ABORIGINAL LANDS PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE (PRESIDING MEMBER) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 12 September 2013.)

The Hon. S.W. KEY (Ashford) (10:42): The existing Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee was established in 2003 by legislation under the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee Act 2003. The committee has now been in existence for 10 years with the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation being the Presiding Member. Although there were grounds for the minister to be the presiding member of the committee when it was first established, this is no longer considered to be the case. It is therefore intended to amend the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee Act 2003 to remove the Office of Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation as a member of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee.

It is the view of this government that the importance of the portfolio of Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation transcends all political divides, which is why the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee (the committee) should conduct its business in collegiate spirit in order to effectively serve for the purposes for which it was established—and I know this is the case; this is how it operates. I note also the concerns of past and current members that that position of presiding member should be allocated to someone with greater opportunity to be fully engaged in the affairs of the committee.

The bill has the support of the committee members and there will be a seamless transition with the minister no longer being a member of the committee. The amendment bill enables the committee to appoint one of its Legislative Council members to be the presiding member of the committee and reduces the quorum from six to five members. This legislative change will have no impact on the work carried out, the functions performed or the Aboriginal community visitations made by the committee.

I note that consequential amendments are required to the Parliamentary Remuneration Act 1990 to allow the presiding member to receive an allowance. In recognition of additional responsibilities arising from the position of the presiding member, the government supports an increase in remuneration to the equivalent of the Presiding Member of the Social Development Committee, being an allowance of 14 per cent of basic salary to perform this role.

In supporting this bill the government also proposes to use an opportunity to introduce a small but not insignificant amendment to include amending references to the Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act 1981 and the Committees Act of the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands Rights Act 1981. Under section 3, Interpretation (c), and again in section 6, Functions of Committee (a), change the legislation reference from Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act 1981 to the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights Act 1981.

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (10:45): I am so pleased by the words of the member for Ashford in saying that support exists for this change to occur to the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee to take the position away from the minister as being chair of the committee and to put it back to one of the committee members. I put on the record that I am not a member of that committee, but I have been lucky enough to host at Goyder a recent visit by the committee in March or April, when they went to the Point Pearce community, which I feel blessed to have.

Point Pearce is an Aboriginal town in Goyder, on the western coast of the peninsula. It was previously called, in a common term, a mission, but they are good people. I have been there many times, quite a lot before I was elected to parliament in 2006 in a previous role in local government visiting that town. I arranged at one stage for a full council meeting to be held at Point Pearce. I have been with them on the challenges they faced in going through liquidation twice in the management structure that was in place, and I have seen on people's faces the distress that has caused and the challenge to the community has a whole that it has represented.

I recognise that a bipartisan spirit and a full complement of members has to exist strongly to ensure that, within South Australia, for the 30,000 people who are recognised as being of Aboriginal decent and live in South Australia and contribute strongly to its social, environmental and economic future, a full-time commitment is being given. I recognise that the whoever holds the role of minister is in a busy position as a result of other portfolio responsibilities, and I know that ministers at all times have made many trips to APY lands and Aboriginal communities to speak to the people and to understand the issues, the opportunities and challenges that face them.

When I read one little briefing paper that referred to a minister who had only been able to attend one meeting out of 29 of the standing committee, it did highlight to me the need for a review to be undertaken. I am so pleased that this has the full support of all committee members and the government, and that it has been recognised for the important part it plays in South Australian society.

When the visit of the standing committee occurred at Point Pearce earlier this year, there was an opportunity for a very full and frank discussion, there is no doubt about that. I was grateful for the attendance not of all members, as some were not able to make it, but four or five were there, and we met with the community leaders. It is fair to say that everybody put their position quite strongly, and that is the way it should be, because no opportunity should be lost when you have that level of representation from parliamentarians to hear from the community the issues being faced.

Point Pearce has challenges, there is no doubt about that. Every time I am with the people I am impressed by the fact that they want their community to have a strong future, to not just be involved in training programs but also for the community and its adults to be involved in opportunities for work, because that is the key for them. They are going through housing renovations, and looking at future opportunities for home ownership. In recent years some excellent work has been done on the farm, and the Aboriginal Lands Trust has driven it quite strongly. An off-site farmer is involved, but there are jobs outcomes for young Aboriginal men involved in that project, which is a commitment and a wonderful example to others.

