BANI, Ms Mary, Chief Executive Officer, Torres Shire Council POIPOI, Mr Robert, Mayor, Northern Peninsula Area Regional Council SERIAT, Ms Elsie, OAM, Mayor, Torres Shire Council TAMU, Mr Kabay, Councillor Division 10, Warraber Island, Torres Strait Island Regional Council YOELU, Ms Mary, Deputy Mayor and Councillor Division 2, Umagico, Northern Peninsula Area Regional Council YORKSTON, Mrs Dalassa, Chief Executive Officer, Northern Peninsula Area Regional Council [11:02] CHAIR: Welcome. Before we proceed, I'll hand over to Mr Smith. Mr MATT SMITH: I would like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we meet, the Kaurareg nation, and pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging. I want to acknowledge the mats that we meet on today and the importance that the mats have in Torres Strait Islander cultures. You were born on the map, you will leave on the mat and all important decisions will be made on the mat. I thank you all for taking the time today and wish to acknowledge the sorry business that is happening across the islands at the moment. I know this is a very hard time for many members of the community, so we do really appreciate the effort in coming together today. We welcome, from the mainland, NPARC. Before we get started, Mayor Poipoi, could I ask you to give us an opening prayer, please? Mr Poi p oi then spoke in an Indigenous language . CHAIR: Thank you very much. I have a short spiel that I need to read, and then I'll invite each of you to make an opening statement. Although the committee does not require you to give evidence under oath, I should advise you that this hearing is a legal proceeding of the parliament and therefore has the same standing as proceedings of the respective houses. The giving of false and misleading evidence is a serious matter and may be regarded as a contempt of parliament. The evidence given today will be recorded by Hansard and attracts parliamentary privilege and is also being broadcast live on the parliament's website with audio. I remind members of the gallery that you do need the consent of the committee and witnesses at the table before taking photos or videos. If you see people taking videos or filming, it's because they have got the consent of the committee beforehand. I now invite you to make opening statements. Ms Bani : Firstly, I'd like to thank Father God for this day, for the gift of life and for his blessings upon us. Secondly, I'd like to acknowledge the Kaurareg nation, the traditional owners of this land where the joint standing committee holds its hearing into the inquiry into racism, hate and violence directed at Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Also, we'd like to acknowledge the traditional owners from Zenadth Kes and also the traditional owners from around this nation. I acknowledge also our families in sorry business, particularly here on Thursday Island today. As we sit here, we know that there is a funeral in place, so our condolences to our families this morning. As Indigenous people, there is one thing we know and we all know for sure: our blood connects us to the land. Our culture is a living culture. It is passed down from generation to generation. It cannot be taught in any classroom or university. It's instilled within us. Our language identifies us. Our totems and our clan, our dance and our songline makes way for us. Our heritage and our culture connect us. It's our birthright. It cannot be taken away from us. And today, like every other day, always was and always will be Aboriginal land. Council commends the joint standing committee for calling this inquiry. Today, I'm here with Mayor Poi Poi and Deputy Mayor Yoelu representing NPARC, the Northern Peninsula Area Regional Council. We represent the five communities of the NPA: Bamaga, Seisia, Injinoo, New Mapoon and Umagico. NPA is a very unique local government in Queensland and in Australia and has been in existence since 2008 as part of the local government reforms. Nowhere in the state of Queensland and nowhere in the nation has a government amalgamated Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and culture together to form one local government. This has been an issue for us on the mainland for a very long time, since 2008. This year, the NAIDOC theme is '50 Years Deadly', and next year we will celebrate the 60th anniversary of the 1967 referendum. Yet the Closing the Gap report that comes out has done nothing but failed our people. We continue to face racism every day. Every day we face racism in person and online. It's on social media platforms or through unconscious bias through policies, government bureaucracy and red tape. The law enforcement system has failed us, and we face injustice every day of our lives as we watch our children being taken away. The stats against us continue to grow. Today, racism is even worse than before. The dial has been turned against us even more since the failed referendum. In NPARC, there are a number of areas we would like to raise where racism has directly affected us. The first one is the Fitzgerald inquiry that brought the alcohol management plans to our region. For more than 20 years we have been discriminated against as a community and as a people, particularly in the cape councils in Queensland where there are alcohol management plans. We are treated differently. There have been no support systems or mechanisms in place for us, and 20 years on all we now see is an increase of sly grogging, ice, meth and other drugs that continue to