Senator CROSSIN (5:31 PM) —I rise to provide a contribution to this motion to disallow the electoral roll integrity regulations. In doing so, I have some sense of deja vu in that I remember standing on my feet some years ago talking about the Electoral Act and what it meant for indigenous Australians. At that time, I spoke about the changes that the government was proposing in assisting people when they went to vote at the polls. But this time the tables are turned. If this government has its way, there will be a significant number of indigenous Australians who will not even make it into the polling booth to allow their vote to occur. Because of the barriers that these regulations will put in place, those indigenous people may not even get on to the roll in the first place.

The amendments to the Commonwealth Electoral Act were actually passed in May 1999, some two years ago, and we know that those amendments have yet to be proclaimed. We have heard significant arguments this evening about the fact that these regulations would limit the people who could witness a claim for enrolment and, of course, dramatically change the enrolment process. Before I get on to the substantive argument that I want to present, let me go to one or two things that the Special Minister of State said. The minister talked about—and named, in fact—some people who, he alleged, were rorting the system. I assume by that he means rorting the ability for them to be genuine voters in this country. But he did fail to mention that a number of people from his side of politics such as Jackie Kelly MP and her staff or Alex Somlyay—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Hogg)—Senator Crossin, I think you need to withdraw that.

Senator CROSSIN —I withdraw that. But there were a number of people that the minister could have named, if he so chose and if he wanted to provide some balance in this argument. Of the people that he named, I think only one was sent to jail. If we want to provide some balance in the argument, there are rorters and there are rorters. The integrity of this debate goes to the barriers that these regulations will put in place that will prevent people from even getting on the enrolment list—in fact, from ever being on the enrolment form. The minister talks about these regulations being able to be less tampered with and about integrity versus the joint roll system. While all those arguments may be well and good, if we actually step back and take a really close look at what happens with indigenous Australians, we will find that those arguments go to a very inappropriate enrolment system being put in place by this federal government.

I think this government fails to genuinely understand the situation in which indigenous Australians in rural and extremely remote conditions in Northern Australia—in particular in the Northern Territory, Western Australia and Queensland—find themselves. If I use the Northern Territory as an example—and perhaps some of these stories might impress upon the Democrats why it is important that they have taken the stance that they have; I congratulate them in joining us in this disallowance motion—there are some 220 Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory with populations of 50 to 1,800 people. There are not too many people in this parliament who have bothered to travel to those remote communities—although it is pleasing to say that more and more members and senators are attempting to do so. It is a pity, though, that a few more from the government did not make the effort to go there. Of course, that does not actually take into account those people who may live on out-stations.

The ABS 1996 census data does not break down the figures into the indigenous population who are aged 18 and over—and it is in five-year chunks—so we have to look at those aged 15 and over. For example, in the Northern Territory in 1996 the indigenous population aged 15 and over was 32,107. So we could assume that now, some five years on—out of a total voting population in the Territory of 132,000—there are at least 32,000 indigenous Territorians who are eligible to vote. As of the ABS statistics in 1996, the percentage of indigenous people in the Territory was around 24.22 per cent.

The proposed regulations do nothing to ensure that that number of indigenous people in the Northern Territory are on the roll—it does nothing to maximise their participation in being on the roll. We do not have 32,000 Territorians of indigenous background on the roll at the moment. As it now stands, it is extremely difficult to get these people to enrol—to understand the importance of it and to fill out the simple form that we have now—without putting any more barriers in their way. Senator Ferris said a minute ago that this minister was on the joint native title committee. If that is the case, I would expect that this minister, more than anyone, would understand the extreme barriers that these sorts of regulations will place on indigenous Territorians. We know that these are people who, by and large, are not able to read and write. We know that these people do not have English as a first or second language but sometimes as a third or fourth language. We know that these people very rarely have any sort of proof of identity on them. In fact, even Centrelink has recognised the cultural differences of these people and asks only that traditional owners in these communities recognise or provide evidence that they are genuine indigenous people and, therefore, are entitled to a benefit under Centrelink.

Let us look at what a person would have to do—what sort of evidence they would have to provide—to get on the roll. Firstly, they would be asked for an original proof of identity, and that in itself would provide major difficulties and barriers in remote communities. They would be asked to provide an Australian birth certificate, and we know that very few indigenous Territorians would have one in their back pocket or in a drawer in a dwelling in which they might live. I will miss out some of the Defence Force requirements because they would not apply here. There would be very few indigenous Australians who would possess an Australian marriage certificate, particularly those in remote communities. They probably do not go through the formal non-indigenous process of getting married, as we do.

There would be a very significant problem in asking for a current Australian drivers licence. The motor vehicle registry people in the Northern Territory tell me that only 26 per cent of current enrolled voters in remote communities have a drivers licence—that is, most people in remote communities in the Northern Territory do not drive so they do not have a current drivers licence. One-quarter of those people currently enrolled possess a drivers licence, so you would not be able to pick up those people. They certainly would not have a passport. They certainly would not have a current photographic student identification card. They do not have a concession card issued by the Department of Veterans' Affairs. They would not have a current identity card showing their signature and photograph issued by their employer. We all know that that would not be the case in a remote community.

Senator Ferris —How do you know that? That is patronising.