I note that you, Mr Speaker, have previously been to Point Pearce, and I thank you for the commitment of visiting. I believe you stayed with the Schulze family, the then mayor of the Yorke Peninsula council. I know you have been exposed to some of the issues in that community as well. It is hard not to recognise that the challenges need to be overcome, and to do that it needs the parliament to ensure that it has people who want to do the hard work.

It is not just a matter of meeting in Parliament House, it is a matter of the commitment that needs to be shown in going to the remote communities and speaking to the people, sitting around the camp site with them in a very informal way. The only way you can do that is by having a representation that has the capacity to be there. Because of the business of the minister that is very hard to achieve, so the fact that this change is occurring is an exceptionally positive step, which I know will be well received. The minister's involvement will still be very strong, but the fact that there will be a committee structure where the chairperson is appointed from the Legislative Council and that the absolute majority will be there at every possible occasion is a good one.

From conversations I have had with the community, that leadership structure is very important to them. The challenges they have faced with the financial issues and its bankruptcy twice, I believe, in the last 15 years, has taken away leadership capacity that previously existed. People have moved onto different roles and, in some cases, very responsible older people have passed away, and that is sad for the community. There were some wonderfully strong ladies who led the community for a long time and are no longer with us, and it was sad for everybody when they passed. They want to see a structure in place that will work strongly.

As a side story, there were a series of consultation meetings held recently. I was told about one at Port Augusta and there was one at Maitland, which impacted upon the management of Aboriginal communities in Point Pearce. I was amazed as to why it was held in Maitland and not Point Pearce. There was a very small turnout of the Aboriginal community, but the Chair was certainly there and another of his committee members was there. It is about setting up a structure that will give greater independence to them and certainly ensuring that there is a level of financial control that exists. That is key for me and, with a local community that has gone through bankruptcy twice, that enforces it. It is all about trying to create an economic future for them, too.

If we have a regional lands standing committee of the parliament that has a chairperson who comes from the Legislative Council, they are out there with the communities all the time, they are not worrying about the diary commitments that a minister has, and it is within their own group that has some flexibility and opportunities to be there, I only see that as a good thing. When the member for Ashford stood up and talked in support of the bill I was so pleased, because the member for Flinders and I debated what we thought the position of the government might be, so to hear that it is supported is wonderful.

I also look forward to the passage of this bill. I look forward to the appointment of a chairperson whose commitment will be undoubted and the relationship between Aboriginal communities and the parliament being so strong that the outcomes are only positive. Yes, we have been told about the challenges and opportunities, but the focus will be on positive outcomes for what is clearly a remarkable group of people.

In my own area, from the Narungga people, when you are told a little bit about the cultural heritage of the community, the dreamtime stories and the basis of things that are there—when you take the time to sit down and listen, you are very impressed. This is a people who go back thousands and thousands of years and their connection to the land, to me, is undoubted. I hope that this change only results in a positive move, because I think it will be very widely received as a positive in the community, because the ministerial contact will still be there but the committee will also operate very strongly. I look forward to the bill's passage and adoption very soon.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (10:53): I support this bill. I will make some general comments. There is no doubt that outcomes have improved in some aspects for many Aboriginal people, but not to the extent that most of us would desire. What we are looking at here, ironically, is a situation where non-Aboriginal people are once again making decisions about Aboriginal people. We do not have any Aboriginal people in parliament that I know of—no-one has declared themselves to be Aboriginal—and that is unfortunate.

Clearly, there has to be some assistance, guidance and direction in terms of helping to ensure that people, whether they are in the APY lands or elsewhere, have good outcomes in respect to education, health and so on. However, we need to be moving to a situation where Aboriginal people control their own destiny and are no longer controlled by other people, even though they might be well meaning. There are some things that need to be looked at: not just changing the composition of a committee, but ensuring that Aboriginal people, whether they are in the APY lands or wherever, can actually make meaningful decisions about their lives. In my view, that includes, if they want to, being able to own a house on traditional lands.

We have a system in Canberra where people cannot own the land; they lease the land. They can build a house on it, but they cannot own it. I cannot see why, in the Aboriginal lands, if the people want that, they cannot own a home on traditional lands. I think we have to move away from this total control model and allow Aboriginal people to chart their own destiny, and that is what I would hope we would see as an important direction and outcome.

I support this initiative. I think it is a good move, what is reflected in the bill; I think it makes sense. It is probably a pity in a way that we cannot have a system—maybe we could, with some adjustment—where we have people who maybe are not members of parliament who could be involved in some of our parliamentary committees; in this case, it would be Aboriginal people directly involved in a committee process. I support this bill, and I look forward to its speedy passage.

