Senator MARGETTS (6:19 PM) —This disallowance motion relates to the introduction of a ward system for elections to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. The commission is the elected representative body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. As such, it is of utmost importance that the system for the conduct of ATSIC elections be the best possible, the fairest possible and the most culturally appropriate.

I do not know if the current electoral system for ATSIC meets those criteria but I am in no doubt that the changes proposed by the government will not help. In fact, they have the potential to do great harm. They have been the subject of considerable debate both within and outside the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community.

The ATSIC board of commissioners, which should be the minister's primary source of advice on this issue, has serious concerns about the proposed introduction of the ward system under the amended rules. Those concerns have been conveyed to the minister, and I am very concerned that he has chosen to ignore them on this occasion.

The chair of ATSIC, Mr Gatjil Djerrkura, pointed out in a letter to the minister in November last year that the board maintained strong objections to the introduction of wards where significant community opposition existed. The minister said that no objections were lodged, and all I have to say to that is that there has been a raft of attacks on the various rights, the lifestyle, the environment, the culture and so on of Aboriginal people. As if these people do not have enough to do and as if they have the resources to be involved in paper warfare. I find it rather annoying that the only way an objection could be considered real is if they had lodged it in writing to the minister.

The commissioners firmly believe that the impact of having a system of wards within these regions will encourage division within the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community, and I agree with them. The question is whether this was the intention of the minister. You do not need to be cynical to think that that might possibly be the case; you only have to look at the history of the government on any aspect of Aboriginal affairs that has come before the parliament in recent times.

ATSIC commissioners have also told the minister that the introduction of multiple wards can act against the interests of minority groups within particular regions, making it harder for them to gain representation on regional councils. Again, I agree with them. It is a bit like the debate we were having yesterday. The fact that this change has been pushed onto some regions does not mean that it makes it fair to push it onto others. By way of example, I draw attention to the implications of the proposals for ATSIC elections in my state of Western Australia.

In the augmented review panel report on this matter, the chair of ATSIC specifically said that no wards should be introduced in the Geraldton region. He did so because of concerns expressed by community members. It is my understanding his comments were made in the general section of that report because there is no capacity to file a dissenting report. Senator Bolkus was interjecting on this issue. It is perfectly fair that the interjection should be registered because Senator Herron was suggesting that, because no dissenting report was filed, that meant there was agreement. If there is no legal capacity to file a dissenting report, how dare a minister come into this place and suggest that the absence of a dissenting report indicates assent?

It is all very well for the minister to argue that this is an ATSIC report, but clearly there is still division over these matters. Mr Djerrkura has sought to highlight these divisions. The minister's proposal will see five wards in the Geraldton region, which will split the community and make it very much harder for minority views—or smaller, more dispersed communities and groups—to be represented. Once again, Senator Herron has said there will be regions which miss out. Senator Herron is possibly not fully understanding the situation where a number of groups span more than one region in geographical terms. The reality is that we are not talking about a European Australian concept of location, as we would do in normal wards for council elections in Australia; we are talking about culturally appropriate groupings.

This likely under-representation is very pronounced in North Queensland where the present deputy chair of the regional council is a Torres Strait Islander. Dividing up Cairns into wards will make it almost impossible for her to be preselected. There will not be enough Torres Strait Islanders in any one ward. It will effectively mean that Torres Strait Islanders who make up a significant proportion of the population in Cairns will not have enough numbers in any one ward to elect any representatives. As well as depriving them of representation, it will also lead to fewer even bothering to take part in the elections, we believe. After all, why would you, if you knew your preferred candidate was not even running in your ward?

The minister is also clearly wrong in comments about how representative the Chairman of ATSIC is when he speaks about these things. Senator Herron told the Senate on 10 March that only 25,000 people voted in ATSIC elections. In this, he is quite simply wrong. The actual figures, which were provided to the minister in a brief after the 1996 elections, indicate that 49,812 people voted to elect the 375 councillors—almost 50,000, twice the number Senator Herron told the Senate. In fact, voter turnout when compared with other voluntary voting elections is actually quite respectable. It compares favourably with local government elections in Australia and even compares favourably with elections for the United States Congress. So when Senator Herron gets advice from the elected chair of ATSIC that wards should not be introduced across the board, Senator Herron should listen, we believe, and take note.

By contrast with the very reasonable turnout at the elections, turnout for the meeting to discuss the review of electoral matters which led to these changes was rather less representative. In Geraldton the number was 10, in Shark Bay it was 15—hardly an indication that there was much concern about the existing system and certainly not in any way, shape or form a mandate for this change.

The chair of ATSIC, Mr Djerrkura, expressed the view that it may be worth the government considering deferring consideration of these proposals. As he says, there is no urgency about them. There could easily be an independent investigation of the various matters in dispute and a better electoral system could be the result in time for the next ATSIC elections.

Finally, I want to reiterate the point about the division in the community which is likely to be caused by this action. Surely the minister can see this potential division. It has been pointed out to him in no uncertain manner—not only by ATSIC commissioners themselves but by community organisations around the country. Why does he continue to pursue this course if it is not his aim to foster this division?

I can understand the statement `I have no choice', but Senator Herron made his appointments to this panel. We must not let the government further weaken the ability of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to speak with a united voice on issues on which they find themselves in conflict with the government. We believe this is an effort to do so. We must vote to disallow this change.