compound against our communities. For so long, we've been calling for the Queensland government to come and review those AMPs, but that continues to fall on deaf ears. The other thing we suffer in Queensland is, while the Premier can have permanent 50c fares—bus fares, rail fares and public transport—for regional centres like Cairns, Townsville, Brisbane and the rest of Queensland, we continue to fight for a permanent freight subsidy. Again, we feel that there's bias and there's racism against our cape councils. It's great to have permanent 50c fares, but it's really bad when every single Cape York community, including our council, does not have a public transport system, does not have a rail system, does not have a bus system. We continue to advocate for a permanent freight subsidy for our people. The removal of CDP has certainly affected us. Back in the 1990s and the early 2000s we had real jobs, we had real community training, we had real outcomes. Now, by privatising it, advertising it and making it a commodity for anyone who would like to apply for it, our communities see that failure. In Queensland, and particularly in the Torres Strait—and we are here today and I fully respect the TSRA as a Torres Strait Islander—at the demise of ATSIC what has happened is that we do not have representative bodies for the Aboriginal communities and councils in Cape York and around the nation. We no longer have a voice. The provisions of NIAA and the provisions of the ACC haven't really represented our people, so we would also like to raise that. Housing has failed us. We're in the worst situation for housing. The NPARIH program that came forward at least gave us 10 years and $5 billion worth of housing where we could plan for all remote and Indigenous communities around Australia. Since the NPARIH program has finished, we have had no funding to help us with our housing. We're in a critical housing condition now, and we ask the parliamentary committee to consider, through the HAFF funding, an identified Indigenous funding round for us so that we can build our own homes. We are so far behind that we need $1 billion in the first iteration to be able to play catch-up for all our housing. Health also fails us, and also the lack of investment for critical infrastructure. The list goes on. With that, I ask the parliamentary committee to consider our submission that we put forward and also the deliberations that we will have today. CHAIR: Thank you very much for that opening statement. Mr Poipoi : Can I add on to the opening statement? The referendum, as we all know, had the biggest response, a clear response, a yes or no vote—racism exists, especially on social media. It causes harm, perpetuates oppression and supports the deficit narrative. Social, economic and commercial determinants impact our health. That disadvantages us. Are we not equal? Look at the burden of disease per population in remote areas in comparison to non-Indigenous counterparts. Funding models support—or don't support—service systems to enable better outcomes. Analysing the widths causes a level of harm when we live with disadvantages from a level of systemic racism, day in, day out. It's faced in health care, schools and justice systems. We have the answer for place based solutions, for example: better funding models; funding distribution methodology; and our cultural governance to centre our knowledge system and to boost our livelihoods throughout nation-building and potential local economic growth. Decolonising our world is the best economic strategy and solution to racism. Have an antisemitism-type law, for example, to protect our First Nations citizens. Thank you. CHAIR: Thank you. We'll go to the Torres Shire Council. Ms Seriat : I want to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land where we gather here today, the Kaurareg nation, pay my respect to our elders past, present and emerging and extend that respect to all First Nations who are here in this room with me or who are watching abroad. Thank you so much to the committee for being present here today. I'm here today with CEO Mary Bani. I'll give an overview, and the CEO will elaborate more with me. Torres Shire Council is 51 per cent government owned and has a four per cent rate base. We've been saying for a very long time that Torres Shire Council—all of us here at this table—is unique when it comes to policy change and policymaking. One size doesn't fit all of us. The water separates us from the mainland, which means that we don't have access to freight. Monopolies are out of our hands when it comes to air freight and sea freight. That includes road train as well for us here. We have an opportunity where we are a mini-Canberra where we have all three tiers government here in the Torres Strait, and Torres Shire is also a regional hub where we cater for the needs of everyone here. We say that Torres Shire Council is 51 per cent government owned, but government is exempt from paying rates. When we say 51 per cent owned, we would think that we'd be rich in our rate base, but housing is a crisis nationally. For us here, it's evident from our health stats that our people are dying simply because of lack of housing for our people. Yes, we know land is scarce. We're always advocating to have lands unlocked so that we can build houses for our people and our mob. I'll get my CEO to elaborate on all the other stuff that has been identified by the CEO of NPARC that we face similarly. I also want to acknowledge the AMP in First