HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2023-11-02 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee: Report 2022-23

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (11:26): I move:

That the 2022-23 annual report of the committee be noted.

The Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee's functions include reviewing the operation of three acts: the Aboriginal Lands Trust Act 2013, the Maralinga Tjarutja Land Rights Act 1984 and the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights Act 1981. The committee can also inquire into matters affecting the interests of the traditional owners of the lands. It also looks into the manner in which the lands are being managed, used and controlled. Other functions include inquiring into matters concerning the welfare of Aboriginal people.

The committee has traditionally visited many Aboriginal lands and communities. It has also held strong relationships with the Aboriginal landholding statutory authorities. Speaking with representatives from those communities and statutory authorities allows the committee to be updated on current issues.

During the 2022-23 year, the committee continued with its two active inquiries, the Aboriginal governance inquiry and the Aboriginal heritage inquiry. The Aboriginal governance inquiry did not receive any further written submissions after the committee readvertised the inquiry in May 2022. On 15 November 2022, the committee tabled its final report, which contained four recommendations. These recommendations focused on increasing accountability for state-based trusts containing public moneys under the Trustee Act.

The committee was impressed with the Western Australian charitable trusts legislation after meeting with the Western Australian Attorney-General, the Hon. John Quigley. The committee also recommended that the previously introduced amendments to the Associations Incorporation Act be reintroduced in order to increase the transparency of Aboriginal incorporated associations for community members.

The majority of the reporting period focused on the committee's Aboriginal heritage inquiry. The inquiry dated back to February 2021 when the committee resolved to inquire into Aboriginal heritage issues. The inquiry looked at the operations of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988 and how Aboriginal heritage is managed in this state.

The destruction of the Indigenous heritage site at Juukan Gorge in Western Australia sparked reviews of Aboriginal cultural heritage protection across the commonwealth and states, including this jurisdiction. The inquiry received submissions from 16 stakeholders, and the committee received oral evidence from 27 witnesses.

On 13 June 2023, the committee tabled its final report on the Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry, which contained recommendations to review the current Aboriginal Heritage Act and for the minister to consider wideranging amendments. Without repeating my earlier speech in this chamber, I would like to reiterate the importance of this inquiry with recommendations aimed at protecting the ancient cultural heritage for future generations of First Nations people. The committee was grateful for the evidence provided by traditional owners who came and told us their concerns regarding their land and waters. The committee thanks all the stakeholders who made a submission, including Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation and the State Aboriginal Heritage Committee.

The annual report is the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee's final report to be tabled in the Parliament of South Australia, so this is something of a historic day. I believe the committee has been in place for 20 years or so. It was an initiative of the Aboriginal Affairs minister at the time, the late Terry Roberts, going back many years.

The committee wishes to acknowledge the support and assistance it has received from Aboriginal communities and organisations throughout the past 20 years. The committee deeply appreciates the generosity and openness in sharing time, community, culture and personal stories. The numerous trips to Aboriginal communities made by the committee enabled a connection with First Nations people that could not be achieved by solely holding meetings in metropolitan Adelaide. The committee also sincerely thanks those who travelled to Adelaide to discuss issues of importance with the committee. It was through the contributions made by First Nations people that the committee gained a clearer understanding of the lived experiences of Aboriginal children, families and communities.

I thank both the former and current members of the committee for their significant contributions to this committee over the past 20 years. I would specifically like to mention the most recent membership of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee: from the other place, the Presiding Member, the Hon. Tung Ngo; the Hon. Tammy Franks; the Hon. Laura Henderson; and, from the house, the member for Heysen; and the member for Newland. I would also like to thank the committee officers. We have been incredibly fortunate to have exemplary officers.

Not long after I was first on the committee, Shona Reid took over the position. Shona was a fantastic secretary to the committee. She is highly organised, highly articulate, with very strong connections to Aboriginal communities. It is a measure of the high regard in which she is held that she is now the Guardian for Children and Young People and previously the CEO of Reconciliation SA. The most recent secretary for the committee has been Lisa Baxter. Once again, she is someone who made a fantastic contribution to the committee. She, too, is a highly organised individual, deeply articulate and has great research skills. I could not sing the praises of both those people loudly enough because they did an absolutely fantastic job.