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (10:56): I, too, rise to support this bill. I commend the member for Morphett for bringing it to the parliament, and I also commend and thank the member for Ashford for indicating that the government will support this, with just one minor amendment. We are pleased to note the speedy passage of this bill.

Essentially, the bill proposes to remove the minister as the presiding member of this particular standing committee, the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, a very important committee. It is generally agreed that it is a very difficult position to have the minister responsible for the portfolio sitting on and presiding over that committee.

For the most part, this is a multipartisan committee. It has a very large budget, particularly in relation to travel. We have spoken about the far-flung communities within this state, right from the Lower South-East to the Far West and the Far North. They are many miles apart, with a lot of travelling involved for the committee. There are approximately 30,000 people of Aboriginal descent living in South Australia, and they are spread far and wide right across the state. So, it is no wonder that this committee is required to travel, and so they should, to many parts of the state.

The committee itself was established in 2003. It has the aim of building stronger, more direct and more enduring relationships between Aboriginal communities and the South Australian Parliament. It is a vital committee, it is a vital relationship to keep working on.

I was lucky enough, as a newly-elected member, to be able to join this committee on one of its visits to the west of the state, when the committee visited Ceduna in, I think, maybe 2010 or early 2011. I took the opportunity and was welcomed along with that committee. We had the chance to visit Koonibba and Yalata.

Of course, in my own electorate of Flinders, there are a number of Aboriginal communities; Yalata is probably the most sizeable, both in population and in area. I have also taken the opportunity to visit Yalata more recently for the opening of the new police station there—and that was quite an occasion out at Yalata. In fact, my staff member at Ceduna had previous employment at Yalata, and her son also does some work out there, so I have a good understanding and insight into how Yalata works.

Of course, there is an old mission station at Koonibba; that community still functions with its own school. I am planning to visit there in the next few weeks to say hi to the kids at the school. Scotdesco, of course, is another Aboriginal land west of Ceduna. Aside from that, there are significant Aboriginal populations living within the townships of both Ceduna and Port Lincoln.

I have digressed a bit, but I want to come back to the committee itself. The committee's functions include inquiring into how Aboriginal lands are being managed, used and controlled. It also discusses issues affecting the interests of traditional owners of Aboriginal lands. Although it is dot point No. 3 on my speaking notes, I think it is probably the most critical of all. It inquires and looks into the health, housing, education, economic development, and employment or training of Aboriginal people. It is my belief that well-intentioned governments of both sides of politics, over many years, have committed much time, effort and money to issues around the Aboriginal population and Aboriginal communities, and it despairs me somewhat to see that very little has changed over many years.

Although we are well intentioned, it seems to me that we have not been able to make significant inroads into living standards, health standards, education standards and housing issues that are so prevalent amongst the Aboriginal communities. A lot of funding goes into Aboriginal affairs both federal and state. I wonder sometimes, particularly seeing it up close and firsthand, how much of the funding actually gets to on-ground works. A lot seems to be taken up in administration and service delivery. The outcomes of some of these funding streams, perhaps, are somewhat wanting and somewhat debatable.

The committee system of parliament is important because committees are established to be bipartisan and, in some ways, this particular committee, the Aboriginal Lands Standing Committee, was compromised from that position by having the minister responsible presiding over it. It is the only committee that is chaired by a member of the Crown. There are a few anomalies that relate to this committee in particular. This bill seeks to address that, and I congratulate the member for Morphett and thank the government for supporting it. It has been a long time coming. I am hoping that it can make a difference to the way the committee functions, and I am hoping that, in the future, the committee can make a real difference to the way our Aboriginal population—that very critical and important part of our state's community and heritage—lead their lives.

The Hon. L.R. BREUER (Giles) (11:02): I rise to support the member for Morphett's bill and it gives me great heart to see that this bill has come in because, after the Aboriginal Lands Standing Committee this week, I asked if there were a change of government in March, would the committee be continued, because I have very strong memories of spending four years in opposition when the then minister, Dorothy Kotz, would not have a meeting of that committee and it really made me very sad at the time. After the 2002 election, the committee was reformed and I have been a member of that committee since that time, apart from my time as speaker—a proud member of a committee that I feel has a real purpose in South Australia and represents well our Aboriginal communities.

