Query:IULA
September 1989
Page:889
Senator BISHOP (New South Wales) (6.03)-I seek to speak about a particular aspect of division 2, clause 7, the functions of the Commission, and its potential for conflict with local government itself. Today the Minister for Local Government (Senator Reynolds) has chosen to put out a press release saying how pleased she is that the Government has supported the declaration by the International Union of Local Government (IULA) in Perth -the world wide declaration on local self-government-and extolling the virtues of the need for local government to be recognised as an integral part of the federal system. It is in the light of the fact that both the Opposition and the Government agree that local government is an important, integral part of a federal system, whilst not agreeing on support for the declaration, that I seek to speak on clause 7. Clause 7 ( 1 ), paragraphs (b), (c), (d), (g), (m) and of course clause 8 about which Senator Peter Baume has already spoken, give various powers to the Commission to monitor; to develop policy; to assist, advise and cooperate; to provide information; and to have such other functions as may be deemed necessary by the Prime Minister pursuant to clause 8.
These functions include monitoring, developing, advising, cooperating and providing information, and finally cover anything that deals with social, economic or cultural development of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders and is conferred with regard to programs conducted by bodies other than the Commission. There are proposals to meet national, State, Territory or regional needs and priorities at the national, State, Territory or regional levels of government. There is a concern expressed in a submission for instance, by the Australian Local Government Association in April 1988 to the Minister for Aboriginal Afairs (Mr Hand) that Aboriginal community organisations performing local government functions should not be recognised for the purposes of the Local Government (Financial Assistance) Act. But then there is another concern voiced, which is that under the Abonginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission proposals there could be direct funding to Aboriginal regional groups in furtherance of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) aims of self-determination and self-management which could put them directly at odds with local government itself. A similar position could arise with road funding, where local government may well see the day when the Federal Government is funding roads into ATSIC regional council areas. It is rather curious that, on the day that the Government has put out a release saying how important it considers local government to be, we are debating provisions of the ATSIC Bill which indeed put that important role of local government at risk and in potential conflict with ATSIC.
There has been specific concern expressed on these points by councils particularly in Western Australia where a phrase such as local government as a service delivery agent' may be usurped by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. They would like to seek assurance from the Commonwealth Minister for Aboriginal Affairs that ATSIC will not be competing with local government for Federal funding that normally accrues to local government. A very specific example is given with regard to the road funding question that I raised. A report points out that the Department of Aboriginal Affairs has indeed identified some 3,083 kilometres of Aboriginal access roads in Western Australia that would require upgrading at a cost of $50m. Over a third of this road length falls within a particular shire of Western Australia. Indeed, one could be concerned that the councils being established are more like Gough Whitlams regional councils and could end up having a most divisive effect. It can be said, without overexaggerating, that there is the potential to split the nation on issues such as these.
Senator Baume has indicated in moving amendments to this proposed legislation that the Government's attitude is one that requires a response more of sadness than of anger, and I think he has been very reasoned in the amendments that he has moved. He has pointed out the grave concerns that confront the nation. My pointing out specifically the potential conflict between local government and ATSIC is done in the same vein. It is done to ensure that our federal system of government, which comprises Federal, State and local governments, is not in any way usurped by the establishment of a set of councils which are quite outside the frame work of our federal system.