I am very mindful that this is the last speech I will be giving on the committee in this chamber, and I do acknowledge all the effort that has been put in over the years. I think it is important, and I think it is a progressive step that, in a sense, we are going to be replaced by a direct Voice to Parliament made up of Aboriginal people and voted in by Aboriginal people. I think it is incredibly important that the people with the lived experience, the people who come from communities, come from the lands, should be the ones to speak to the parliament and to make recommendations to the parliament, but ultimately it is up to this house to determine what is initiated as a result of that. But that direct voice in preference to a committee, which was a conduit and an important conduit, is something to be commended.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (11:34): I rise to commend the motion and, rather than repeat many of the more particular observations of the member for Giles, I would endorse and amplify his remarks in terms of summarising the recent work of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee, its two reports it concluded in the course of this parliament and, of course, the annual report that is the subject of the motion.

I start really in terms of where the member for Giles left off and it might be at this point where we differ in a significant way. I think there is room for reform. Clearly, there is a mood of reflection at a time when what has been described as a final annual report of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee is to be noted in this place if the motion passes. I just say very clearly to members that this moment should never have come along.

I am at one with the member for Giles in terms of the observations that have been made, including over the course of this parliament, with regard to the need to review and adapt the purposes and the work of the standing committee of this parliament whose chief, primary and only purpose is to focus on the better interests of Aboriginal people in this state.

The mistake—and it is an egregious one in what is now a series of errors made by this government over the course of this year in particular—is to chart a course that starts with removing this committee altogether. That has been the subject of debate and, of course, I will not traverse the debate in relation to the State First Nations Voice. We are yet to see that machinery come into place.

But I just say very clearly to the house that it is not some inadvertent accident by the government that has seen the ending of this committee with all its parliamentary resources, with all its parliamentary processes and powers and capacity to go and engage with Aboriginal people and to identify their needs by hearing from them both here and in the lands, by travelling as the committee report says and by Aboriginal communities coming to this place to raise issues of concern in turn to deploy the productive capacity of the parliament and the interests of Aboriginal people. That will be lost. It has been lost as of 30 June. It is gone.

The virtue that the government presents in the course of rolling out its State First Nations Voice legislation is, as the member for Giles has summarised, that this body, which is to be the subject of an election process that has been put off now from September until March next year—at least we are told—is to somehow replace the work of the parliamentary standing committee and I just say to members of this house that that could not be any further from any coherent possibility or reality. It just cannot be, and at the very least it denies those who would be involved in such a body, if it ever comes to fruition, the capacity to use the machinery of the parliament in their own interests.

Let us be clear: this was the subject of proposed amendments on this side. There is nothing new. I have argued it to the best of my ability: amend the legislation at least to keep the parliamentary machinery working in a coherent way towards the best interests of Aboriginal people. The Malinauskas Labor government wanted nothing to do with it. The Attorney-General made it clear to me that the body that is to be established is to replace the committee, yet it cannot do it on the face of the structure of the Voice.

The Voice is a body, if it ever comes into fruition sometime next year or who knows when, that will meet four times a year. It is legislated to have a maximum number of meeting times without the permission of the minister. Goodness gracious! Who would have ever thought such a thing could contain a parliamentary process. Not only that, compared to a committee of the parliament that can meet every sitting week or as often as it wants to, the Voice will have no coherent point of communication with the parliament in anything like the same way a standing committee of the parliament can have.

I completely hear and take on board what the member for Giles says about the need for the parliament to credibly, thoroughly, relevantly be able to engage with, relate to and take on board matters of concern for Aboriginal people. But that ought to mean that if you are going to establish some new body—and let us bear in mind it is not only detached from the parliament; the act makes it clear it is detached from all the existing Aboriginal bodies, including Native Title Services and the list goes on—at the very least you would say to that body, 'Alright, you've got a parliamentary committee at your disposal. You can go and engage with the parliamentary committee and, guess what, then you will have members of the parliament, members of both houses of the parliament, armed with all of the capacity of the parliament—powers to inquire, powers to call evidence, all the rest of it—that you can work with towards coherent outcomes.'

