Aboriginal Housing Bill

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

The Hon. J. F. RYAN [3.03 p.m.]: Before debate was interrupted for the taking of questions, I made a number of points with regard to the way the bill was introduced and the manner in which the Government pursued it through the Parliament, and the impact of those decisions by the Government on the ultimate success of the proposed Aboriginal Housing Office. I regret to say that during question time the Leader of the House said it was one of the worst speeches I had given in this House. I am not quite sure what he meant by that. I do not believe anything in my speech indicated prejudice or lack of support for the Aboriginal community. In fact, it is my concern for the Aboriginal community that has led to my criticisms of the bill.

I sincerely hope that the Treasurer is not merely setting the scene to suggest that anyone who criticises legislation that includes the term "Aboriginal" is somehow racist, because I intend to
Page 6111
deal with a number of criticisms about how this legislation will work, not only about how the community might view the Aboriginal Housing Office. I believe Aboriginal people will have some criticisms about how the bill will affect them. First of all, the bill may be described in some respects as a Trojan horse, so far as the Aboriginal community is concerned. A bill that will have an extremely severe impact on some people in the community, a bill that is going to be used to control Aboriginal housing in a very strict manner, has been dressed up with the rhetoric of Aboriginal reconciliation and introduced into this House in the context of National Sorry Day and other issues.

The Government has attempted to grab people’s attention in that regard, but what may elude the attention of this House is the incredible powers the Aboriginal Housing Office will have to wind up and interfere with a number of Aboriginal agencies which are self-determined by Aborigines and which already provide Aboriginal housing. This issue is something that ought to attract the attention of the crossbenchers, and I will outline just some of the reasons the Opposition is concerned about the bill. For example, in his second reading speech in another place - and I imagine it will be the same in the second reading speech in this House, which I have not seen - the Minister stated that the chairman of the board of the Aboriginal Housing Office will be independent and will be appointed by the Minister.

It is nonsense to refer to someone appointed by a Minister as independent. That person may act somewhat independently, but if honourable members examine the bill and consider the extensive powers of the Minister and of the board to direct the Minister to direct the AHO to do things, there is no way that organisation will be independent at all. I ask honourable members to consider the powers that the Minister has, to go through the bill and read the clauses that contain a reference to the Minister. The explanatory note on page 5 of the bill states:

The management of the Aboriginal Housing Office is provided for in Part 6 of this Act. The AHO has a Board and a Chief Executive Officer. The AHO is also subject to the control and direction of the Minister.

Clause 9(2) provides:

The AHO may, with the approval of the Minister:

(a) transfer or lease property to registered Aboriginal housing organisations, and

(b) construct housing for registered Aboriginal Housing organisations.

I presume it cannot do those things if it does not have the Minister’s approval. In fact that is made very clear in clause 10, which provides that the AHO must not, unless the Minister otherwise directs, provide funding to various organisations, transfer land, construct housing or provide other assistance to various Aboriginal housing organisations. There are other references to the Minister in the bill. Clause 29 relates to ministerial control and states:

(1) The Aboriginal Housing Office is, in the exercise of its functions, subject to the control and direction of the Minister.

(2) An approval of the Minister under a provision of this Act may apply generally or be limited to a particular case.

Clause 30(5) relates to the membership of the board. It states, in part, that of the members appointed by the Minister, one is to be appointed by the Minister as chairperson of the board. The chairman of the board is not elected; he or she is appointed by the Minister. Other clauses provide that the Minister may dispose of that person when and if it appears appropriate. Clause 36 relates to the investment of money into the fund and provides that the Aboriginal Housing Office may invest money in the fund if the Public Authorities (Financial Arrangements) Act does not confer power on the AHO to invest the money in any other manner approved by the Minister with the concurrence of the Treasurer.

This department will be no different from any other State government department. I do not criticise that, but I understand, as the Minister said in another place, that the power I referred to will have a significant impact on a number of organisations that currently do not operate under the control and direction of a government department or a Minister. I refer in particular to those people whom the Minister described in these terms:

There has been little, if any, attention paid to the viability of services, the training of providers and the sustainability of housing . . .

It is estimated that there are currently 200 Aboriginal housing organisations which own and manage approximately 2,800 dwellings in New South Wales. The number of dwellings managed by each organisation ranges from one to 50 and around half of the organisations manage an average of less than 10 dwellings resulting in very low levels of revenue . . .

. . . many of these organisations are simply at present not able to operate effectively . . .

On reading the bill one could come to the conclusion that if these agencies do not continue to operate effectively, clause 27, which deals with
Page 6112
revocation of registration, would come into operation. Clause 27(1) states:

The registration of a registered Aboriginal housing organisation under this Part may be revoked at any time by the AHO for such reasons as the AHO thinks fit.

Any time, for any reason! Clauses of that nature are probably unprecedented in other legislation. A board established by the Minister, to which members are appointed, can suddenly take over agencies, which are currently non-government agencies, and be responsible for their funding and deregister them - presumably making them ineligible for government funding - for any reason it deems appropriate.

Those provisions have been of concern to Aboriginal land councils. Because the Opposition in another place delayed the passage of this bill on National Sorry Day, the Minister for Housing was forced to make some concessions to the Aboriginal land councils that he would negotiate further with them. The Opposition has asked for details of what is to be negotiated further before the House passes this bill, which contains these fairly extensive powers. Is the Opposition not entitled to ask for details of how this legislation will operate, how these powers will be exercised, and what powers these agencies will be able to exercise? We have no details. All the Opposition has and all the people have is a commitment by the Government to negotiate at some further time.

