COALITION GOVT WALKS AWAY FROM RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT
In a vote just counted in the House of Representatives debating the
Hindmarsh Island Bridge Bill, the Australian Parliament voted 86 to 43 not
to included an amendment (moved by the Opposition) which had the effect of
making explicit the priority of the Racial Discrimination Act over the
Bill.
The Hindmarsh Island Bridge Bill 1996 will provide powerful legislative
support for the building of the bridge despite continued opposition from
local Ngarrindjeri First Peoples. It will remove the obligation on the
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs from performing one of his statutory
functions and thereby pave the way for speedy construction at Kumarangk.
The battle against the building of the Kumarangk/Hindmarsh Island Bridge
can be seen in light of an extraordinary attempt by pro-development forces
in Australia to ensure that the values of First Peoples' cosmologies are
not impediments to commercial profit taking. Tolerance only stretches so
far, apparently.
MOCKERY OF PARLIAMENTARY JOINT STATEMENT ON RACIAL TOLERANCE
This makes a mockery of the Joint Parliamentary Statement on racial
tolerance passed only last week which said, in part:
That this House
Reaffirms its commitment to the rights of all
Australians to enjoy equal rights an to be treated
with equal respect regardless of race, colour,
creed or origin.
Denounces racial intolerance in any form as
incompatible with the kind of society we are and
want to be.
The Opposition's spokesman on Aboriginal Affairs said that the
government's support for that Joint Statement has been demonstrated for
what it is - "weasel words". "What the government just did was it voted
against the provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act."
GOVERNMENT'S RACIST MESSAGE
The refusal of the government to insert a clause in the Bill which
reaffirmed the priority of the Racial Discrimination ACT sent a message
from the government to both the domestic and international community that
"... if the colour of your skin is black in this country then you don't
count" said Mr Melham.
The Kumarangk/Hindmarsh Island bridge debate has seen conservative
Anglo-Australian forces successfully smear those who respect the values of
First Peoples. These extremely intolerant forces, which characterise the
concern of Ngarrindjeri women for their sacred sites as "lies" and "fraud"
and "forgery", have now been provided with the highest stamp of approval
for their position.
The Bill can be seen as part of a process in which the cultural
construction of what it means to be Australian, in the sense of a doctrine
of terra nullius which denies the validity of the realities of First
Peoples, reaches the legislative level and receives an official stamp of
approval.
WIDER CONSEQUENCES - NATIVE TITLE
This can be expected to have far wider consequences whenever the core
values of First Peoples come into conflict with the economic aspirations
of Anglo-Australia.
With the whole area of the substance of native title rights up for debate,
the attempted containment of First Peoples' cosmology can be seen as part
of a wider process of intimidation aimed at inhibiting the original voice
of Australia from being heard and respected.
The Hindmarsh Island bridge, if built as is presently envisaged, will be
a concrete statement of Anglo-Australian domination, rather than of
partnership and respectful relating with First Peoples. And that should
alert others seeking to engage in bridge building with Anglo-Australia
Inc.
COALITION GOVERNMENT'S ACT OFFENDS THE RDA SPIRIT
The Opposition's spokesman on Aboriginal Affairs said that Hindmarsh
Island Bridge Bill had been found, in the opinion of counsel he had
consulted, to offend the spirit of the Racial Discrimination Act. He said
that, if the government's Bill had been state legislation, it would be
struck down because it would be inconsistent with the provisions of the
Racial Discrimination Act (RDA).
The Hindmarsh Island Bridge Bill apparently offends the provisions of the
RDA because it specifically prevents a small section of Australian society
from exercising their rights under the Heritage Protection Act. Senior
Counsel advised the Opposition that the Hindmarsh Island Bridge Bill
discriminated on the basis of Aboriginality.
HIDING BEHIND COMPLEX STATUTORY INTERPRETATION
The trust of the Opposition's attack was based on the failure of the
Minister introducing the Bill, coupled with the equivalent silence of the
legislation and the accompanying Explanatory Memorandum, to explicitly
reaffirm the priority of the RDA when he made his second reading speech.
Under the rules of statutory interpretation, the Second Reading speech
can be referred to by Judges seeking to determine which legislation has
priority. Also under those rules, a later piece of legislation is held
to take precedence over earlier legislation such as the 1975 Racial
Discrimination Act if a discrepancy arises. The Parliament is deemed
to have taken these concerns into account, and exercised its wisdom in
leaving such explicit statements out.
The absence of an explicit statement from the government on this matter
paves the way for the Hindmarsh Island Bridge Bill to take away the rights
of Australia's First Peoples by over-riding the protection provided by the
Racial Discrimination Act.
A MAJOR ANTI-ABORIGINAL LEGISLATIVE PRECEDENT
Mr Melham said that the Racial Discrimination Act was like the Bill of
Rights in Australia as it makes us all equal. It is, he said, "...the
most important act on our statute books."
With the passage of the Hindmarsh Island Bridge Bill, he said, we will
have an Act "...on our statute books which breaches the spirit of the
Racial Discrimination Act."
Following the defeat of the Opposition's amendment, and with an absence of
government argument, the Bill was quickly read a third time and passed by
the House of Representatives. It will now move to the Senate.
It sets an extremely bad precedent for the next major round of amendments
to the Native Title Act. With those amendments, a high degree of the fate
of First Peoples and a share in astronomical amounts of wealth are at
stake.
ACTION - PRESIDENT CLINTON IN CANBERRA 20 NOVEMBER
Setting the appropriate climate in the Australian Parliament has never
been more important. The Hindmarsh Island Bridge Bill (coupled with their
draft Native Title amendments) provides unambiguously clear proof of the
Coalition Cabinet's present disastrous course of action.
With the reelected President of the United States, Bill Clinton, due to
address both the joint House of Representatives and Senate on 20
November, people concerned about the Australian government's over-riding
of the Racial Discrimination Act might consider their options for peaceful
demonstration provided by the accompanying concentration of the world's
media in Canberra on that day.
A major march had already been planned by Ngarrindjeri people and their
supporters, starting 25 November. Since the de facto RDA Bill of Rights
has failed them, they would do well to consider heading off for Canberra
earlier, and greet the President with a copy of the draft Declaration of
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
It is clear that, when it comes to the protection of the rights of
Australia's First Peoples, as Opposition spokesman Daryl Melham said
"You can't rely on the word of the government."
Bruce Reyburn
7 November 1996