Instead, the government said, 'No, it will have to replace the parliamentary committee,' but the engagement—

Mr BROWN: Point of order, Mr Speaker: as reluctant as I am to interrupt the member for Heysen in full flow, he is continually referring to votes of the house and talking about how his amendments failed to be accepted. I wish you to draw his attention to refraining from doing so.

Mr TEAGUE: I am happy to address the point of order, but that may or may not be necessary.

The SPEAKER: It is unlikely to be necessary. I think the member for Heysen knows well the standing orders, and I am sure he can craft a continuing contribution in accordance with them.

Mr TEAGUE: The member might just have a close look at page 14 of the annual report. Have a close look at page 14 of that report, because it will stand as a historical marker of the course that is now being charted. There is no doubt about that. There is no mystery to any of that. What is important for the house to take on board at the time that it would note this report—and I would certainly hope that the house indeed supports this motion of the member for Giles.

It is important that the house note this annual report, because in time there will be time to reflect on the course that we are told by the government we will now be charting over the months and years ahead. It remains my sincere view—and I think it ought to be one shared by members of this house without hesitation—that the powers of the parliamentary committee process and the standing committee process in particular are one of the most powerful tools in the interests of the community.

They are a means by which the parliament can act independent of the executive. They are a means by which the parliament can act in a bipartisan and multipartisan way, and they are a means by which the parliament can get to the bottom of issues of importance in the community and, in particular for this committee, with those matters in mind, the interests of Aboriginal people in the community in South Australia. It is a sad day that we see the noting of this report recording, as it does, the demise of this standing committee.

We have seen already in the course of short months numerous examples of the kind of work that the committee could easily have latched onto. Let us not forget that it was at the beginning of this year that the committee shone a light on the vandalism at Koonalda Cave. That in turn was a driver for securing $400,000 of federal money, which in turn is now being administered in the interests of the preservation of that important heritage. Without the committee's work it would not have happened, at least not with the same dispatch, and—please gainsay me if anyone has a contrary view—that is one of many examples.

The SPEAKER: The member for Heysen's time has expired.

Mr TEAGUE: I will close on that note. It is abundantly obvious the committee should be reinstated.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:45): I rise to speak on the final report of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee. Indeed, as the member for Heysen has outlined, it is a sad day because it essentially signals the absolute end of that committee, which was wound up earlier this year. I served on the committee previously and got around the state—the little bit of travel that I did. I wish I had the opportunity to do more, and it would have been more if the committee had still been in place. We visited Ceduna, Yalata, Koonibba and all around the West Coast and obviously had hearings with people there. We had some informal and formal meetings and also had many formal meetings here in Adelaide hearing evidence around the various subjects of the committee.

The inquiry around the Aboriginal governance I found extremely interesting. We were requested, under the rules of the committee, to review governance standards in South Australian Aboriginal community-controlled organisations. It was requested that the committee undertake this review, under the former government, on 1 February 2021. The committee formally resolved to undertake the inquiry on 15 February 2021.

In particular, the committee was asked to consider the key elements of a comprehensive governance capacity-building framework that will support South Australian Aboriginal organisations and corporations to deliver on Aboriginal community aspirations for self-determination. It was outlined what this committee may look at, and it included what policies and processes will best support directors and boards to meet their statutory and financial obligations and oversee the management of their organisations.

It was also to consider what policies and processes will best support directors and boards to ensure culturally safe processes and also governance structures that enable South Australian Aboriginal community-controlled organisations and corporations to maximise economic opportunities for the benefit of their communities. It also looked at governance structures that enable South Australian Aboriginal community-controlled organisations and corporations to maximise cultural opportunities for the benefit of their communities. It also looked at best practice in training and mentor supports appropriate for the boards of Aboriginal community-controlled organisations and corporations.

It also looked at examples of good governance in First Nations organisations nationally and internationally that have local relevance, including practical examples of how to implement good governance principles such as accountability, transparency, integrity—including management of real or perceived conflicts of interest—cultural authority, efficiency, leadership, culturally safe processes and incorporating Aboriginal decision-making principles. What was also under investigation were the specific pathways to support young Aboriginal people and Aboriginal women to step into leadership roles in their communities.