However, this bill has to be passed as part of the Aboriginal reconciliation process. It has become a benchmark of support for Aborigines. According to the Minister one has to fall into line with some particular political orthodoxy, and because this is an Aboriginal housing office and because it has the support of some Aborigines - and I presume some do not support it - members of the Opposition are not supposed to ask legitimate questions about the operation of specific clauses of the bill. The Opposition will not fall into line with that treatment. Opposition members will deal with this bill as we do with all legislation - in a proper manner - and will ask important questions.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile: Don’t delay it.

The Hon. J. F. RYAN: It needs to be delayed. If we do not delay this bill, its draconian powers will become law and six months down the track, after the bill commences operation on 1 July, we can ask all the questions we like, but we are then in the hands of the Government as to whether it will change the law. It would basically be giving the Government the gun and the bullets and saying, "It is up to you if you want to shoot us later."

Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile: Ask your questions in your speech.

The Hon. J. F. RYAN: I am. All these questions were asked of the Minister for Housing in the other place, but he did not answer one of them. So the Opposition has asked the questions and not one has been answered. Let me ask a few other questions about what various provisions of this bill mean. Honourable members may be interested in how extensive and wobbly some of the powers outlined in the bill are. Apparently members of the Opposition are racist because we ask sensible questions. I am not going to be called a racist for asking questions that need to be asked. For example, clause 28 refers to the registration of Aboriginal housing organisations. That clause provides that the Aboriginal Housing Office will be given the opportunity to include amongst the information that it keeps about these agencies:

. . . such other information, provided by a registered Aboriginal housing organisation at the request of the AHO, as the AHO considers appropriate for inclusion in the register.

The register can be expanded or contracted, and this organisation can be intrusive. This arrangement is not about self-determination for Aborigines; it is about the Minister for Housing taking over from Aboriginal organisations because, in the Minister’s words, they are deemed to be not viable and not working. The Opposition is simply asking how that will operate. I have already drawn attention to the fact that the registration can be withdrawn for any reasons that the AHO sees fit. Clause 26(6) of the bill includes this remarkable provision, with regard to the registration of Aboriginal housing organisations:

The regulations may make further provision for or with respect to any matter that relates to the registration of an eligible organisation under this Part.

In other words, if we have not done our job properly in explaining how the organisation is registered, the AHO may, without any further consent of this Parliament, make a series of regulations as it deems appropriate. They are subject to potential disallowance; nevertheless, they can operate. The bill provides this extensive regulating power. I ask the Minister what provisions in other legislation allow people to virtually rewrite legislation and rewrite what Parliament has provided by way of regulation? Why does the bill not simply provide that the conditions for registration of Aboriginal organisations to be registered under this Act are to
Page 6113
be determined in the future by regulations? Why should we comment on anything when the bill contains this sort of open-ended clause with regard to registration? Under such a regulation, anything could be done to register or deregister an organisation.

The Opposition hopes the Minister will respond to these questions. The honourable member for Vaucluse raised a few other areas of concern. I am becoming tired of people abusing him because of the electorate he comes from and represents, and for saying he is not an appropriate person to administer Department of Housing accommodation. That has been said on a number of occasions in the other place. I am not going to reveal people’s private details, but there is not a great deal of difference between the house occupied by the Minister for Housing in a very leafy part of Liverpool and that occupied by the honourable member for Vaucluse. Those sorts of prejudicial judgments are offensive.

Apparently we are not supposed to be able to understand the needs of people who live in Department of Housing accommodation because of the condition of the houses in which we live. If the honourable member for Vaucluse is not eligible, neither is the Minister for Housing. I would not make that accusation. I have accompanied the honourable member for Vaucluse through the streets of Claymore, Ambarvale and Airds, and have spoken to Department of Housing tenants. That is part of our duty, and that consultation was not inappropriate. The Opposition is simply asking the Government to consider that much of the detail in this bill has not been worked out. Many questions need to be answered. The Opposition is asking legitimate questions, as it would with any legislation, whether it dealt with Aboriginal housing or with the budget.

Just because this matter deals with Aborigines we should not be accused of being racist. We are not. I believe strongly in self-determination by Aborigines. I legitimately ask the Minister to explain the creation of a new Department of Housing, given the reputation of the current department. I have seen terrible houses administered by the Department of Housing, with carpets I would not let my own children crawl on, and with kitchens that are infested with cockroaches. I have been to neighbourhoods in which housing is inappropriate, neighbourhoods that I would not be proud to claim as being provided by the public purse.

I am not the only person to make such comments. Mr Joe Tripodi travelled in a car all around Villawood with a Channel 9 news crew, extensively criticising housing. I have for a long time had grave concerns about conditions in Department of Housing homes. I have a motion before this House proposing an inquiry into fires in Department of Housing homes, in an attempt to make sure that fires in those houses do not occur with frequency. For various reasons the Government does not want to debate my motion, even though the questions asked are legitimate. Nobody can accuse me of not having spent an extensive period of my service in the House standing up for and fighting for the rights of people who live in Department of Housing homes. I do the same thing for Aborigines who live in public housing. I do not consider that the present Department of Housing is working so brilliantly that the best thing to do for Aborigines is form a brand new department that replicates many of the problems and errors now evident in the Department of Housing.

