Subjects: Visit to Western Australia; Visit to Laverton and Leonora; Labor’s abolition of the Cashless Debit Card; crime crisis in Indigenous communities; Indigenous Voice to Parliament.
E&OE
QUESTION:
So, Mr Dutton, can you tell me what are your plans here in Laverton?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, the plan is to meet with the council and just to talk about the acute situation that’s been unfolding here, and it can’t be ignored by Canberra. We need to accept that there’s a huge problem and really the big driver of the problem has been the abolition of the Cashless Debit Card and Rick Wilson and Julian Leeser have spoken a lot about this – the impact on local communities and even speaking in the car with Pat before, it’s obvious that the violence against women in particular has ramped up and that’s nothing that any of us should want to see. There should be an immediate response as to how we’re going to stop it from continuing to happen night after night after night.
QUESTION:
You’ve spoken previously about practical measures to assist Indigenous people. What practical measures would you like to see in towns like Leonora?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I think you can compare the before and after. The before with the Card meant that there were restrictions on alcohol and a management system which meant that kids were being fed and you’ve got the after now where the rivers of grog are flowing and we’re seeing the results through violence against women, the attacks in the streets on innocent people etc. That’s the contrast, so I can’t understand why the Prime Minister can’t reconsider his decision to remove the Cashless Debit Card because the decision that the Prime Minister has made has resulted in an increase in violence in communities like this. It’s not just in WA but the Northern Territory and elsewhere.
QUESTION:
Do you think there is a role for state governments to implement drinking bans in places like this town?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, there’s no question that there is a role for every level of government here. I applaud what the local council’s doing here. They are stepping up, they’re providing leadership but there is a restriction in terms of what they can do just given the limited resources.
So, the state does need to provide more support and certainly the Commonwealth does. The difficulty for, I think, both the local and state governments at the moment is that the federal government is working against them. The federal government is taking decisions which are just making it harder to get the positive outcomes on the ground that the local council or even the state government would want. It doesn’t make any sense, even in Canberra, let alone here on the ground, that the government abolished the Cashless Debit Card, and it should be reinstated.
QUESTION:
The question of the Cashless Debit Card appears to be one of evidence. Both sides are saying there’s no evidence of harm or reduction in harm. Can you point to real evidence that the removal of the Cashless Debit Card has caused more social harm?
PETER DUTTON:
I just saw a photo of a young Indigenous lady, blood coming from her head. She’d been kicked in by her partner, by a male person that she was keeping company with. The police were there in attendance and if that was an isolated incident, it would be appalling enough. The fact is that it’s a daily occurrence and the numbers have ramped up, as we’ve seen in Alice Springs and evidenced elsewhere. So, if the Prime Minister makes a claim that there’s no violence or there hasn’t been an increase in violence now that there’s more alcohol available and less food available to kids, I’d like to see it but the fact is, if you speak to those who have their sleeves rolled up on the front line, out there each night trying to manage communities, they are very clear in their minds as to what’s happened and the problem has really compounded since the Prime Minister took what I think was a completely unwarranted decision to remove the Cashless Debit Card.
QUESTION:
So just on the Cashless Debit Card again – so that is a terrible anecdotal story, and I have heard it from the local council here as well. Are there any statistics that demonstrate that these anecdotal stories are in fact (inaudible)?
PETER DUTTON:
Look, I just think we are past all that, to be honest. That’s a pedantic public service sort of approach to it. What we need is practical support on the ground. It was clear in Alice Springs, as it is across other parts of the Northern Territory, as it is here in Indigenous communities in Western Australia that the police are overwhelmed. They’re overwhelmed because there is a breakdown in law and order and there is a law and order crisis underway and the Prime Minister refuses to attend these communities.
If the Prime Minister was here, he would hear the accounts first-hand, and you can’t hear those accounts firsthand and then try and hide behind some, you know, statistical argument about what the ABS is producing by way of stats, where there’s a huge lag figure in any case. So, the requirement for action is here and now. These communities are screaming for their Prime Minister to support them, to put in place actions which will bring an end to the violence or at least dramatically reduce the violence. Instead, the Prime Minister is making decisions, which is making it harder for these local communities to function.
QUESTION:
And just on the question of the Voice, senior federal government ministers have urged you not to turn your back on Indigenous Australians. Can you argue that you’re supporting Indigenous Australians if you’re not backing the Voice to Parliament?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, a couple of points. Firstly, we’ve had, I think, a very constructive engagement in relation to the Voice. It’s strange that the Prime Minister now says that the Calma-Langton view of having local and regional voices is potentially not part of his plan. A week ago, we had one senior government minister – indeed, the Envoy in this area – saying that there would be a seat at the table at the National Cabinet for the Voice. That was then backtracked by Linda Burney and then ruled out by the Prime Minister. But we don’t know what the model would look like because it’s negotiated in Parliament and with the Greens and the crossbenchers and the Coalition in the Senate. So, there are a lot of moving pieces in this at the moment. I think it’s confusing the Australian public. I think the Prime Minister has an obligation to explain the detail so people can fully comprehend what is it that they are being asked to vote for. I’ve said this to the Prime Minister. There are models that we could vote for, as a public, if you understood what it meant, but there are other models which you wouldn’t vote for if you thought it wasn’t going to address the sort of violence that we’re seeing in communities now. So, I think there an onus upon the Prime Minister and I hope that he can provide that detail sooner than later.
QUESTION:
We’re coming very close to a date to the Referendum. Do you have a timeline as to when the Party will settle on a position on the Voice?
PETER DUTTON:
We don’t, but we would like to see the detail, and frankly, I think millions of Australians are keen to see the detail and really understand. I think in their hearts Australians have a desire to see better outcomes for Indigenous people. But how will the Voice help in communities like this? And what would change when you’ve got Indigenous women and Elders at the moment saying the biggest issue for them is to try and restore law and order to bring safety back to their community; to allow their kids to go to school. What will the Voice do in that regard? And if their voice is not being heard now by their Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister won’t come here to listen to the voice of those women in the communities in relation to alcohol and violence, then how would the Voice change that; and how would it improve the outcomes to the lives of Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in regional and remote areas?
Thank you very much.
[ends]