The committee was advertised across the board in metropolitan and regional publications as well as on the committee's website, and obviously it went through the pretty standard submission process of asking certain people to write in with their submissions.

The initial report, an interim report, was tabled on 26 October 2021, and on 18 February 2022 we received responses to that interim report from the then minister with that function, former Attorney-General the Hon. Josh Teague MP. The committee also received an interim response to its interim report from the then commonwealth Minister for Indigenous Australians, the Hon. Ken Wyatt MP.

As has been said, the committee was readvertised under the new government; however there were no further written submissions. On 15 November 2022 the final report was tabled, and there were four recommendations, as follows:

1. The committee recommends that the Trustee Act 1936 (SA) be reviewed by the Attorney-General with a view to amendments to increase accountability in relation to trusts that contain public moneys, whether from state or federal sources (for example native title compensation moneys), to apply to trusts already established under that legislation.

2. The committee also recommends that the Trustee Act 1936 (SA) be amended to offer inexpensive mechanisms for beneficiaries (including common law holders) to inspect the records in relation to the management and expenditure of trust moneys being invested on their behalf. The proposed Western Australian charitable trusts legislation may provide the Attorney-General with a model for potential reforms in the South Australian jurisdiction.

3. The committee recommends that the Attorney-General introduce a bill that amends the Associations Incorporation Act 1985 (SA) to increase oversight and dispute intervention powers for the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs. The committee encourages the parliament to pass the previously proposed reforms provided for in the Associations Incorporation (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2021 in order to increase the transparency of Aboriginal incorporated associations for community members.

4. The committee also recommends that the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs, within Consumer and Business Services, be resourced to provide regular governance training and education to Aboriginal community-controlled associations around their obligations under the Associations Incorporation Act 1985 (SA). This includes providing training on any new amendments arising from the proposed reforms, on good governance practices and on communication. The committee recommends that such training include the provision of necessary template documents, including flowcharts and visible representations of requirements which can be tailored to the particular association.

Earlier this year, in February, the Hon. Andrea Michaels, the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs, responded to the committee's recommendations 3 and 4, and the minister supported both recommendations in principle. On 14 March 2023 the Hon. Kyam Maher MLC, Attorney-General, responded to the committee's recommendations 1 and 2, but the Attorney-General did not support the implementation of recommendations 1 and 2.

I found it concerning that those first two recommendations were not supported by the Attorney-General, because that was part of the whole point of having the governance inquiry, and I think it showed, apart from the other inquiries, including the heritage inquiry that was conducted as well, the excellent work of this committee getting out and about, talking to communities, talking to associations and talking to individuals and having individuals present to the committee.

Sadly, some alarming issues came up, like boards not having meetings for 20 years, and issues around general governance. It does not matter where the money is going, we must know where public money is going, there must be accountability.

I think this committee did great work researching that, and I applaud some of the other initiatives around education in communities, but we have lost all that communication because the committee has been wound up and we have not been able to reach out to do that valuable work of the Aboriginal Lands Parliamentary Standing Committee. As with the member for Heysen, I think it is a sad day that that committee has now wound up and we lose the opportunity to do that valuable work into the future.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (11:56): I thank everyone for their contribution and I do not intend to prosecute again the whole debate we have had in this chamber when it comes to the establishment of a Voice, which is the best way forward. I acknowledge the committee has done some good work, and I also acknowledge that when it comes to the area of governance there need to be some additional initiatives so that there is a greater degree of transparency and accountability on behalf of communities where public money is expended. That is an important issue that needs more attention.

I think there is a bit of pre-judgement going on about the effectiveness of the Voice. I am not a big supporter of setting and forgetting something. It is important to see, once the Voice is up and running, how it operates and how effective it is. We want it to make a difference, and I do believe that it is important that it is the Aboriginal people themselves directly communicating with speaking to the parliament.

For too long white people, Europeans, have spoken on behalf of Aboriginal people. It is their land: let them have the opportunity to speak to this chamber, to the parliament. Let's see how it goes and let's hope that it will be an effective body that will make a real difference. With those few words, I acknowledge the passing of the committee, I acknowledge once again some of the good work it has done, but let's see what the Voice can deliver.

Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT