberts just around one thing that we do do in the health space I think, perhaps not. I don’t think it’s quite as relevant necessarily for Mornington Island as such, but obviously through the work we do to support comprehensive primary health care, driven by Aboriginal and Torres Strait community controlled organisations, that is effectively the reason why that is not growing, obviously grown from Aboriginal and Torres Strait people wanting to kind of that sense of self-determination and growing their health services, for that is about putting them in charge of health and getting improved outcomes through that, and so we are at the moment going through a process to strengthen, and work very collaboratively with the sector to strengthen that over the time, we have put funding into that sector to strengthen it. Recently, we injected about $90 million over three years into that, over recent times we put a further 36 million into that recently to expand services. There’s a new clinic in, that we’ve set up through in Puntukurnu, in Newman, in WA. So we have been trying to, and we will continue to keep working away with that sector in line with the new closing the gap agreement, because of that exact point you’re talking about there in terms of strengthening community and strengthening, you know, backing the local communities in to provide services for local communities.
And to acknowledge that I’ve seen communities in the Territory and in Queensland, who are proudly talking about some of the measures that they’re taking in regard to preventative health care through food and nutrition. So I acknowledge that.
So we are working very closely with the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation and their affiliates on those matters, thank you.
With 40% of Australian land mass currently under a successful native title claim, you can see how estimates of up to 80% of Australia being claimed under native title by 2050 are very possible. There are currently 177 native title claims awaiting determination right now.
Transcript
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you for attending today. My questions are to do with native title projections.
Thank you.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. What are the current costs of administrating administering Australian native title claims each year, please?
Kathleen Denley, assistant secretary of the native title unit. So the approximate cost per year is 140 million. I don’t have the exact breakdown, but I can get it for you. The majority of that money goes to the national indigenous Australians agency who pay for native title representative bodies. There’s also money that then goes to, for example the Federal Court, the National Native Title Tribunal. There’s some administered funding that goes to native title respondents funding schemes. There’s also an anthropologist scheme which the department administers for some funding for native title anthropologists and some money that departments such as NIAA and AGD expend.
[Malcolm Roberts] It’s a massive undertaking. Could, could we get the breakdown on notice please?
Certainly
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. Secondly, how many claims have been finalised to date?
Senator just to clarify, do you mean native title claims as distinct from state compensation claims?
[Malcolm Roberts] Yes.
I’ll have to find the exact figure for you Senator. According to the data held by the NNTT as of the 3rd of May, there are 524 determinations and 177 active claimant applications
And of those determinations Senator 416 are consent determinations and 53 were litigated determinations.
[Malcolm Roberts] How many 53 did you say?
Result of litigated determination.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. What human resources are being used to assist progressive progressing native title claims.
Could you
[Malcolm Roberts] How many people in the department are working on that?
Oh, so the native title unit in the attorney General’s department? So I think we have approximately 14 staff. However, the unit is also working on things other than native titles, such as the closing, the gap measures in conjunction with the national indigenous Australian agency
[Malcolm Roberts] And how many people would be employed full-time equivalent on, on government funding outside the department?
Senator, Just before we go onto outside of the department we also, our legal assistance area would also process claims under a number of schemes. I don’t have those details. We’ll take them on notice and I’ll give you an estimate if you
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. Yep. How many claims are currently in the system yet to be finalised? Is that a 177 active?
That’s right. That’s of native title determinations. There are also native title compensation claims that are currently before the courts.
[Malcolm Roberts] How many of them?
I think there’s approximately 15, 14 or 15.
[Malcolm Roberts] When is it considered that the remainder of unfinalised claims will be finalised?
I’d have to take that question on notice. I think there’s a range of cases that are still before the courts for a variety of different reasons. I’d, I’d have to take the question on notice to see if there was a projection by the federal court.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. What proportion of the Australian landmass is currently under finalised native title?
So 40.5% are covered by a determination and 6.3% are covered by a determination that there is no native title or that native title has been extinguished.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, thank you. There have been some assessments made by persons including Warren Mundine and Josephine Cashman. Who’s an indigenous lawyer and activist predicting that that finalised native title claims will cover 70 to 80% of the Australian land mass by the 2050s. Is this estimate reasonably correct? If finalise claims as successful?
I’m not sure I could accurately comment on that particular percentage. What I could say is in terms of the indigenous land estate once Al Rowe or Aboriginal land rights act findings are also taken into account. The overall indigenous land estate is larger. Of course it’s, it’s uncertain what the percentage would be that it would be based on individual circumstances of cases that are before the federal court. But we would, I think, expect that the overall percentage would increase, but I couldn’t comment on that exact percentage.
