Wednesday, 31 July 2024
Bills
Aboriginal Land Legislation Amendment Bill 2024
Bills
Aboriginal Land Legislation Amendment Bill 2024
Second reading
Debate resumed.
Lauren KATHAGE (Yan Yean) (15:00): In my contribution earlier I was speaking about the history of Lake Tyers and I was focusing on the champions in the Aboriginal community who represented and spoke for their people to bring about the outcome that they sought. So in my closing time I would like to focus on what really is the core value and principle of this bill, which is self-determination. I note that in the development of this bill there was guidance and direction from the residents of Lake Tyers and the shareholders of Lake Tyers because for this government we are talking about people’s homes and we speak to the people that are relevant who guide us. It is hard to put into words, but I believe that stands in stark contrast to those opposite, who say when people do not have a home it is because of Aboriginal Victorians’ cultural heritage rights, but they do not consult with or be guided by Aboriginal people in that. In fact even worse, there is a blatant disregard for the published outcomes of the relevant budget paper 3 measure, which shows that the percentage of decisions made in cultural heritage management plans within statutory timeframes has always been above 97 per cent and in some years has been 100 per cent. So I ask them to consider self-determination, to take it seriously and to back treaty.
Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (15:02): Acting Speaker O’Keeffe, what a pleasure it is to see you in the Speaker’s chair this afternoon, and congratulations on your additional role. I know you already work very, very hard in your electorate and in your role in this place, so thank you.
It is with pleasure that I get up to contribute to the Aboriginal Land Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 and to refute some of the things that have been mentioned in the chamber recently about this side’s disregard for self-determination for our First Nations people, which is completely untrue. In my location in the north-west of the state around Mildura, with the highest population of First Nations people, I spend a lot of time within that community. They are my friends and my teachers. The Murray Valley Aboriginal Co-operative in fact have been one of the reasons I have been able to be a working mother, quite frankly. Having an organisation like Murray Valley Aboriginal Co-op and those like them, and First People of the Mallee as well, doing an enormous amount of work in the space of self-determination, which is place-based and community-led like all solutions should be, is highly important, and bills like this, which update management and ownership structures for Indigenous community funds, are obviously very important.
But like I mentioned, it is important that I acknowledge, as I have done several times in this house, co-ops like Murray Valley Aboriginal Co-operative, which do deliver all sorts of programs and services, and early childhood learning is one of them, with long day care. In fact they are the only early learning centre in Robinvale, which is a town of 8000 people. Not only is the work that they do there in the early childhood space with regard to vulnerable children in the community; also, like I said, they are the only daycare centre in Robinvale. They took care of and educated my children from birth, pretty much, until I could get them in, because as you can imagine, being one centre in a large town, it is difficult to get places. But they do an incredible amount of work, and it is a pleasure to work with them in that capacity and in other capacities to talk about what is actually really important to self-determination locally and what it means for those communities.
When we talk about the removal of restrictions on use and transfers of missions, cemeteries et cetera, this has been one thing that has come up. This is what happens when you build real relationships with our communities, not just with our First Nations people but all communities. You are privileged enough to have some very honest conversations – sometimes they are hard conversations – about what is required, and the cemetery issue and sorry business has been one that has come up a few times locally and is something that needs a little bit more work in our landscape with our local cemetery trust. I do think there is a lot of work there that could still be done with regard to the local cemetery trust being culturally sensitive and appropriate when it comes to sorry business. There is a lot of work still to be done, but again there are some great people doing great work; there are great programs being offered.
I push the Clontarf Foundation barrow often. In small towns they all work together, and the results we see are astounding. I think I have mentioned it before: put the work that Murray Valley Aboriginal Co-operative do in the housing space, in the counselling space and with the men’s program together with the Clontarf Foundation, which is a mentorship program for boys – the data does not lie. The data is there, and a zero per cent youth offending rate in Robinvale is astounding. Then put that together with the Koori Stars Foundation and the Koorie Girls Academy on a wider scale in our region – I mean, these programs speak for themselves. When we talk about self-determination and closing the gap, there are people doing the work, and that is where we need to focus and talk on a very grassroots level and a very community-based level – specifically community-based, because the needs in every community are different. In every family they will be different. This is something that is really important in my electorate, not only in my town but in the wider region as well.