Nations communities. We are made of 17 First Nations communities. Torres Shire Council is a mainstream council, but 86 per cent of our population is First Nations people and, when we come down to funding models to apply for Indigenous funding, Torres Strait doesn't meet that request, because it is a mainstream council. These are continuous fights where we're having to change the policy to suit our people so that we too can be eligible for the funding rounds. Ms Bani : Welcome and good morning to all the committee members. I want to thank all the panel members here already—the mayors and CEOs and deputy mayors and our mayor, of course. I want to reconfirm and agree with all the feedback that's been provided. Rather than repeating it, I want to confirm that that is something that we experience being the most northern councils in the country. What the mayor was just sharing about that 51 per cent of government presence and us being a mini-Canberra means that there is office space, accommodation, a lot of investment, a lot of staff and a lot of people helping our region, but, when you look at the statistics from an everyday basis, that investment is creating a negative impact more than the positive impact that it's meant to be having. We mentioned the funding models. Even if we wanted to identify the multiple layers of racism, whether that's not being greeted politely as you walk outside, because that's part of our culture—we like to acknowledge everyone. When you get snubbed in the street, that's a bit disheartening because hosting is part of our cultural expression. It's a high value of ours. It's also about how the children are treated at school and their needs not being met despite the efforts of our community leaders and trying to incorporate cultural values and curriculum. It's through to the lack of opportunity, despite the investment in the region, of our young people to be able to get jobs, the fact that as we grow through the struggles where you can't actually leave your home to as an adult to start your own family—there's nowhere to go—so you end up having multigenerational families in one house, sometimes up to 45 years, going through to trying to start your own family and having a space. There isn't a space. There isn't a space for young men. There isn't a space for young women. There are a growing number of youth and children in our population, meaning that there are a lot more needs, but it also goes through to being an adult and maybe getting a job to then be able to try and save up to buy a house. What we're finding as Torres Shire Council is, yes, we are considered mainstream by local government because we do collect that very minimal rate space, but by having such a government presence on behalf of the whole region, we are constantly having pressure on our infrastructure. When you have major development happening, the council itself is disempowered and not being told that these developments are happening other than some final tick-box exercise at the very end, because there are entitlements that state and Commonwealth can do what they want here. There's that ongoing issue about the cost and contributions of those buildings. Not only the buildings but the population, the excess vehicles, the excess rubbish, all of those sorts of things are meaning that the value of having that extra resource in the region does not meet the demand and is creating a negative impact on our community. Why we're mentioning funding models is that, again, there are multiple layers of how Indigenous money is being distributed, and, from Commonwealth to state, by the time it gets to local government, it's minimal and it doesn't really look like it's enough money to meet the need. There's also the systemic racism where councils are not considered or respected as a key partner to deliver critical infrastructure projects, because some of our bids actually try to demonstrate the real cost of doing something, but, when we talk about employment and training, we're wanting to save money down the track that we can maintain assets to the lifespan that they need to, because you can't just replace a sewerage treatment plant with a couple of bucks. It's a big expense. Why we're sharing this and Torres Shire Council's contribution to the inquiry is that we would like the committee to recognise that there are multiple layers of racism. There are also major issues with how funding is distributed from Commonwealth all the way through, and that includes to the extent of policy delivery at officer level as well. An example recently is that, if we're having Closing the Gap funding, it may be distributed by the state, and we're a one-time concern because, if you get contractors from south, they will not be able to deliver an effective model here because of the shortage of land, the shortage of lay-down areas, the high-cost freight. It means that there is great investment, but, because it goes through all those different stages, which you're probably very much aware of, we're finding the costs of things is almost tripling from one year to the next. An example I wanted to share of why we need to start looking at the true impact and value for money of Commonwealth and state taxpayers' money is that, if you continue to try and implement mainstream models here, including procurement, and not acknowledge the resources that are here, which are the people, the councils and the community organisations, you'll never have enough money. We need to be at this table as an equal party at all