Mr HAASE (10:45 AM) —I rise today to support this name change to IBA and other items included in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission Amendment Bill 2000. I am moved initially to refute some of the comments made by the shadow minister. He has made the point that CDEP and welfare are not being seen as a permanent safety net. I, as a representative of a caring government, take an opposite point of view. I believe that some do see it as a permanent safety net. Quite frankly, I think that interpretation is just: a caring government will ensure that there is a safety net at all times to catch those who would fall through any other process. I emphatically make the point that the safety net will be kept in place by this government for those who absolutely need it. However, I move on because time is limited.

I commend the work that has been done previously by the CDC. There have been many achievements around Australia and I wish to highlight one in particular—that is, the joint ownership by the CDC and Port Hedland Regional Aboriginal Corporation of the Homestead office and retail complex in Port Hedland, Western Australia. I wish to highlight it because I am a tenant of that jointly owned complex. I am pleased to report that I get good service from the landlords and that the facilities provided are ideal for my needs. I read in the annual report of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commercial Development Corporation that this complex not only has had full tenancy during this past reporting year but also has produced a satisfactory commercial return to its owners. I believe that is the most important statement about any of these joint ventures that are funded by the CDC, presently to be renamed the IBA. If we cannot genuinely make a reasonable commercial return to these joint ventures they should not be operating.

The funding that has been provided in the past to the CDC, some $50 million, was not meant to be a gift or a handout or welfare, it was meant to be seed capital to assist indigenous people to be involved in joint ventures. It was meant to break this cycle of so frequently funding in some mismatched form from various sources of funding, on the basis of family ties, ventures that were doomed to fail before they were even initiated. We have too much evidence of that across this country. When these businesses that are poorly funded, poorly researched—certainly not market researched—eventually fail, mainstream Australia rises up and condemns the failure of the business as yet another example of indigenous mismanagement. What the CDC has done, and what IBA will continue to do, is fund successfully, research effectively, and give some guarantee as to the long-term economic viability. That is to this government's credit, and to the credit of the office bearers, the executive, of the IBA.

Colleagues will note that one of the changes that we have proposed in this bill is to give permanency—and make it a full-time position—to the chair of this particular organisation. This will go a great way towards giving this new organisation the credit that it so richly deserves, and I fully support that move. To promote indigenous and mainstream joint ventures in business is not something that can be done on a part-time basis. By giving full-time status to the position of chair we are going to say to the commercial world of Australia that this is a fair dinkum organisation and not some ragtag show. We will do well to support this legislation because it moves forward the idea of reconciliation.

I too attended the breakfast for reconciliation this morning, and I was proud to do so. It was quite a moving experience, frankly. Dramatically portrayed during the breakfast was the individualism of our indigenous population on one hand and the mainstream population on the other, and it displayed the coming together of those two groups. I applaud the efforts of the Reconciliation Commission, but I also hope, in my lifetime, to look back on the acts of reconciliation as something that has happened, rather than as something that might happen in the future. I believe that the collection of some 150,000 statements, aspirations, regarding reconciliation that have been presented today is a great move in that direction. I welcome the fact that we have had now some one million people walk together for reconciliation across bridges in Australia. When one has approximately one-fifth of one's population passionately embroiled in a movement, I believe there can be no holding back that movement, and I commend that. I look forward to a future where reconciliation is something that occurred in the past, rather than something that may occur in the future. I wish that movement every success.

I am aware of the tight time frame of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs in addressing this bill and so I will contain my comments. It is sufficient to say that the future does lie in joint-venturing successful indigenous employment. The renaming of this organisation as Indigenous Business Australia will give it credibility in the eyes of the commercial world. It will give opportunities to its board to go out and select those commercial operations that are most appropriate, and it will give it great status. That augurs well for its future. I believe, with a successful future, it will create an example for indigenous people around Australia, an example that says, `You too can be successful in business. You too can make profits from those businesses and aspire to being financially independent in the long term.' I applaud that. I commend the bill to the House.