I will keep this short because I just wanted to contribute to acknowledge the work that is being done in the self-determination space in our region through corporations and co-ops like Murray Valley Aboriginal Co-operative, First People of the Millewa Mallee, the Clontarf academy, which have several locations throughout the region, and the Koori Stars Foundation as well, which gets as yet no government funding but again is a program that has been set up there and is already having results.
Anthony CIANFLONE (Pascoe Vale) (15:09): I rise to speak in support of the Aboriginal Land Legislation Amendment Bill 2024, and in doing so I would also like to begin by paying my respects to the First Nations people and traditional custodians of the land on which we meet, live, learn and work, the Wurundjeri people of the Kulin nation. I pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging, particularly Uncle Andrew Gardiner, who is a representative of these traditional lands in the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria. I would also like to acknowledge of course the member of Geelong for her fantastic contribution from the outset, our good friend the member for Northern Metropolitan Region Ms Watts in the other place and also senator for Victoria Jana Stewart. As stated by then Prime Minister Paul Keating on 15 November 1993:
When the High Court of Australia handed down the Mabo judgement last year, it set our generation of Australians a great challenge.
The Court’s decision was unquestionably just.
It rejected a lie and acknowledged a truth. The lie was terra nullius – the convenient fiction that Australia had been a land of no one.
The truth was native title – the fact that the land had once belonged to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians and that in some places a legal right to it had survived the 200 years of European settlement.
So here was an issue the country could not ignore – either legally, or morally.
There was another form of title that had to become part of the way we manage land in Australia.
We owe it to Aboriginal Australians, to all Australians – indeed, we owe it to our fair and democratic traditions and to future generations – to recognise native title.
…
Over tens of thousands of years Aboriginal people had developed a complex culture built on a profound attachment to the land.
The land nourished them spiritually as well as materially. In the landscape and the life upon it they saw evidence of the epoch of creation. Down through the generations they passed on laws, customs, traditions and ceremonies reflecting an obligation to care for the land which went to the heart of their society.
Yet this most remarkable fact about Australia – this oldest continuous civilisation on earth – has until now –
that is, 1992 –
been denied by Australian law.
The first European settlers declared that the land had belonged to no one and the Indigenous Australians were shunted aside, often with appalling brutality.
Much of the despair and degradation, conflict and disease, and many of the problems which Aboriginal Australians face today are a consequence of this dispossession.
We have no need nor any use for guilt. This generation cannot be held responsible for the cruelty of previous generations.
But to ignore Mabo would be the final cruelty, and we would be held responsible – by the world and by future generations of Australians.
And they’d be right to hold us –
that is, this generation –
responsible.
In rising to speak on this bill I am also very proud to be part of this Victorian Labor government that has long remained committed to building on this historic Mabo decision and over more recent years remained committed to fulfilling the aspirations of the Uluru Statement from the Heart through voice, treaty and truth. We are proud to be the first state to have established the first voice in Australia for First Nations people through the landmark establishment of the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria, an independent, democratically elected body that represents traditional owners of country and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Victoria.
We are proud to be the first state to have established a formal truth-telling commission through the Yoorrook Justice Commission, which is helping us to begin understanding the full history of Australia – the one that dates way back before the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788 and one that stems way back before modern-day Melbourne was first established from 1835 thereabouts onwards – a history, in fact, that dates back 60,000 years.
We are also the first state in Australia to be progressing a genuine treaty with First Nations people through the establishment of the Treaty Authority and the creation of the treaty framework and commissioner. In acknowledging every one of these incredible initiatives it is essential to point out that every one of these milestones has been supported and delivered and continues to be facilitated proudly by this Victorian Labor government.
This approach is about listening and walking with our First Nations communities, an approach that stands in very stark contrast with the approach of the Liberal–National opposition. When it comes to voice, we had the Liberal–National opposition oppose the campaign for the creation of a federal Voice to Parliament, with the opposition leader choosing to ignore the overwhelming yes vote in his own community of Hawthorn at the expense of pandering to the right wing of his party.