I am not so closed minded as to think that might not be a partial solution, and I do not expect the Government to come up with perfection. I do, however, expect the Government to answer the kinds of questions that I put to it. In fact, I believe those questions are a little too broad to be dealt with in this House in a debate that has extended over yesterday and today. Therefore, I support very strongly the idea that the bill be referred to a committee. It would not need to be considered by the committee for years; a matter of a few months should be sufficient. There should be the opportunity for members of a committee to go out to the community, ask questions and report back to the House. Having made those comments, I hope that honourable members at least understand that I have spoken strongly and passionately in defence of the Aborigines who use Department of Housing homes. I have been frank and candid, I accept. I do not believe that this bill is in any state fit to be passed by the House.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [3.22 p.m.]: I support this bill. I place on record that I do not consider the Hon. J. F. Ryan to be a racist or to have any racist feelings. Before speaking to the bill, I wish to congratulate the Hon. Carmel Tebbutt on her first speech in the Parliament. She made a very worthy speech and it was lovely to see all her family present. The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt is a young woman who obviously has a bright future. I congratulate her most warmly and wish her a brilliant career. Last week’s State election in Queensland saw the rise of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party. Perhaps the coalition’s attitude to this bill has been influenced by the results of the Queensland election. We are all concerned about the dividing of Australia by the One Nation Party.
Page 6114
Newspaper articles, editorials and letters to the editor demonstrate that this is an issue of concern to most Australians in one way or another. This morning’s Australian newspaper carried a letter from Mr Paul Silbert of Beldon in Western Australia which stated:

Ironic, isn’t it, that an anti-immigration party like One Nation would do so well in the State which, after Tasmania, has the lowest proportion of immigrants? Ironic, but not without precedent. Historians have found that the Nazis, during their rise to power, got their best election results in those areas of Germany that had the fewest Jews. Evidently, it is easier to persuade people to hate groups they know nothing about than those they do.

That is sad, but people who are against immigration generally know very few immigrants, and people who are anti-Aboriginal generally know very few Aborigines. The more we know one another, the more we understand one another. That is why this bill, the Aboriginal Housing Bill, is important. I am sad that we as a House have not reached consensus on the bill. We should have reached some agreement so that Aboriginal housing could be the subject of a bipartisan approach and not become a political football, which is what I am afraid will happen. It will be very sad if that does happen.

In effect this bill does not do anything to advantage the Aboriginal community but gives the Aboriginal Housing Office responsibility for planning and delivering programs and services to assist Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in meeting their housing needs. It was interesting to listen to the contribution made this morning by the Hon. Patricia Forsythe, who presented a true scenario of the damning and unbelievable circumstances in which most Aboriginal people live. She spoke of the high percentage of Aboriginal people looking for public housing.

This has been a shame for successive governments at both State and Federal levels. Ministers have visited Aboriginal estates and Aboriginal camps and have said that something will be done, but nothing ever seems to be done. It will be a very good thing to have an umbrella organisation accountable for registered Aboriginal housing organisations. Having read the debate in the lower House, I note that one of the problems some coalition members, such as Peter Debnam and Joe Schipp, have with this legislation is that there has not been enough consultation. Some of the material I have received, however, shows that there has been quite an amount of consultation. Senator John Herron, Federal Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, wrote on 16 June to Minister Knowles as follows:

Dear Minister

I understand that the NSW Government’s response to indigenous housing needs in the State includes the development of a proposed Bilateral Agreement together with the consideration of appropriate legislation by the NSW Legislative Assembly.

My colleague, Senator the Hon. Jocelyn Newman, Minister for Social Security has indicated that the draft NSW Indigenous Housing Bilateral Agreement appears generally to address the priorities identified by both the Commonwealth and the New South Wales Governments.

I note that it is intended to establish an Aboriginal Housing Office under the NSW Aboriginal Housing Act, 1998. This arrangement will be welcomed by indigenous people in NSW as it will improve the delivery of housing services to them, whilst taking their unique requirements into account.

It is essential that housing for Indigenous people is provided in a coordinated and efficient manner, and I am pleased that the measures that the New South Wales Government is intending to put in place recognises the importance of this.

Yours sincerely

SENATOR JOHN HERRON

I emphasise Senator Herron’s statement that the establishment of an Aboriginal Housing Office will be welcomed by indigenous people. The Hon. Jocelyn Newman, Federal Minister for Social Security, wrote to the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, and Minister for Housing as follows:

I am also pleased to note that the latest draft of the Bilateral Agreement has accommodated [all] the issues raised by the Commonwealth in previous negotiations.

The Minister for Social Security supports this legislation. I recognise that many honourable members would like to speak to this legislation and that the Government would like to have the bill passed, if possible, so I shall not speak at length. The New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council wrote to the Minister as follows:

Please be advised that the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council ("NSWALC") supports the passage of the Aboriginal Housing Bill 1998 ("the Bill") through the NSW Parliament.

NSWALC is satisfied that the understanding reached in its detailed discussions with the Government will ensure the Bill is beneficial to Aboriginal people in NSW, including members of Local Aboriginal Land Councils, in terms of addressing their housing needs while providing for rigorous accountability.

