APY LANDS

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (15:22): I rise today to speak about housing on the APY lands. I will refer to an article in The Australian of 13 April and a story presented on ABC News on 21 April. The Australian of 13 April published an article entitled 'Billions to go to remote Aboriginal areas' which stated:

Twenty-six of the nation's largest remote Aboriginal communities will be targeted to receive billions of dollars in new federal funding as part of the Rudd Government's push to close the gap between blacks and whites.

Nobody could argue with that. I, for one, am absolutely passionate about advancing the cause of Aboriginal affairs and raising awareness about the plight of Aboriginal communities in this state.

The federal indigenous affairs minister, Jenny Macklin, told The Australian that the 26 communities had been selected for intensive help because of their potential to be turned into hubs of 'economic development'. She said:

We want to intensely focus on 26 communities to really deal with the massive overcrowding that exists...with the very poor municipal services (and) the fact that we don't have decent land tenure arrangements that can enable economic development and employment.

At the end of the article, Ms Macklin said that all communities would be chosen on their potential to flourish, but she conceded that would be harder in South Australia. She said:

The need is so intense in the APY (Anangu Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara) lands we've just got to get in there and do it. But even there we want to get at least some internal economic development happening. All of this is about saying to people (that) there's an expectation. It's not going to happen tomorrow but these reforms have to be put in place to bring about the sort of changes that are necessary.

On 21 April, there was an article on the ABC News website where the federal indigenous affairs minister was quoted as saying that $300 million over 10 years would be given to Amata and Mimili—two communities on the APY lands.

My recollection is that there are about 600 men, women and children in those two communities. That is $500,000 per person in those communities. Don't anybody in this place for a moment think that I do not think those two communities are deserving of some consideration and significant funding and changes to the way they operate, because they do need some significant help.

I was very concerned when I phoned the APY executive and asked whether they knew anything about this and they said no, that they did not and that it was news to them. So, there had been no consultation on it. In fact, in response to the article in The Australian, the APY executive wrote to the Editor of The Australian in a response dated 16 April as follows:

Dear Sir

Re: 'Billions to go to remote Aboriginal areas'—23 March 2009

I refer to the above article. The final paragraph quoted Minister Macklin as saying that 'the need is so intense in the APY Lands we've just got to get in there and do it'. The minister does not appear to know that: Anangu (Aboriginal people on the APY Lands) have been pressing government for 100 new houses for health reasons for four years; signed a contract in October 2007 giving management of the entire 400 property housing estate to the state government; resolved in a general meeting in August 2008 to sign leases for 50 years over land for new houses and existing houses to be upgraded; submitted a draft MOU for management of the public housing to the state in November 2008, which has not been signed by the government parties; and, signed leases for three police stations and related housing in October 2008.

There is nothing standing in your way, minister.

Anangu even offered to sign leases over housing not related to the much publicised $25 million offer so that this would be part of the public housing stock. APY also resolved to lease service yards and accommodation to the state to be made available to service delivery contractors in accordance with national competition principles to encourage competition and to improve those services and give better value for money.

The minister gives no credit for Anangu over the past four years for opening up the APY Lands to resources exploration; establishing Anangu pastoral businesses; and, for a privately funded feral camel control game meat facility to create income and jobs for Anangu.

No-one reading your article would know that Anangu have retained Mal Brough, the former federal minister for indigenous affairs, as an advisor to drive change and entered into a partnership to develop the lands with Coffey International Development. Nor would readers know that our appeals to minister Macklin for implementation of welfare reform have gone unanswered.

Anangu directors of the principal service provider (placed in special administration on 16 February 2009) were illegally overthrown when they resolved to dismiss the current management and called for a financial report in October 2007.

The letter continues:

APY has proposed to the government that the $15 million services budget be managed by Coffey as a service implementation provider, to put in place the appropriate design and contracting arrangements to ensure delivery of publicly funded services, with far better value that the paltry $0.33 cents in the dollar delivered to the lands to date.

The letter continues on, but I will just read the end of it:

If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact the writer.

The government needs to talk to people about the APY lands.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Morphett, your time has expired, and I hope you will accept that the Hansard record will reflect the document rather than any variations you might have made from it. I think it is unreasonable to expect Hansard to do anything else.