When it comes to the Yoorrook Justice and truth-telling commission on any given day you get a different message from the opposition – a lot of flipping and flopping, but you certainly will not get the truth when it comes to the truth-telling commission. And when it comes to treaty, they have now said that they no longer support treaty in Victoria, and they have withdrawn bipartisan support for this historic initiative. This is despite the Productivity Commission having specifically outlined that the best way to close the gap will be through this type of structural reform that the treaty process will offer.
Just last weekend we saw – as we have heard through this debate – the opposition leader also essentially, to a large extent, blame Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities for the housing affordability crisis. That is right, the reason why housing is so expensive and unaffordable is because the cultural heritage management plans, which make up less than 1 per cent of development proposals, are to blame!
While those opposite will continue to sadly use First Nations communities as political footballs, we on this side of the house will continue to listen, to walk alongside and to support our First Nations communities as we strive towards closing the gap and reconciliation. Delivering on these things can only occur by empowering and supporting Aboriginal people through self-determination. That is why this Allan Labor government is committed to delivering on legislation that enables traditional owners to take control of their own destinies and their traditional lands.
In this respect this bill will improve the way land is managed at Framlingham and Lake Tyers Aboriginal trusts, and additionally the bill will remove restrictions on decisions made about Aboriginal land by Aboriginal communities at some of the mission cemeteries. It will do this by amending two acts, which were enacted in 1970 and 1991 respectively, and those are the Aboriginal Lands Act 1970 and the Aboriginal Lands Act 1991.
The Aboriginal Lands Act of 1970 was a landmark piece of legislation created in direct response to First Nations advocacy from those respective communities for land rights – well before the Mabo decision too, by the way. As former mission sites they represented, frankly, the state’s past racist, segregationist and assimilationist laws which actively sought to deny First Peoples any form of self-determination. On 1 January 1968 residents from these communities were listed in the Victoria Government Gazette as members of these respective Aboriginal trusts and were allocated shares in trusts, thereby granting them freehold title to the land. It was the first time the Victorian Parliament recognised Aboriginal land rights and the government’s first attempt to recognise the self-determination of First Peoples in Victoria, specifically the trust community’s right to own and make decisions about the land. Since then, obviously, the act has become outdated in many respects, and some of the reforms contained in the bill today will very much go towards modernising that very act.
When it comes to reforms in the Aboriginal Land Act 1991, that act sought to redress some of the impacts also of Victoria’s past racist laws. Under this act freehold title was granted over three Aboriginal burial sites across three different communities, including to the Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung Cultural Heritage Aboriginal Corporation, the Goolum Goolum Aboriginal Cooperative and the Gippsland and East Gippsland Aboriginal Cooperative respectively, these being the only Aboriginal-led community organisations in those regions at those times. Again, the reforms contained in the bill will continue to modernise and improve self-determination opportunities and processes for those respective First Nations communities. These reforms also continue building on the landmark work that Victoria has undertaken in this space in leading the nation, even prior to, as I pointed out, that historic Mabo court decision of 1992 and the subsequent federal legislation that was introduced by the Keating government in 1993.
My community, which is home to and built on the lands of the Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung people, was one of the first communities in mainland Australia’s history to actually experience the process of dispossession and colonisation upon the arrival of John Batman and John Pascoe Fawkner on the banks of the Yarra from 1835 onwards. As outlined in the book Coburg: Between Two Creeks by Richard Broome, in late May 1835 John Batman and a survey party surveyed land from Indented Head to the Yarra. Batman sought opportunities for himself and 14 other capitalists of the Port Phillip Association. Throughout their journey they encountered some Woiwurrung, and after gift giving they accompanied the First Nations people to their camp by a stream. Whether this was the Merri Creek near Northcote, Preston or Coburg or the Edgars Creek near Thomastown, various commentators contend where this occurred. Batman was reported to have met with eight Woiwurrung chiefs, and after pleasantries he explained his desire to purchase the land. However, this concept was completely alien to the Woiwurrung, and what followed was frankly a sham. Batman gave them blankets, knives, looking glasses, tomahawks, beads, scissors and flour as payment for about 60,000 acres of land and agreed to give them a yearly tribute of the same. He then had them place a mark outlining their agreement to the deal.