I like the phrase "rigorous accountability", which is certainly something most of us would welcome. Gatjil Djerrkura has written to Minister Craig Knowles, and stated that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission approves in principle the draft housing bilateral agreement between the
Page 6115
Commonwealth, ATSIC and the New South Wales Government and is pleased with the negotiations. I have been handed a memorandum of understanding reached between the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, and Minister for Housing, the Aboriginal Housing Development Committee and the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. This is a long document, which I perused during lunchtime. It is a good document and I am glad that agreement was reached. Also at lunchtime I received a facsimile from the Council of Social Service of New South Wales, NCOSS, which reads as follows:

I write to urge you to support this Bill in Parliament today.

The Aboriginal Housing Bill makes significant gains for indigenous peoples in controlling the delivery of housing to Aboriginal communities. It also enables duplication in the delivery of Aboriginal housing to be overcome by the pooling of sources of funding.

NCOSS understands that agreement has been reached between the Government and Aboriginal Land Councils in support of the Bill . . .

I urge you to ensure the passage of this Bill.

This morning when I read Hansard I thought that there had not been enough consultation about the matter but having considered those letters and reports I received from various bodies it is obvious that there has been a lot of consultation. I read all the speeches given in the lower House with great interest. Both Peter Debnam and Mr Schipp, a person I have always held in high regard, gave good speeches. I particularly liked the speech given by the honourable member for Bligh, Clover Moore, in which she said:

I would support referral of the bill to a committee. I remind members that the House of Commons takes 18 months to finalise pieces of legislation, because it wants to get it right. I cannot understand why the Parliament sits for a few weeks at a time and legislation is rushed through or guillotined, as it is being guillotined today. We are denied the opportunity to debate motions of urgency or matters of public importance and denied private members’ day to put forward matters of importance to our community.

This morning I toyed with the idea of moving an amendment to send the bill to a parliamentary committee. I thought it important to reach consensus on this bill. After examining a lot of papers given to me and after listening to the coalition members both this morning and this afternoon I realised that no matter what happens it will be very difficult to reach any consensus on the measure after what happened in Queensland last weekend. Therefore, I decided not to move the amendment but to support the bill, and hopefully to see it passed.

I am pleased to see that the Treasurer is present in the Chamber today. I would like to put to him that the second reading debate on the legislation should not take 18 months, as Clover Moore says happens in the House of Commons; that seems to be too long. However, it is important that the legislation is put on the table for people to have a chance to look at it. This House now has eight crossbench members and it is becoming more important for them to look at the legislation in detail. The Legislative Council is, after all, a House of review.

The legislation should be reviewed. Last night the legislation passed through the lower House. This morning the bill was brought here to be passed quickly through this House, but that course is completely unacceptable. I do not have a staff member to look at it, I have to do all the research myself. I find that extremely difficult.

The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: You have not got a second staff member yet?

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA: No, and I am not getting a staff member. I do not think Mr Carr likes me, and I do not think the Treasurer will make money available for that purpose. No matter what I do, the Government will think I am doing things to spite it, which I would never do. I try to do the right thing by the community, as I did when I looked at the legislation. In the final analysis I thought it was a better course to support the legislation. I again make a plea to the Government that legislation as important as this not be debated so quickly. Why do we have to sit only a few weeks a year and then rush legislation through in such an incredible way?

The legislation will have consequences for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people, some of whom will attack the Aboriginal community and claim they receive some sort of privilege. Aborigines in Australia are still the most disadvantaged group in this country. I am afraid there will be an onslaught of discussion of the bill by radio commentators and other pundits. The losers will be the Aboriginal people themselves and that is why I am so concerned about the measure.

My credentials on Aboriginal affairs over the past 17 years are on the public record in Hansard. I do not need to tell people how I feel about the injustices suffered by the original Australians. I support the bill and I hope that it will be a big step for the Aboriginal community to enable them to regain their dignity. The indigenous community must understand that the new body will be closely monitored and they are on notice that the general community will expect performance and accountability. I make a plea to the Aboriginal community not to let down all the people who have supported them in the passing of this bill.

Page 6116

The Hon. I. COHEN [3.35 p.m.]: The Greens strongly support the Aboriginal Housing Bill and we congratulate the Government on introducing it. The bill will establish an Aboriginal Housing Office with functions relating to housing for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders. In regard to the current position the New South Wales Federation of Housing states:

There exists:

•a multitude of Aboriginal Housing Providers in NSW competing for funding for capital improvements and constructions that are scarce relative to the Aboriginal population, backlog and family formations;

•in excess of 40 former Aboriginal reserves in NSW in need, notwithstanding a specially targetted Tripartite Program that involved ATSIC; NSW DAA and NSW ALC four players instead of the proposed one Aboriginal Housing Office;

•social problems stemming from poor economic standing at both the individual and community levels that Aboriginal Housing Providers have to contend with but receive no funding from relevant agencies;

•severe impacts by the latter on the Aboriginal Housing Provider(s) measured by the legacy of low rental payments and deterioration in the condition of housing stock;

•an inability of Aboriginal Housing Providers, generally, to develop and implement cyclical maintenance plans;

•an ability of Aboriginal Housing Providers to undertake capital renovations and make improvements such that the Housing Stock is under control and working for the benefit of the community and the organisation;

•a frustration among Aboriginal Housing Providers with caveats and specific purposes agreements that come with funding and limit their ability to operate "as a business" and potentially make commercial decisions that are limited to their asset base;

•a "vacuum" in terms of opportunities for individual Aboriginal Housing Providers to meet and as a collective group network, share experiences, forge strategic directions for the sector, influence sector wide reforms, provide input for the formulation and implementation of training programs that are responsive to real life experiences and practical situations that exist at the community level, participate in the design and formulation of standards and "best practice" models and feel part of a sector that is "upwardly mobile" and making positive gains.

•a gentle push for an umbrella group to unite Aboriginal Housing Providers in their thinking on matters that affect them; and to assist in the introduction of measures aimed at achieving improvements in management and efficiencies.

That clearly indicates the need to reform and rejuvenate Aboriginal housing in New South Wales. I am glad that the Government has seen fit to bring this bill forward at this stage. The Aboriginal Housing Office - AHO - will be a statutory corporation. The bill gives the AHO responsibility for planning and delivering programs and services to assist Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders in meeting their housing needs, and provides for the registration of Aboriginal housing organisations eligible to receive assistance under the Act. The Greens applaud these provisions.

The briefing note on the bill states that for the first time the bill will ensure that Aboriginal people achieve self-determination in relation to the management of housing opportunities in New South Wales. Aborigines will be responsible for the allocation of expenditure and the management of housing organisations. When the bill was first introduced, crossbench members were approached by the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council, which was concerned about the bill. The ALC presented to the crossbenchers a number of amendments they wished to have moved. In particular, concerns were expressed about part 6, management of Aboriginal Housing Office, clause 29(1), which states:

The Aboriginal Housing Office is, in the exercise of its functions, subject to the control and direction of the Minister.

The ALC was concerned that that provision provides too much ministerial discretion and control. The ALC had problems with clause 30, which sets out the board of the AHO. The ALC was also concerned that ATSIC representatives would dominate the board, yet ATSIC was only providing 20 per cent of the funds. However, the Government has consulted with the Aboriginal Land Council and a memorandum of understanding - MOU - was drafted and signed. The parties to the MOU are the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, and the Minister for Housing, the Aboriginal Housing Development Committee and the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. On 3 June 1998 Ossie Cruse, the ALC chairman, wrote to Minister for Housing, the Hon. Craig Knowles, expressing support for the bill. The letter stated:

Please be advised that the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council ("NSWALC") supports the passage of the Aboriginal Housing Bill 1998 ("the Bill") through the NSW Parliament.

The NSWALC is satisfied that the understanding reached in its detailed discussions with the Government will ensure the Bill is beneficial to Aboriginal people in NSW, including members of Local Aboriginal Land Councils, in terms of addressing their housing needs while providing for rigorous accountability.

Of particular interest in the memorandum of understanding are the following provisions. The MOU provides general guidance as to how it is intended that certain provisions of the Aboriginal
Page 6117
Housing Act 1998 are to be applied with respect to the NSWALC and local aboriginal land councils - LALCs - constituted in accordance with the provisions of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983. The MOU should be read at all times as subject to the Aboriginal Housing Act 1998. This MOU derives from the recognition by the parties that LALCs have played, and are likely to continue to play, a significant and important role in the provision of housing and infrastructure services to Aboriginal communities in New South Wales through their various capacities as landowners; housing, infrastructure and community services developers and providers; housing and tenancy managers; providers of employment, training and enterprise development functions; and Aboriginal community advocates and representatives with respect to housing and housing services.

The significance of this role is evidenced by the fact that there are 117 local aboriginal land councils across the State, and they are currently the largest providers of Aboriginal housing outside direct public sector housing provision and assistance. This MOU seeks to address the concerns of the NSWALC which were raised during discussions on the bill with the Minister and the chairperson of the Aboriginal Housing Development Committee. The NSWALC strongly supports the proposal that the State Government transfer title to existing Housing for Aborigines - HFA - dwellings from the Department of Housing to the Aboriginal Housing Office following the commencement of the Aboriginal Housing Act.

Regarding the appointment of NSWALC nominees to the board, it is proposed that the first board of the AHO will have 14 members comprising: one independent chair; six members nominated by ATSIC; six specialist members, including an NSWALC representative; and the Chief Executive Officer of the Aboriginal Housing Office, who shall be a non-voting member. The Minister will invite the NSWALC to nominate a member of the council for appointment to the board of the AHO. Members of local aboriginal land councils will be eligible to be considered for appointment to other positions on the board. Further, the Minister will be happy to receive nomination by NSWALC of up to three other persons from the land council network, other than NSWALC councillors, for appointment to the board. An independent selection process will be established to advise the Minister as to the suitability and credentials of the nominees for the six independent positions on the board, that is, the chair and five specialist members.

Relating to the Aboriginal Housing Office’s interest in land, the parties acknowledge that where a proposed AHO housing agreement with an LALC relates to land of the LALC which it has acquired as a result of a claim under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 it would as a general principle be inappropriate for the AHO to seek to include conditions in a housing agreement which confer on the AHO any right or option to acquire that land if the events outlined in section 20 of the Act, for example, failure to use the land for the purposes contemplated by the housing agreement, should occur. It is intended that the agreement will reflect this understanding. However, the parties also acknowledge that neither this memorandum of understanding nor the agreement should be treated as restricting LALCs in negotiating the terms and conditions of an AHO housing agreement with the AHO. It is interesting that a letter to the Hon. Craig Knowles, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, from Jocelyn Newman, the Federal Minister for Social Security, stated:

The NSW Aboriginal Housing Act, 1998 will enable the implementation of the Bilateral Agreement through the establishment of the Aboriginal Housing Office. The desired outcomes of both the NSW Indigenous Housing Bilateral Agreement and the Aboriginal Housing Act, 1998 should be increased housing outcomes for Indigenous people in NSW.

May I take this opportunity to thank you for your continuing co-operation in the development of the Bilateral Agreement and I look forward to working with you in the implementation of the Agreement.

The Greens have received numerous faxed messages and a multitude of information, albeit rather late, which expressed great concern that the bill be passed. Extreme concern has been expressed at the opposition put forward by members of the Opposition. This morning I received a fax from R. Norton and A. Cedervall which stated:

I am writing to encourage you to support the Aboriginal Housing Bill without amendment, when it comes before the Legislative Council.

I am a non-Aboriginal Australian. I do however have some 18 years association with various Aboriginal people and communities around NSW and other parts of Australia, and have a reasonable understanding of the nature of the housing, infrastructure and related health issues that confront these communities. I have also worked in the "social housing sector" providing low income housing to both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal tenants.

I believe the proposal to establish a dedicated Aboriginal Housing Office, specifically addressing the planning and delivery of Aboriginal housing is long overdue. Such an arrangement will make the provision of Aboriginal housing a more transparent, accountable, efficient and coordinated activity. At the same time, the proposal for an all Aboriginal Board to oversee the Office and report to the Minister establishes the opportunity and responsibility for self-determination in addressing the housing needs of the Aboriginal community . . .

Page 6118

I would simply encourage you to think about whether the principle behind the Bill and the objectives of the Bill are appropriate, reasonable and just; whether it poses any insurmountable problems that cannot be addressed by subsequent policy or regulation; whether the proposal offers more hope for the Aboriginal community and those in housing need than the existing and relatively unsuccessful arrangements, and, what will be the consequences for the planning and delivery of Aboriginal housing programs in both the short and long term (and hence for those who depend on these programs for their housing) if this opportunity is lost?

We have the opportunity to look at this bill as a springboard for a complementary opportunity to provide appropriate housing for Aboriginal people, getting away from the strict model of what has not worked previously. Recently the Minister for Housing, Craig Knowles, introduced State environmental planning policy No. 15 for multiple occupancies designed to enable alternative communities to live on the land in groups. I term them "intentional communities" because they have a commonality of interest in which people share their housing and live in harmony on the land. This is a great opportunity for Aboriginal communities to take advantage of this alternative method of housing which will allow accommodation on one block of land which would normally carry only one farmhouse.

Under this proposal low-cost community units would be developed which would be accessible to the Aboriginal community. This type of social arrangement is in keeping with Aboriginal traditional values. With the use of the alternative communities model there may be an increase in interest in bush tucker and organic agriculture. Aboriginal communities will be able to get together and develop a viable economic base for their community through multiple occupancies, living and working together to supply the ever-growing market for bush tucker. Today I had a discussion about the situation in New Zealand, where communal-based Maoris, with the support of the bureaucracy, have been very successful in exporting organic foodstuffs.

This bill will enable similar communal-based groups to be established, with community support. That will provide a strong economic base that is in keeping with the attitudes of Aboriginal people. Aboriginal people have the ability to live together in harmony and to protect the land in a way that is productive for both the land and the community. This bill will enable Aboriginal people to exercise a degree of control over the land that they have not had for a long time. Interestingly, I received a letter from the New South Wales Federation of Housing Associations Incorporated, in which the executive director, Joan Ferguson, said:

The NSW Federation of Housing Associations strongly supports the Aboriginal Housing Bill currently before the NSW Parliament.

This organisation represents the interests and views of housing associations in NSW. We provide a range of services and resources to our members. Part of our work is with Aboriginal housing organisations. We speak from a position of some authority when we say we are sure that broad consultations on the proposal have been undertaken. Consultation first began with the release of the Mant Report, the subsequent Green Paper and various other papers. Those sections of the community involved in housing have been well aware of the proposal for several years. The proposal of an Aboriginal Housing Office has certainly not come out of the blue. Indeed, establishment of the Division of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Housing (DATSIH) is a necessary forerunner of an Aboriginal Housing Office.

The Aboriginal housing team within the Federation has been comprehensively involved in lengthy and detailed consultations over this Act. Members of the team have worked with Aboriginal communities to provide them with information and access to resources. We acknowledge that there will always be discussion and debate within communities over these matters and accept that this is a healthy outcome of any consultation process. The fact that there is debate is, itself, evidence of an information process and consultation.

Finally, I received a fax from the Council of Social Service of New South Wales, in which the director, Mr Garry Moore, said:

I write to urge you to support this Bill in Parliament today.

The Aboriginal Housing Bill makes significant gains for indigenous peoples in controlling the delivery of housing to Aboriginal communities. It also enables duplication in the delivery of Aboriginal housing to be overcome by the pooling of sources of funding.

NCOSS understands that agreement has been reached between the Government and Aboriginal Land Councils in support of the Bill. This should be recognised by all MLCs as significant.

NCOSS is concerned that at this late stage of negotiations, the Opposition may choose political point scoring over just and fair housing outcomes for Aboriginal communities.

I urge you to ensure the passage of this Bill.

The Greens are enthusiastic about the passage of this bill, which will enable the Aboriginal community in New South Wales to receive the equity and quality of life it deserves. The Greens strongly support the Aboriginal Housing Bill.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [3.53 p.m.]: I support the Aboriginal Housing Bill, which is an important step forward for the welfare of Aboriginal people. The establishment of a single agency to co-ordinate Aboriginal housing issues is a positive step and will alleviate problems associated with dual roles and double money dipping. The Indigenous Social Justice Association believes that the bill is well thought out and the best possible way to
Page 6119
improve Aboriginal housing issues in New South Wales. The Gunya Aboriginal Tenants Advice and Advocacy Service, which services 50,000 Aboriginal people west of the Blue Mountains to the Victorian, Queensland and South Australian borders, has said in correspondence to me that the bill will alleviate nepotism and queue-jumping, and will streamline the allocation of houses for Aboriginal people.

Control over housing is an important issue for indigenous peoples, who have been dispossessed since colonisation and have had paternalistic and unconscionable policies enforced on them by white bureaucrats. Too often these attitudes are reinforced in society by narrow-minded and patronising people. I am disappointed that the Opposition, in supporting this bill, has surrendered to One Nation sentiment. I suspect that the Opposition has a hidden agenda as a result of the big vote for One Nation in Queensland. Perhaps the coalition is saying that it should start bashing Aborigines because that might get it some votes in the bush. The main strength of this bill is that it gives control back to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people within an accountable framework. Indigenous people must be able to control their own affairs, particularly in the delivery of housing to their own communities. Quality and availability of housing greatly influence the social and economic wellbeing of all. This is particularly true for indigenous people.

In a recent study the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research noted that indigenous households are complex social and economic units which differ from other Australian households. Characteristics of indigenous population lifestyle, such as high mobility and the overcrowding of accommodation visited by many guests, tend to lead to faster deterioration of housing conditions, exacerbation of environmental health problems, increased stress in social relationships and reduced expenditure capacity in indigenous households. Provision of indigenous housing must be considered separately. Indeed, fair housing outcomes will not be achieved unless that is done. The time has come for coalition members and others to recognise that indigenous people are perfectly capable of looking after their own affairs. Anyone who argues differently expresses a condescending paternalism that has no place in New South Wales or, indeed, Australia.

Giving control of housing provision back to indigenous people is a positive step toward their self-determination. This bill does just that by providing for the establishment of a single Aboriginal Housing Office for New South Wales which will be funded through a joint agreement between ATSIC, the State Government and the Federal Government. The AHO will be a full statutory corporation and will plan and develop programs and services for indigenous housing. It will have the power to sell and acquire property and to arrange for the provision of housing and related infrastructure in Aboriginal communities. Aboriginal housing organisations will need to register with the AHO and enter into an agreement before being able to apply for funding. An important part of this bill is that registered organisations will receive training and support in relation to carrying out their tenancy and property management functions. This is an excellent provision because it is likely to improve the existing system and encourage greater accountability at the local level.

I understand that the AHO will primarily provide rental housing. However, the Minister noted in his second reading speech that policies to support home ownership will also be developed. That is essential if indigenous people are to gain complete control over their lives and break welfare dependence. I hope this issue is not forgotten. It is significant that there is wide agreement from indigenous groups, including the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council, on the proposals outlined in the bill. Agreement is essential if this legislation is to be effective. It should be known, however, that the consultation process was not smooth. The Aboriginal Land Council expressed concerned about a number of aspects of the bill and, despite being involved in preliminary discussions, did not obtain a copy of the bill until one week before its presentation before Parliament. However, since that time it has reached agreement and signed a memorandum of understanding with the Minister for Housing and the Aboriginal Housing and Development Committee, which played a large role in formulating this legislation. In a press release dated Friday 5 June 1998, the Chairman of the Aboriginal Land Council, Ossie Cruse, noted:

This bill provides for a significant increase in the level of Aboriginal involvement and control of the housing services provided to Aboriginal people . . . the NSWALC has always supported the idea and we believe this AHO provides for a strong level of accountability in the management of public housing for Aboriginal housing in this state.

One reservation I have about this bill is that on my current reading it is possible that a non-Aboriginal person could head the Aboriginal Housing Office. Clearly, this would be unacceptable and against the intention of the bill to increase indigenous self-determination. In discussions with the Minister for Housing I was informed that there is every intention that an indigenous person will be the chief executive
Page 6120
officer of the Aboriginal Housing Office. I would prefer an assurance on this matter as I think appointment of an indigenous CEO is critical to the integrity of the AHO. I await the Minister’s reply to see if there is a response on this matter.

The New South Wales Aboriginal Women’s Legal Resource Centre supports the establishment of a separate agency to administer Aboriginal housing programs and believes that self-determination is critical to the functioning of the AHO. The centre has raised issues relating to policy focus and implementation of the bill. It is important that the policies of the board, and subsequently the AHO, adequately address the housing needs of Aboriginal women and children, especially those experiencing violence. The centre submits that:

. . . any policy development and program must address and provide appropriate emergency housing and long-term housing for Aboriginal women and children experiencing and/or escaping violence. It is our experience that one of the biggest obstacles to Aboriginal women escaping domestic violence is the great difficulty in finding appropriate alternative housing for themselves and their children. (This) . . . is particularly difficult for Aboriginal women in rural and isolated communities. Aboriginal women and children often have to move hundreds of kilometres away from their community, family and support network to find appropriate housing when escaping violence.

It is therefore critical that Aboriginal women are appointed to the Board of the AHO and the Aboriginal Regional Housing Committee. Equally important, (is that) the Minister, when determining the criteria for eligibility for appointment to the Board, must require members to have an understanding of and commitment to addressing the housing needs of Aboriginal women and children.

I conclude by endorsing the bill once again and reading what the Indigenous Social Justice Association has to say about the bill:

. . . by combining resources and having Aboriginal people taking responsibility for and determining the direction of Aboriginal housing in this State, many of the housing problems associated with the timely and appropriate response to housing needs may be eliminated.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [4.00 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party is pleased to support the Aboriginal Housing Bill, which will help to ensure that Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders have access to appropriate, affordable and quality housing having regard to the social and cultural requirements, living patterns and preferences of those to whom the housing is to be provided. The bill will enhance the role of Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders in determining, developing and delivering policies and programs for Aboriginal housing. Further, it will ensure that in providing housing assistance for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders priority is given to individuals most in need.

The bill will also increase the range of housing choices for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders to reflect the diversity of individual and community needs. Other objects of the bill are to ensure that registered Aboriginal housing organisations are accountable, effective and skilled in the delivery of Aboriginal housing programs and services; to ensure that the Aboriginal Housing Office’s housing programs and services are administered efficiently and in co-ordination with other programs and services that are provided to assist Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders; and to encourage the sustainable employment of Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders in the delivery of Aboriginal housing assistance.

This is a most important bill. It is a shame that the coalition parties have spoken against it - although they will not cause the House to divide on its second reading. From my research it is clear that the bill originated with a coalition Minister for Housing, the Hon. Robert Webster, when he appointed the Aboriginal Housing Development Committee - AHDC - to consult with the Aboriginal community and to establish a vision and direction for meeting the housing needs and aspirations of Aboriginal people in New South Wales. The bill developed and evolved from that foundation. The AHDC consulted communities throughout New South Wales in 1995 and tabled its report "Future Directions for Aboriginal Housing in NSW" at the end of 1996.

The committee supported the establishment of a single agency to administer Aboriginal housing programs and to provide leadership to Aboriginal organisations. That would be the most effective means of addressing some of the current problems, such as the lack of co-ordination between agencies, the duplication of program management, the inefficient use of resources, and inconsistencies in policies and procedures. The bill will establish the Aboriginal Housing Office, which, combined with executing the proposed agreement with the Commonwealth and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission - ATSIC - will enable the pooling of funds for Aboriginal housing programs and provide the strongest model adopted across Australia for reforming administration of Aboriginal housing.

I had discussions with Tom Slockee, the present chairperson of AHDC, and also with Mr Ossie Cruse, who is a personal friend of mine and the chairperson of the New South Wales Aboriginal
Page 6121
Land Council, to ascertain whether all key Aboriginal leaders and organisations were happy with the bill. Because of concerns expressed by the council consideration was given to seeking amendments. However, the concerns were resolved with the preparation of a memorandum of understanding.

I seek leave to table a number of documents: first, correspondence from the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council that I received on 18 May; second, a memorandum of understanding between the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, and Minister for Housing, the Aboriginal Housing Development Committee and the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council; third, a report entitled "Future Directions for Aboriginal Housing in NSW", dated December 1996; fourth, a document entitled "Training Plan for the Aboriginal Housing Sector Volume 1", produced for the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning by the consultancy Robyn Kennedy and Co. Pty Ltd, dated December 1997; and, finally, the 1996-98 New South Wales Aboriginal Housing Plan.

Leave granted.

Because of an agreement to adjourn the House earlier than usual my comments on this bill will be brief. Suffice it to say there has been considerable support for this measure. It will benefit Aboriginal people, who I am sure will be pleased with this outcome. I remain hopeful that all legislation dealing with Aboriginal issues receives the support of all members of this House.

The Hon. R. D. DYER (Minister for Public Works and Services) [4.07 p.m.], in reply: I thank all honourable members who contributed to debate on this bill, particularly those who supported the bill. I shall respond briefly to some matters raised by the Hon. R. S. L. Jones, who expressed concern about the appointment of a chief executive officer. I am informed that the board of the Aboriginal Housing Office will develop a specific policy on Aboriginal employment consistent with clause 3(h) of the bill, which states:

to encourage the sustainable employment of Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders in the delivery of Aboriginal housing assistance.

The agency will report annually on its staff establishment and achievements against its employment policy, which will include annual targets for increasing Aboriginal employment. The current head of the Division of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Housing is an Aborigine and has held that position since 1995. More than 50 per cent of staff currently undertaking the functions of the new agency are Aborigines. If any matters raised during the course of the debate have not been specifically responded to, I am confident that the office of my ministerial colleague the Hon. Craig Knowles, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning, and Minister for Housing, will respond. I commend the bill.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.