levels, and Torres Shire Council would like to share this insight, because, as a recipient of state and Commonwealth decisions and even international diplomacy decisions, we're at capacity now, and there needs to be a better way of doing things for the betterment of the region, but also for transparency for taxpayers' dollars. Thank you. Mr Tamu : Good morning once again. First of all, I also want to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land and waters that we are having this inquiry on, the Kaurareg people and the Kaiwalagal nation, and I pay my respects to their elders past and present. I also want to acknowledge Torres Strait Islander and Aboriginal leaders and community members who have contributed evidence to this inquiry. Also, thank you for bringing this inquiry to Thursday Island. It is important that the committee hears evidence not only about the Torres Strait but in the Torres Strait. For TSIRC, our council's evidence responds most directly to paragraphs 1, 3, 5 and 6 of the terms of reference: the nature and impact of racism, initiatives that reduce harm, reporting and response mechanisms, and other related matters. Council does not seek to duplicate specialist evidence on online platforms or ideologically motivated extremism. Our direct evidence is about systematic and institutional racism as it can operate through public policy, funding rules, administrative practice and fragmented accountability. I want to be precise. Council is not saying that every funding shortfall, delay or poor service outcome by itself is racism. We do not allege that every public official acts with discriminatory intent. Our concern is cumulative to the effects of systems. When governments know that a standard policy or funding model repeatedly produces substantially unequal outcomes for remote First Nations communities but the model is not adjusted over time, the result could be structural discrimination. Council uses 'structural racism' in a public policy sense—rules and practices that appear neutral but, in their operation, repeatedly deny equivalent access, opportunity, safety or decision-making power. TSIRC represents 15 island communities spread across approximately 42,000 square kilometres of sea at Australia's northern border. As you've heard here before, a mainland delivery model does not translate neatly to an island region. Freight, marine access, mobilisation, weather, a thin contractor market, biosecurity and climate exposure materially alter the cost and risk of every project. Council's updated strategic investment plan identifies approximately $1.4 billion in infrastructure investment required over the next five years. That is council's planning estimate across critical assets. It is not a claim that the whole amount is caused by racism. It does, however, demonstrate the scale of the gap that accumulates when policy and funding settings do not keep pace with the actual cost of providing essential services in the Torres Strait. The assets involved are not luxuries. They include water and wastewater systems, road and drainage, seawalls, marine and aviation access, waste facilities, community facilities and the infrastructure that supports housing. When renewal is delayed, the consequences are lived by people. Less reliable services, constrained housing, higher costs, reduced mobility, greater exposure to climate and disaster risk offer fewer opportunities for education, employment and enterprise. Equally, allocation is not equity of outcome. A formula can give the same nominal amount to a mainland project and an island project and yet will purchase far less in the Torres Strait. Short-term grants can compound the problem. While approvals, recruitment and mobilisation occur the costs rise, scope is reduced, and work is deferred. Communities are then required to prove the same need again in the next funding round. That cycle produces consultation fatigue, administrative burden and decline in trust. People see they are acknowledged but not resolved. That is a form of collective harm relevant to paragraph 1. The same issue appears in governance responsibilities spread across Commonwealth, Queensland, statutory, local government and service provider arrangements. Council is often the institution closest to community and is expected to assist delivery, while many of the decisive funding and policy levers sit elsewhere. When responsibility is fragmented, accountability is also fragmented. In 1997, the parliamentary report Torres Strait Islanders: a new deal examined greater autonomy and the need for better coordination. Almost three decades later, important aspirations remain unfinished. Council is not calling for a removal of institutions or a transfer of responsibility without resource. We are calling for a clear regional settlement, decisions made at the lowest effective level, responsibilities that are transparent, funding that is long term, and genuine authority for Torres Strait people over the matters that shape their lives. I want to go back and touch on the new deal, greater autonomy for the Torres Strait, report. That's been an aspiration since 1936, 1937 and was something that came through in that new deal, greater autonomy for Torres Strait, report. It was a similar hearing to this, a similar inquest. Recommendations came from it through the Commonwealth process and it's still been sitting around as an aspiration. Next year it's going to be 30 years and we still haven't achieved greater autonomy for the Torres Strait. But it's the