Senator CROSSIN —What employer in a remote community, Senator Ferrris, would provide photo ID for their employees? Are we talking about local community councils? Are we talking about workers in a health clinic or Aboriginal assistant teachers in a school? None of those places provides photographic ID. You have come up with a list that is right off the planet in terms of the way in which indigenous Australians would relate to it. It is beyond any sort of fairness and equity. With regard to a current proof of age card issued by state or territory Australia, are we talking about a seniors card? It would be really worth my while if I were living in Port Keats to have a Territory seniors card; there would be an awful lot of concessions I would be able to get out there!

Senator Ferris —You are patronising and letting down indigenous people and you should be ashamed.

Senator CROSSIN —I doubt it.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Hogg)—Order! Senator Ferris, if you want to join the debate, there will be plenty of opportunities upon the conclusion of Senator Crossin's speech. Enter the debate then.

Senator CROSSIN —There would be no need to have a current proof of age card in a remote community either. In fact, indigenous Australians would not even bother to have one in those communities. As to a degree absolute granted by the Family Court of Australia, indigenous Australians do not recognise such a body. And, if they did, there would be very few of them who would have that sort of paperwork on them, or a document of appointment as an Australian justice of the peace—and you would find very few of those.

I say to the minister that this is not about patronising. Whatever regulation you want to put in place, your bottom line should be to encourage people to get on the electoral roll. You should be making it easier for people to be eligible to vote in order to maximise the vote of every person in this country. There is nothing wrong with the current enrolment form in the way in which people in remote Australia are able to access it and fill it in. If they need to provide any of the 13 documents that you have here, you will find fewer and fewer indigenous Australians eligible to vote—in fact, the number of indigenous Australians on the roll, particularly in remote Australia, would decline.

Senator Faulkner is right: that would suit your political purpose, wouldn't it? That would be absolutely correct. You want as little a number as possible of people who are eligible to vote to get on the roll. We know that, by and large, indigenous Territorians in remote Australia do not support your policies or your government's outlook, so that is correct. This would be one way of ensuring that they are not on those rolls and that they will never get a chance to vote for the party of their choice.

Let us go to those who might want to witness these enrolment forms. The call to have a drivers licence on behalf of the witness is probably about the most uniform and consistent suggestion that you could have. Again, out of your list of 42 people, there are only about eight who would apply in the Northern Territory. Out of that, you are talking once again of teachers and nurses; you are talking about people who are probably government workers—

Senator Ferris —ATSIC regional commissioners?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESI-DENT —Order! I have been very tolerant to those on my right. You have had the opportunity to have your say. I understand that Senator Ferris is going to speak in a few moments, so she may respond to the comments made by Senator Crossin then.

Senator CROSSIN —There are 220 remote communities in the Northern Territory alone, not including outstations, but there are not 220 ATSIC commissioners in the Northern Territory. That is just an absolute furphy. There would not be enough of them around to witness these signatures. Again, the responsibility will fall back on those people employed by state and territory governments in those areas—the old reliable town clerks, the teachers and the nurses who would be called on every day and night to provide evidence to witness these enrolment forms. In a community of a couple of thousand people, they would want some time of their own. Basically, your regulations will not result in the integrity of the electoral roll; they will disenfranchise those people in our community who least understand how to fill out forms, who are not literate, who are not able to fill out those forms without assistance, who have English as a third or a fourth language and who find such a process extremely difficult. I have a letter here from Clare Martin of the Northern Territory government who states:

We know that. She continues:

That is correct. This has not been assisted by the cuts, in remote Australia, to the Australian Electoral Commission, which now no longer provides education programs on how to vote and no longer undertakes systematic trips out to those communities to ensure that the rolls are up to date. They seem to do it a few months before each federal election is due to kick around. Clare Martin goes on to say:

Not only that, they will, most likely, have the same effect in Queensland and Western Australia as well. She goes on to say:

She is right; that is exactly what should happen. The AEC should be resourced again to be able to provide that sort of enrolment.

There is one other important point that I want to make: there has never been, in the Northern Territory or in remote places, substantiated allegations of systematic enrolment irregularities or fraud in the electoral rolls. There is no evidence to suggest that that is the case when it comes to rural and remote Australia. There is no evidence to suggest that that is the case when it comes to indigenous Australians, particularly people in the Northern Territory. These regulations will, in fact, have the effect of disenfranchising those people who are least able to cope with a more complex form. They will be required to produce some sort of original form of identification, which is extremely difficult for those people who live in remote communities.

This will make the process of electoral enrolment extremely bureaucratic and there will be no benefit at all. There is no proof that this measure will ensure that the electoral roll has some degree of integrity. All this will ensure is that there are less indigenous people in remote and rural communities who are able to get on to the electoral roll. There is nothing wrong with the way the current system operates. Senator Faulkner has put forward a view that perhaps—

Senator CROSSIN —Senator Ferris, you will not be able to find me examples of this for indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory. These regulations will affect those people who are least empowered to be able to complete those sorts of forms. These regulations will ensure that, at the end of the day, there are fewer indigenous Australians on the electoral roll. They will ensure that fewer Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in this country will be able to exercise their democratic right to vote when it comes election day because they will not even have a chance to get on the roll. It will be much harder than it is now. There is nothing wrong with the current process. The suggestion by Senator Faulkner that perhaps a witness should be able to provide identification is something that should be considered. There is nothing wrong with the current system for getting on the electoral roll. Your proposal simply puts extreme barriers in place and will make it very difficult for these people. (Time expired)