Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
ABC News Breakfast -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) clinic at the mine but he died

from a heart attack there. More

now on the new representative

body for Indigenous Australians

with the expected impact for

Aboriginal communities around Australia. Northern Territory

senator Nigel Scullion has

taken a particular interest in

how the new National Congress

of Australia's First People

will affect his dinl

constituents. He joins us now

from Canberra. Good morning. At

first blush as you understand

it from the very first proposal

that Tom Calma put up to the

way this new body will be

structured as announced by the

Federal Government, is it what Indigenous Australians need in

with order to provide them a voice

with government? Tragicically,

I suspect this will just be the

son of ATSIC. I know it's

needed in the community. I

think it is essential and

important that we are provided

advice for all sectors of the

community but what is needed

certainly in my constituency,

and my people tell me all the

time they want the same

opportunities as others. You

won't get those opportunities

unless you have an education, unless you have an education,

unless you ensure the kids get

to school, you have access to

medical facilities where you

live, and we need to develop

opportunities there. We know

that. I can tell you 29 million

oaf three years, if in

government can't get their act

together with 673 million over

two years and can't build a

I'm single house, I'm sorry, but

I'm not overawed by the changes

this organisation will make and

that sort of investment. But we can't confuse the two things

here. When you say what it is that Indigenous Australians

need, it sounds very much like

you're singing off the same

song sheet as the government. Jenny Macklin makes the same

points that you need safe

housing, that you need access

to education and the like. This

new body will not be in charge

of either funding or

implementing those policies. It

will be about giving some sort

of senior voice to Indigenous

Australia to take the issues up to Canberra S that not

addressed by this body? Well,

it is important. 29 million

over three years, I'm not so

sure that the priorities are

right. This will be another

ATSIC or another organisation

where we're providing $29

million and they are not

actually providing any

programs. So it's too much money for too little

then? Well, I'm not even sure.

I have read all the media releases, listened carefully to

what Tom Calma has had to say.

Apart from the construction of

an ethics committee, I'm not

about what this organisation is even sure anybody is clear

expected to achieve. If you

don't have a clear vision of

what the organisation is going

to achieve, it's almost doomed

to failure from the start.

Right at the moment in terms of Indigenous Australia having an organisation that is effectively representing existing organisations, there

is no sort of speak of a

democratic process to elect

people from the grass root,, I think it's all been done

before. I don't think it's

going to make one single bit of

difference to those people who

people. It share a house with 21 other

people. It is a very different set-up, though. This is a

company limited by guarantee,

there will be elections for

those positions and it will

also be equally comprised of

men and women. Does that not

reassure you? No, none of it

will represent the first does. There is no doubt this

Australians. It has no idea

what it will do. It has

what it's going to absolutely no clear vision of

what it's going to achieve. As

you have indicated, it's not

going to have funding for

programs. In the early days, at

least ATSIC delivered a number

of quite good programs. Yes t

fell apart towards the end but

at least there were some things

you can point to. This doesn't

appear to be able to do

anything apart from provide

vague advice to government.

Again, we've had ATSICs before,

we've had these sort of organisations before. The

criticised previous government was

criticised because we had an

advisory board made up from

appointed people. At the end of

the day, this is just another

conversation that people are

going to have. What excites me

are houses, people going to

school and the creation of

opportunities and access to

health where people need it.

They're the sort of things that

will excite me. Just to

the finally change the subject to

the big issue of the week, emissions trading - do you

believe that some kind of legislation will get to be

voted on in the Senate this

week, and by that, I mean, do

you believe there will be

enough agreement in the coalition party room that something will be passed to the

Senate to be voted on? I think

that it's very difficult to

answer that question. Everybody

in the coalition and most

Australians are mostly

gobsmacked that after all this

time, suddenly there's this

huge rush. We've had months and

months to consider this.

Suddenly, two minutes to

midnight we're considering all

of this information. And yet

here we are, we're a month away

from some decisions made by the

whole world in Copenhagen. Yet

we're forcing ourselves to make

a decision this week. So look,

I'm not sure what's going to happen. Sounds like your I'm not sure what's going to

answer is "no". Well, no, I'm

being fair dinkum. I just

simply don't know. There are a

lot things that can happen and

unwind this week but I'm

astounded we're all being asked

to make a decision on a

framework of legislation before

there is a global undertaking

on the matter which is just a

few weeks away. We've wasted

months and months so the Prime

Minister can cynically make

this into a double dissolution

trigger. But that's in his

political interests but if he

has thinking about the national

interest, wouldn't you wait

another four weeks so at least

we had consider this

legislation in the right of

Copenhagen which is a global

agreement? Good to talk to