The member for Morphett became a member of that committee also after the 2002 election, so we have been buddies ever since that day, and I am really pleased to see that this has come up and it is very likely to go through. The importance of this committee for communities in our more remote areas is invaluable, and I do not want to go into country versus city because it might get me in all sorts of trouble—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. L.R. BREUER: —however, it is a popular move out there in the bush I can tell you. I am a hero! This committee is important in our remote areas of South Australia, as they have a channel into this parliament and into government, and it is really invaluable. I remember I first went to the lands when I started campaigning prior to the 1997 election, and I have regularly visited there since, so I have made many visits to the lands.

The issues around 1997 were finding employment for people there; there were not enough houses in the area; there were health issues, particularly for their young people; the mortality rate for young people in that area; and their stores always cost too much—the cost of living there. They were the issues back in 1997. On my last visit to the lands this year a couple of months ago, the issues were employment, not enough housing in the lands, the health of all people but young people particularly and the stores cost too much. So, what has changed?

However, I do believe in that time, there have been some incredible changes in that area in the APY lands and in some of the other regional communities like the Oak Valley Maralinga community and the Nepabunna community, etc. We have introduced a lot more housing; there are a lot more services that are provided in this area and they are good services. We have a lot more police out in those areas. A whole range of issues have improved out there, but we still have such a long way to go. I think the member for Morphett certainly understands that, I understand that, members of our committee understand that, and the government understands that. We still have such a long way to go.

I believe that we are at a point now with the millions and millions of dollars that have been pumped into those areas over the years that we have to look for some other solutions. I firmly believe that good leadership in those areas is absolutely essential. In those committees where you have good strong leadership, things do happen, but communities really have to take responsibility themselves in lots of cases and make more happen in those areas. I think that is something that needs to be seriously looked at and I know it is happening, and I am pleased about that.

The issue of the chair of this committee has been ongoing since the time of minister Weatherill, actually, when he was the minister for Aboriginal affairs. He realised that it was not appropriate for the chair of the committee to be reporting to himself or writing to himself—or herself, in the case of subsequent ministers. It has been an ongoing issue but it has never really seemed to happen so it is really good for the member for Morphett to do this, because it was ludicrous that they do write to themselves or report to themselves.

I think it was also really important that people from the communities actually had an opportunity to have a figure of authority in parliament that they could refer to, rather than the minister. If there was some angst about the minister or some issue with the minister that they were dealing with, to have a chair of the Aboriginal lands committee who they could report to and ask and seek assistance from is really important.

I think in the future this will make a considerable difference. The have been able to come to the committee itself, but they have had to go through the minister's office to do it. Now they can report to the chair and the committee itself can take it up from there. I know that certainly when I leave this place, the committee that I will be really sad about leaving is the Aboriginal lands committee.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. L.R. BREUER: I will miss some of you. I will miss the bush people, the country people. One of the things about that committee, is that Duncan and I—because we have been the longest-serving members of that committee and probably pushed the issues harder than anyone—have always insisted on trying to make it a non-partisan committee because that was really important. It was not a committee that you should be playing politics with. There are too many issues at stake; there are too many people at stake. We have always tried to make it a non-partisan committee when we have had any say in it.

I know we have reprimanded a couple of very vocal members at times who have tried to turn it into politics and turn it back. I think even the member for Morphett has felt an occasional sting from me if I felt he has overstepped the mark—he is smiling. It has been a non-partisan committee and it always should be. It should be about looking after the Aboriginal communities, looking after those areas and making sure that we get the message through to parliament and to our parties about what is happening out there.

Although primarily a lot of those communities are actually in my electorate or the member for Stuart's electorate because they are remote communities, I think it might have been the member for Flinders who mentioned some statistics about the number of Aboriginal people in South Australia. One of the issues there that has always concerned me is that the great majority of Aboriginal people in South Australia actually live in the cities and towns, rather than in the remote communities. There are something like about 3,500 people living in the APY lands. So, it is not a committee that has really dealt with issues within the cities and towns. It has been a bit of a sideline at times.

But I think, for the committee that is formed after the next election, maybe there might be some way that it could be looked at that they get included a bit more in the dealings and deliberations of the committee, and that there may be some way we can assist them, because there are some serious issues out there in certain communities. They have very similar problems to some of the problems that you find in the APY lands. Education—keeping kids at school and getting kids into further education—is a really important thing, and it is not happening in a lot of our major cities and our bigger towns.

So, I think that is something that could be looked at with the next committee; I think it would be important to do that. Again, for me to say metro versus country is a bit of pot calling the kettle black at the moment, but I have felt strongly about that over the years, that we are not inclusive enough of those others, although the committee is of course not geared to that. The legislation is aimed at the Aboriginal lands.