[Malcolm Roberts] Senator, if I can add to that, of course when the court makes a determination of native title it might be exclusive native title. What might be non-exclusive native title. So we could have land that’s subject to native title but that doesn’t mean that it’s subject to exclusive native title. If you understand where I’m going with that.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. Yep. So it will be, you don’t know whether it’ll be a lot more than the current 46 and a half percent
We would expect it to increase
[Malcolm Roberts] Increase. But you don’t know how much. I’m not not complaining about that. I’m just, just trying to pin it down broadly. So next question, Aboriginal people of Australia currently represent around 3.3% of Australia’s population. Yet native title does not allow individual ownership of land under native title claim, as I understand it. This will effectively lock up a large proportion of Australian land that is no longer available as private freehold property to any individual Australian to purchase. Was this an intended consequence of the introduction of native title to lock up the land?
So the purpose of the native title is to recognise pre-existing interest in land and the court will make that determination based on evidence before it. So if there has been pre-existing laws and customs as the secretary outlined before, it will be it will depend on the individual circumstances as to the extent of those rights. In some instances they may be exclusive but in some instances it may be more limited such as a right to hunt and gather. It could be a right to continue a particular cultural practise. So it will change in every circumstances to the extent of those rights.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, thank you. Is it true that Aboriginal people are not able to build or buy and own their home on land under native title? Because that’s what I’ve been told by people in communities.
So native title isn’t free hold title although exclusive native title in some circumstances has been considered similar by the nature of the rights that are given. However, as I mentioned, it really does depend on the finding of those individual rights.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay.
The native title act also contains the regime where the native title holding groups can themselves decide whether they wish to permit activities, to take place on land that is subject to native title. So it would be open to a native title group to in fact say that if they wish to that they would allow individual members of that group to, to build housing on that land and to have, for example, 99 year type leasehold arrangement. But that’s a matter for the group themselves as to whether they wish to do that or not.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. It is, it’s much more complex than people think then. Is it true that land under native title cannot be used as security for a loan to assist an Aboriginal person? Or is that following on from what you just said?
So, because if someone was to default on a loan, for example native title land, can’t then be repossessed by a financer financier. So that that’s not to say that financial institutions aren’t capable of devising financial ways of actually lending to, to native title groups based upon assets and revenue streams that a native title holding group might have. I mean, a native title holding group might have revenue streams, if they’ve agreed to mining, for example on the land and things like that. So it, again, it’s more complex than it might seem.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay. Thank you. Two more questions. What is the relationship between the United nations and the native title act given the extensive reference to the UN in the acts preamble?
Are you referring to a particular treaty or?
[Malcolm Roberts] No, just a, just a broad understanding of the relationship between the UN and the native title act.
I guess broadly the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous people. I, I’m not sure of the particular reference
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay.
The declaration on the rights of indigenous people postdates the, the native native title act that was passed before that, that declaration. So like my, my colleague, Ms. Stanley, I’m not sure about the references to the UN in the preamble. The native title act is an act passed by this parliament. So it’s, it’s a piece of domestic legislation in that sense.
[Malcolm Roberts] So who would be the best person or agency to do find out more on that?
Look, we, we can take on, on notice.
[Malcolm Roberts] No, could we come and see you? No need to take it on notice.
You actually want a meeting?
[Malcolm Roberts] Yeah. Just a briefing on it. Yeah. Better understanding. Yeah. Thank you. Oh, we intend to, we have been. Has native title improved the living circumstances of the majority of Aboriginal persons in Australia.
Are you asking me for a personal opinion? I’m not sure I can give that sense.
[Malcolm Roberts] That’s probably not
With all due respect to the official, that’s exactly right.
[Malcolm Roberts] That’s fine.
But a briefing will be facilitated for you Senator Robert.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you very much.
Thank you very much Senator Robert.
Thank you.
If I could just interject for a minute to going back to the previous witness I appreciate the answers being direct and concise. It’s very helpful.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/xFMMz5oxaPw/hqdefault.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-05-31 18:15:002021-05-31 13:37:31Over 40% of Australian Land Mass under native title
Yesterday I spoke on an amendment to the Native Title legislation. While I support anything that removes complexities, the government still hasn’t promised to give farmers restoration or compensation of their property rights.
Make no mistake, farmers property rights have been stolen by governments to comply with international agreements like the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement. They must have restoration or compensation.
