APY LANDS

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (14:35): Does the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation agree with the federal government's decision to appoint AP Services as the provider of municipal services on the APY lands? In a letter dated 29 June 2009 to the acting state management of the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, the Chairperson of the APY Lands Executive, Mr Bernard Singer, stated in relation to AP Services:

The NGO is in Special Administration, having previously wasted $1.3 million of taxpayers dollars on lawyers and consultants fees which had nothing to do with the service delivery but instead were directed to the subversion of the elected government of the APY Lands and the introduction of an alternative political structure.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for Early Childhood Development, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister Assisting the Premier in Cabinet Business and Public Sector Management) (14:35): I have a bit of free advice for the shadow minister for Aboriginal affairs, and that is: do not buy into factional disputes on the APY lands. It is the best advice I can give him, and the question proceeds from that fundamental difficulty. AP Services is controlled by one faction of the AP lands; the APY Executive is controlled by another. There is a struggle over who will control the resources. I simply will not participate in that nonsense.

The Hon. P.F. Conlon: it sounds a bit familiar, actually.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: That's right. The truth is that I have been studiously trying to avoid being dragged into the very issues which the honourable member seeks to agitate and which are being played out regularly through a cascade of media releases which, to anybody who is prepared to listen, get increasingly hysterical from one day to the next. At their essence, they have as their objective a struggle for who controls resources. I would have thought the struggle should be about who can provide a better future for the children in the APY lands rather than who can get their hands on the money and get the power and influence they seek to enjoy.

The reality in relation to AP Municipal Services is that, unfortunately, it is one of the only shows in town, so the federal government made a very pragmatic decision to work through it on an interim basis for the provision of municipal services. It is not my decision but, as I understand it, the federal government has taken the view that, on an interim basis, while the AP Services is under administration (so it is not presently being managed by the people who managed it when it got into difficulties) it is in a shape ready and appropriate to deliver municipal services in the communities.

The advantage with that is that it is done on a regional basis. Members would be aware that the government has announced a move towards a regional council. It is our intention to press ahead with a regional council in relation to the AP lands. In my view, that would be the appropriate vehicle in the future for the delivery of municipal services, but in the short term there are some interim arrangements that need to be put in place.

Just to demonstrate the sort of nonsense that is going on in the APY lands at the moment, AP Services, albeit under administration, is the provider of significant services on the APY lands. The Chief Executive Officer of AP Services has been denied a permit by the present leadership in the AP lands, so we have the spectre of the chief executive officer of a service organisation being denied a permit to carry out what presumably the Chief Executive Officer should be charged to do, that is, to go to the very place where she is to deliver those services. It is this sort of nonsense that we are seeking to intervene to stop. We will not be deflected from our objectives in that regard, and we would be greatly assisted by a bipartisan approach.