Another thing I just want to put a word in about: I have heard many pronunciations of Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara today, and it always amuses me when I hear them and how people try very hard. One of the issues is that people see the APY lands as Pitjantjatjara people. I just want to put my two-bob in about Yankunytjatjara people, because, in actual fact, there are more Yankunytjatjara people in the APY lands. My people who I work with very closely (and I have a Yankunytjatjara name myself—Nyimbula) will always make a point of telling me, 'You tell them that it's Yankunytjatjara lands, not Pitjantjatjara—Yankunytjatjara lands.' So, I just want to put that point in, that the Yankunytjatjara people are just as, if not more, important than the Pitjantjatjara people in those particular areas.

I support this bill. As I said, I am very pleased that it is going through. I think I would really like to be in that committee in the next parliament; however, I will not be, and I wish them well in the next parliament. I think we can do great things. I think that this committee has done a lot of good over the last 10 or 12 years, and I know that they can continue to do that in the next parliament. I think that having the chair not being the minister will make it so much easier.

Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (11:12): I will not detain the chamber for long, because I have a feeling if I can keep this speech to about four minutes, we may get a private member's bill from the opposition through for the second time in a couple of months, which is very pleasing and I think good for the parliament. Ever since I have been elected, for the last three and a half years, I usually do try to make some comment on bills and motions relating to our parliament's dealings with our Aboriginal people, because it is very important for me.

I would not be here in Australia, let alone anywhere else, if my mother, when she came to Australia to do some work with Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory, had not found the experience so enriching and rewarding and so welcoming that she decided to stay in Australia and continue on with that work for a number of years. Otherwise, she probably would have gone home to England, and who knows where I would be? At any rate, I also should probably declare a conflict of interest, because this is a committee that I hope one day to have the opportunity to—

The Hon. L.R. Breuer: Oxford, we reckon. You'd be at Oxford, we think, studying English literature.

Mr GARDNER: Excellent. Well, I appreciate the confidence of the members for Giles and Ashford in my academic ability. To the member for Giles, can I just say, I hope that this committee in the future brings you back regularly as a witness, so that you do not feel too alienated from this community within the parliament that you have been such an important member of for a number of years.

With that in view, it is probably a conflict of interest for me, because I hope one day to serve on this committee. I have not put myself forward to be one of the lone Liberal opposition representatives from this chamber on the committee up to now, because the member for Norwood and the member for Morphett have done an excellent job since I have been here, and it would probably be a fairly career-limiting move to run against the member for Norwood in the party room for something like this, so I have not done it. This bill is quite important, and as I say, I will try to wrap up quickly so we can pass it thanks to the words of the government, get into committee, pass through amendments and then have it all done and dusted.

To get on the record: the bill has been a long time coming. I have spoken to a number of people about this committee, and I read the reports when they come out. I know that it has been a frustration for a number of years for members of the committee and for people who work in the sector that the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation sits on the committee.

Others have explained why it is a bit of a conflict of interest. It does not happen in practice, it does not work in practice, it affects quorum, and it affects the workability of the committee. It is the only standing committee in the state's parliament that is chaired by a minister of the Crown, and as it stands, the minister very rarely, if ever, attends the committee hearings, let alone chairs them.

It is the only committee that conducts inquiries at the direction of a minister. Essentially, you have the minister instructing the committee to investigate his or her own portfolio of responsibility, and it has been called into question a number of times over the years, including by the member for Morphett, the member for Giles, former member Lea Stevens (in 2009), and the Hon. Robert Brokenshire in another place. We have heard others talk about the historical interest.

Ministers who have held the portfolio, including the Premier, the member for Hartley, the current minister, and the member for Colton, have rarely, if ever, attended committee meetings. It affects the ability of annual reports to be able to be out on time, and there have been some issues with that. The committee is a wonderful committee; it gives a serious voice to people who need to be heard on issues relevant to them, and I appreciate the spirit in which it has been conducted. I look forward to this bill's passage, and I am sure it will go from strength to strength in the future.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (11:16): I rise today to support all of the people who spoke on this bill, but of course most particularly the member for Morphett, who has been working on this for a very, very long time. In the electorate of Stuart, I represent the very important Aboriginal communities of Nepabunna and Davenport. Of course, as the member for Giles would understand, when we both essentially represent the North-East and the North-West outback areas respectively, we do take a great deal of interest in each other's patches, and as she contributes to the North-East, certainly I have a lot of experience over the years and hold an interest in the APY lands and Maralinga lands as well.

This is a very important issue. I will not go over everything that has been said, other than just to say that really there is nowhere else that a governance model like this would be allowed, where essentially the chair of a committee is there to report to and lobby him or herself; it just really is not sensible. I also think that if, and hopefully when, the member for Morphett's good work comes into practice, a very useful outcome of this is it will actually bring one additional member of parliament into significantly contributing to this work.

If the minister is not the chair of the committee, then there will be one additional member of parliament who can join that committee, and I think the more members of parliament take a very serious interest in the Aboriginal lands, Aboriginal affairs in general and in reconciliation, the better off this parliament and our state will be.

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (11:18): I would like to thank all members who have contributed to the debate on this bill, and I am very pleased to say that it has bipartisan support—or multipartisan support—both in this place and the other place. I spoke to the minister's staff just recently and we did pick up a couple of technical errors for which we are going to introduce amendments, through the member for Ashford, I believe—just to change the name of the act from the Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act to the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights Act ('the APY Act').

Can I just say, regarding the member for Giles' comment about pronunciation of the word 'Anangu', that Bill Edwards, when I undertook some language studies, always said that the 'ng' is pronounced like in 'singer'; it is a nasal thing. People say A-nan-gu or whatever, and it is a bit like the various mispronunciations of Kaurna. So, let's get it right; it is a South Australian language, and we should all try and pay respect.

The purpose of this committee is not just about the APY. I should say also on what the member for Giles said, Lowitja O'Donoghue often says to me—and she is a Yankunytjatjara woman—that it should be the YPA Act, not the APY Act, so that it would then be the Yankunytjatjara Pitjantjatjara Anangu. They are two groups, and Anangu just means 'people' in Pitjantjatjara.

There are 30,000 people of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent in South Australia. The Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara and also some of the Ngaanyatjarra who come across from Western Australia make up about 2,500 of those people. We spend about $1.3 billion on those 30,000 people per year and this is why this committee needs to be a committee that has its own power within itself to drive issues, to question, to examine and to direct people to report to us without having to have a situation where the minister has been writing and reporting to themselves and questioning themselves. It has been a strange situation. This bill will change that and I look forward to its passage through the place.

Over the years the various secretaries of this committee have been very hardworking. Not only do they have to try to get a group of politicians together to go on trips to remote parts of the state but also they deal with the many different groups that are involved in Aboriginal affairs in South Australia. We started off with Jonathan Nicholls, who is now with Uniting Communities and runs the Anangu Paper Tracker website which is a very good website for people to look at. He is a terrific fellow and is certainly my conscience in Aboriginal affairs on many occasions. We had Sarah Alpers who came down from the Tiwi Islands where she had been working. She did an excellent job with us and is now with the Attorney-General's Department in Justice.

Terry Sparrow came out of the Public Service and worked with us for a number of years and now is back with the Public Service. Terry was great at organising politicians and Aboriginal groups. Now we have Jason Caire. Jason does a terrific job under a lot of pressure from the members of the committee. Just this week he organised 20 tjilpis and kungkas down from the APY lands to address the committee. He organised them to get here, to make sure they were in parliament, and getting them fed and watered was also an important part of the process of welcoming them to this committee. It has been an important job for the committee secretaries and I congratulate them, our past and present committee secretaries. I cannot guarantee the member for Giles a job as committee secretary but perhaps there might be some consultancy work there in the future. This is an important piece of legislation. I thank members for their contributions and I thank the government for their support. I look forward to its swift passage through the other place.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clauses 1 to 3 passed.

Clause 4.

The Hon. S.W. KEY: I move:

Amendment No 1 [Key–1]—

Page 2, after line 14—Insert:

(2) Section 3, definition of the lands, (c)—delete 'Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act 1981' and substitute:

Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights Act 1981

Dr McFETRIDGE: I appreciate the government picking up the technical difference here.

Amendment carried, clause as amended passed.

Clause 5 passed.

New clause 5A.

The Hon. S.W. KEY: I move:

Amendment No 2 [Key–1]—

Page 3, after line 7, insert:

5A—Amendment of section 6—Functions of Committee

Section 6(a)—delete 'Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act 1981' and substitute:

Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights Act 1981'

Dr McFETRIDGE: I thank the member for Ashford for her eagle eye in picking this up as well.

New clause inserted.

Remaining clauses (6 to 9), schedule and title passed.

Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (11:28): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.