On his return to Van Diemen’s Land Batman and the Port Phillip Association actually tried to get the British government to recognise their claim to this land. It was a cynical effort to obtain land without paying the minimum five shillings an acre imposed by the then British government. The authorities declared Batman’s treaty as void as it dangerously assumed that the Aborigines were the original owners of the land, whereas the British Crown held that there were no prior owners of Australian land. In that context I commend the bill to the house.
Ellen SANDELL (Melbourne) (15:19): I rise to also speak on the Aboriginal Land Legislation Amendment Bill 2024. In doing so I would like to first acknowledge that this Parliament sits on the lands of the Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung people of the Kulin nation, and I pay my respects to elders past and present and also to the generations of First Nations advocates and activists and resisters from across the state who have fought for land justice for such a long time. I acknowledge that Parliament has a long and shameful history of making decisions for First Nations people without First Nations peoples, and a lot still needs to change for First Nations peoples to have true self-determination.
We have heard a little bit today about the history of the Aboriginal Lands Act, and the original Aboriginal Lands Act 1970, which the bill amends, predates the recognition of native title in the common law and the concept of traditional ownership. It was a response to the Framlingham and Lake Tyers Aboriginal communities’ fierce advocacy for land rights and represents a historic milestone in the ongoing struggle for land justice. The communities fought for these rights in a context that was violent, racist and assimilationist, stemming from the mission histories of the sites, and the original act recognised the rights of First Nations communities at Lake Tyers and Framlingham to own the land and to control decisions made about it. It vested the land in two trusts and provided for residents to hold personal shares in those trusts.
Despite being in operation for nearly 50 years, the act was only reviewed properly in 2021, just a few years ago, by the First Peoples’ Assembly, and this review made recommendations on how to improve the administration of the act. This government has committed to implementing these recommendations in two phases, and this bill gives effect to phase 1. These changes focus on the trusts’ governance and other simpler recommendations to implement. The second phase recommendations, however, will be more complex, as these changes go to the very heart of how the trusts function. This will require the government to commit to deep community engagement and to really listen to the needs of the Framlingham and Lake Tyers communities and all those First Nations activists, advocates and community members who so often have not had a voice when it comes to these matters.
We in the Greens support this bill, and we commend the government’s commitment to implementing the review’s recommendations but to implementing them in full. I am concerned that the review, however, of the Aboriginal Land Act was completed in 2021 and now, several years later, the government is only just getting around to implementing these simpler recommendations, which for all intents and purposes are pretty much low-hanging fruit. To be honest, it is concerning that the real work required to improve the trust system is yet to be done, and this really goes to this Labor government’s approach to reform, because this piecemeal approach to reform reflects Labor’s broader reluctance to embrace the real transformative change needed to see real and true First Nations self-determination.
This is the kind of change that First Peoples have long called for and that is being echoed by the First Peoples’ Assembly and the Yoorrook Justice Commission. Labor’s noncommittal response to Yoorrook’s second interim report speaks volumes, and it speaks volumes in terms of where they sit on meaningful transformative change. In that report, Victoria’s First Nations truth-telling commission gave the government 46 clear recommendations to reform our systems here in Victoria – to reform the child protection system, which has an over-representation of First Nations children and families in it; and to reform our criminal justice systems, which also have a horrible, disgraceful over-representation of First Nations peoples in our prisons. These are racist systems that have caused immeasurable harm to First Nations people since their inception. But Labor has decided to only accept four of those recommendations in full, four out of 46 recommendations, and the four that they did decide to implement were all low-hanging fruit – things like better reporting on funding, things that were easy to implement.
A further 24 recommendations are supported in principle. I am quoting from the government’s response here. They have supported these 24 recommendations in principle, but they are ‘subject to Victoria’s fiscal circumstances’, which is Labor’s way of saying, ‘Well, they’re nice ideas, but we’re not going to commit to pay for them’, ‘They’re nice ideas – oh, we’d do them if they were free’ or ‘They’re nice ideas, but we might not be able to do them because we might prioritise something else in our budget.’
Fifteen other recommendations are still under consideration by the government. For another four, the Labor government has simply said a blatant no. The ones where they have said a blatant no include raising the age of criminal responsibility to 14 and bail reform. Both of these recommendations, yes, are important structural reforms that are not as easy as something like better reporting on funding, but they have extensive support in research and in international law, and this government is refusing to do them. Why is it? I think we need to ask ourselves that question: why is it that this government is refusing to implement them? They set up Yoorrook as a truth-telling organisation, a truth-telling process. The Labor government say that they are for self-determination for our First Nations peoples and Yoorrook is part of that, yet when Yoorrook makes these recommendations – which are not recommendations that are made lightly, they are recommendations that have been made after evidence has come before the commission, after people have bared their souls and told their painful history and their painful stories of what it is like to be a First Nations person in this state and in this country – after all of that, these very considered recommendations from Yoorrook, from some really eminent, incredible people who are highly qualified in this area, why is it that the Labor government then says a blatant no to these recommendations? Let us be honest: it is because the Labor government is fearful and scared of reprisal by the Murdoch media, and I do not think that is good enough. I think that when we are talking about real reforms for our First Nations communities, when First Nations communities come to us and when there is an overwhelming call for things like raising the age of criminal responsibility to 14, it is incumbent upon us as legislators who have been elected to this place, which is First Nations land, to heed that call and to listen to those calls – not just listen to them but then actually act, not just say that we are listening but then to actually act on those calls. We need to raise the age to 14. We need proper bail reform. The government needs to accept the recommendations that are more difficult to do but are the right thing to do.
Just last week I think it was, or the week before, I was very fortunate to be at the Melbourne Museum for the launch of the treaty database. That was an incredibly moving experience for me to see the first step on the pathway to treaty – to have the Treaty Authority get up and say ‘We are here to accept nominations from the First Nations Victorians, traditional owner groups, the First Peoples’ Assembly, to enter into treaty negotiations’ and to have the First Peoples’ Assembly get up and say ‘We are ready. We are here. We are ready to negotiate treaty and to present a kangaroo skin to the Treaty Authority as a symbol of saying, “We are here and we are ready to start negotiating treaty.”’ It is something that so many people have been hopeful would happen for a very long time, and it is just so incredible that it is here. With treaty negotiations looming, I do not think it is feasible for Labor to continue down this this path of not accepting the Yoorrook Justice Commission recommendations.
We know the Liberal and National parties have already backed away from treaty, which I think is absolutely shameful. I think that this is something that should be above party politics. We all live on Aboriginal land, and there used to be this bipartisan commitment – tripartisan, multipartisan commitment – to treaty. I very much hope that they are able to come back to that position of supporting treaty, to put it above cynical politics and to see it as something that is important for all Victorians, because that is very much what it would be. It is not something that benefits one group. It is something that benefits all of us, and I often say that I think my three kids benefit more than anyone from treaty, because for them to be part of a process where they are welcomed onto the land on which they live by the traditional owners of that land, by the First Peoples of that land, for them to feel fully welcomed and celebrated as part of a joint history on this land, for them to know the history of this land and for them to embrace the culture and history of the First Peoples – what a rich, amazing gift to give my kids, who are not Aboriginal. Treaty is a gift to all Victorians, no matter where they come from. It is a call for unity and a call for all of us to be welcomed together to embrace the history and culture of this land. I think that is an incredible, incredible thing and an incredible gift to be offered, so I hope that all parties in this place can find their way back to accepting that gift.
Talking about engaging meaningfully with that treaty process, Labor must commit now to the treaty principles in everything that it does in government, and that means driving real transformation of these unjust systems – we have talked about the child protection system, the criminal justice system – and not just cherrypicking the easy recommendations for change. It means sustainably funding essential services, not leaving critical Aboriginal community controlled organisations woefully underfunded, and it means handing over real decision-making power to First Nations communities. I hope that the treaty that will be negotiated shortly with the First Peoples’ Assembly and the Treaty Authority will go some way to real self-determination for First Nations communities, real decision-making power, real change in some of these structural elements of society and our institutions that are leaving First Nations people behind and that see our First Nations communities over-represented in the child protection and criminal justice systems.
If Labor want to commit to land justice fully, they would place a moratorium on all public land sales while treaty is being negotiated. Over the past four years we have seen 16 hectares of public land worth $54 million sold off by this Labor government. A further 148 sites of public land – 2500 hectares – are being prepared for sale. This is land that belongs to the First Peoples, land that could potentially form part of treaty reparations or be used for public purposes, like much-needed Aboriginal housing.
We in the Greens support this bill’s intent. We support the government’s commitment to heeding the recommendations of the Lake Tyers and Framlingham communities and the First Peoples’ Assembly, but for true land justice and lasting Indigenous sovereignty Labor will need to do better than incremental, piecemeal change. Labor must commit fully to the transformational changes being called for by not just the Yoorrook Justice Commission but First Nations communities right across Victoria.
Tim RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (15:33): Thank you for the opportunity to contribute on the Aboriginal Land Legislation Amendment Bill 2024. I too want to start by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we gather today in this Parliament, the Wurundjeri people, and pay my profound respects to elders past and present. I also acknowledge the Bunurong and Boon Wurrung landowners in my community that represent my areas through the City of Kingston and Greater Dandenong and pay my respects to them.
I just want to take a moment to acknowledge the contribution by the member for Melbourne, who I respect greatly. I just want to address some of the points that she has made in her contribution. I think you cannot hold an argument or a line around the government’s approach to treaty and criticise the Labor government when this government for eight years of its term has come forward with something ambitious and important that should have been done long ago. We have seen the trauma and impact of the Voice campaign and what that has meant for First Nations peoples across Australia and indeed in Victoria as well. You cannot sustain an argument that says we are not genuine on the pathway to treaty when it was literally this government who had the courage to take it to the Victorian people and to be endorsed in its policies on three separate occasions and to live those values of voice, truth and treaty.
So the notion that the Labor government is not serious – while having a process that established the First Peoples’ Assembly and the democratic process that that enables and the self-determination principles that that brings – I just do not think stacks up. I hope that some of that commentary was not more about the politics that happen in the inner-city elements. If there is a genuine reflection on the coalition and how they have come to form their view – and I was encouraged by the member for Mildura’s contribution and acknowledgement that self-determination is indeed a very important principle and that listening to First Nations peoples in Victoria is such a critical element – she should have the strength in her party room to come forward and let the Leader of the Nationals know that it was an error in judgement and decision-making to lobby the coalition’s shadow cabinet and to then walk away from treaty.
This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity and this is a moment in time, and history will not be kind on those that walk away from such a significant and substantial process. Come forward with ideas around maybe changing and structuring its implementation, not the notion of just a blanket walk away, especially when it has been through the First Peoples’ Assembly, and many of those opposite have sat on the floor of the Parliament and been moved by some of the presentations and contributions that have been made. Reflect on how Victoria can be different and the pathway that we have taken, and how that is also helping to lead the nation. So I was encouraged. I am not sure if it was a bit off-grid from the dot points that were provided by the opposition, but I appreciated the honesty and the integrity of the member for Mildura to front up and say that they support self-determination. The language was very similar to the process that we would go through on truth and treaty and some of the language that was put forward. I welcome that, but at the same time I just think that there needs to be a bit more advocacy by those opposite on where they find themselves.
Where we find ourselves on this bill is really important. It was the incredible previous Minister for Treaty and First Peoples, who is now the Minister for Public and Active Transport, Gabrielle Williams, who was the minister at the time that responded to this review. It talks about how the 1970 act, although its intentions at the time were at an important moment in legislative reform, really needed to be investigated and evaluated after significant changes in policy. That review process was undertaken in 2016 on the 1970 act, and we have found ourselves with this bill today.
I just want to acknowledge a couple of things. The contributions from the member for Geelong and the member for Yan Yean were absolutely outstanding. With the work that was put into their contributions on this bill, I want to place on the record the appreciation of the time that they have taken to really speak power to this legislation and its reform and the history – particularly the member for Yan Yean, who I see in this place. What an outstanding reflection, contribution and elegance in how she went through some of where we find ourselves and the work that has gone into this bill.
Just to give a bit of an overview, bills on these reforms are the government’s responses. I again say to the Leader of the Greens that the notion of just supporting in principle can talk about some of the technicalities or difficulties in implementation. That is what happens when you are in government. You do not want to be disingenuous and promise everything to everyone and not get it right. So if you are going through recommendations that you accept in full because they are technical in their nature or they do not need further investigation or evaluation, that is totally acceptable. But the support in principle is that they would be implemented down the track. There is not a support in principle as the member for Melbourne articulated or interpreted in that sense. The support in principle has been worked through in this first phase of reforms under that review of the Aboriginal Lands Act 1970, so I think it was disingenuous to suggest that the government will walk away from that.
On the notion about the Yoorrook Justice Commission – just to give a bit of insight to the member for Melbourne and other opposition members – each and every one of the ministers that have gone forward to that hearing and the ones that I support as parliamentary secretary have been incredibly focused. Their departments have briefed them to no end and have been extremely engaged in how significant that moment is in this Parliament.
If you tuned in to watch the evidence – and I am not sure many would have had that opportunity; hopefully some tuned into some of the coverage – you would have seen the deep care, compassion and honesty. In an environment like politics where admitting failures and the need to do more can carry a significant amount of risk, this is not the approach that has been taken through the Yoorrook Justice Commission. The incredible reflections by Minister Hutchins in her evidence, which has been played out and has reflected some of the contributions in the second-reading debate, go to the values and the integrity of those ministers and the honesty which they have brought forward to that – to apologise and to acknowledge the huge intergenerational trauma that exists and why truth is so important to the empowerment of those with lived and living experience and the ongoing sufferings and impact that has on First Nations communities and the process towards a better way forward.
If you have seen those presentations and you have seen part of those reforms – and I have had a little bit to look at in terms of how the Department of Health has responded as Parliamentary Secretary for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention – you would have seen again the massive work that has been done by people like the member for Geelong in her advocacy and tireless work in suicide prevention. She is an absolute powerhouse and a superstar representative. That work, the commentary at Yoorrook Justice and then the pathway to treaty are absolutely integral.
So I do not think that is a fair reflection on their contributions and where we find ourselves. Yes, there will be disagreement, but if you are wanting to build unity in this Parliament and you are wanting to bring people together, those sorts of cheap political points are probably a poor way of trying to commentate on that. Pointscoring at every single opportunity or juncture: you will get more from working in collaboration over that time, and you will get more integrity and more respect by working through those nuances and maybe disagreeing but not always just saying, ‘Oh, well, the Greens would do better. They’re not serious about treaty,’ even though we have been on that eight-year journey and we have taken that to three elections, over and over and over. That is a disingenuous approach. It is the same disingenuous approach to say that these recommendations that are said to be supported in principle are not supported by the government.
I want to just reflect also on the reference to the 1991 act and the work around Coranderrk mission. This has significance for the Bunurong people in my community. Many descendants have connections to Healesville, and it was a significant connection point after the traumas that were inflicted on the communities I represent along the Mordialloc Creek. This was a site of significant tragedy, and so many generations have had connections to the site in Healesville. It was really one of my last acts as Parliamentary Secretary for Health Infrastructure to do the First Nations cancer clinic in Healesville. To witness the call to country was incredibly moving on land out in Healesville, and the connection to country out in Healesville is significant.
Some of the reforms obviously to the 1991 act will be welcomed across communities as well. As I have said, the self-determination approach and our engagement with this I will take back to my communities. It will be of significant comfort, but there is so much more work to do and so much engagement ahead of us. I commend the bill to the house.
That the debate be now adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.