absolute aspiration that we Torres Strait Islanders have and it's something that will remove systematic racism, institutional racism, in our region for our people if we are able to manage our own affairs, make our own decisions with the funding models that suit us for our people to better the lifestyle and lives of our people and our region. Paragraph E asks about reporting and responding to racism. A person should not need to be an expert in jurisdiction to report discriminatory treatment yet the relevant pathway may involve an employer, service provider, police, a regulator, a human rights body or a Commonwealth or state agency. Council's experience is that fragmented systems can lead to referral between bodies, uncertain timeframes, limited feedback and no clear view of whether the underlying institutional problem has been addressed. A cultural-safe response requires more than an email address. It requires a no-wrong-door approach—active referral between agencies, published timeframes, reasons for decisions, review rights, support for complainants, and public reporting of de-identified trends and outcomes. Those standards should operate across jurisdictions and institutions, not depend on where the complaint happens to land. Paragraph C asks: what works? Council's position is that cultural awareness training is not enough. Training may help individual behaviour but it does not correct a funding formula, a procurement rule or a service model built on assumptions that do not fit the Torres Strait. Effective initiatives include First Nations equity impact assessment before major policies, program and funding formulas are approved; co-designed with local decision-makers and community controlled organisations; multiyear investment agreements with transparent outcomes and independent monitoring; local collection and ownership of data on racism, complaints and service equity; procurement and workforce settings that build local capability; and sustainable community led antiracism and cultural safety programs. Council asks the committee to consider economic self-determination under paragraph F. Dependency is often spoken about as though it were a failure of communities. Policy can create administrative dependency when communities are required to rely on recurrent grants because they lack the infrastructure, market access, investment certainty and decision-making authority needed to grow local economies. The Torres Strait also carries a nationally significant border role. Our communities contribute through their permanent presence, cultural knowledge and long-standing relationship across the treaty region. Investment in local infrastructure and capability should be commensurate with those responsibilities and developed in partnership with regional leadership. The Torres Strait Treaty protects traditional ways of life and recognises traditional activities including barter and market trade. The council supports careful exploration of lawful reforms and administrative arrangements that can improve freight market access and local enterprise. Any change must be jointly negotiated and remain consistent with customs, immigration, biosecurity, fisheries management, law enforcement and national security. This is not a call to weaken the border. It is a call to design border and economic policy with the people who live there. The council asks the committee to recommend eight practical actions. First, recognise structural and institutional racism. The final report should expressly examine persistent discriminatory effects of policies and institutional practices, while distinguishing systemic effect of allegations about individual intent. Build a Torres Strait specific evidence base. Support locally governed data on the prevalence and impact of racism complaints, service access and institutional outcomes rather than subsuming Torres Strait experience within broader categories. Review and fund an equity commission and independent jointly governed review of Commonwealth and Queensland funding and service arrangements of Torres Strait, including indexation, freight mobilisation, remote market failure, climate and disaster risk, and whole life of asset costs. Negotiate a long-term investment agreement. Align Commonwealth, Queensland and regional commitments to a transparent, multi-year infrastructure and service pipeline based on demonstrated need and realistic remote delivery costs. Strengthen regional decision-making and accountability. Advance the unresolved autonomy and coordination objectives identified in the 1997 A new deal report with clear responsibilities, local authority and resources matched to functions. Create national minimum reporting standards. Establish a culturally safe, no-wrong-door model, common timeframes, active referral, reasons for decisions, review rights, support for complainants and public reporting of de-identified outcomes. Fund community led prevention and institutional reform. Support sustained anti-racism and cultural safe initiatives and require First Nations equity impact assessment for major policies, programs and funding methodologies. Advanced economic self-determination and broader partnership involved in procurement, infrastructure, enterprise and workforce capability. Explore treaty based opportunities and provide long-term border capability investment developed with regional leadership. In closing, the council is not asking the community to commit to label every disadvantage as racism. We are asking it to define racism so narrowly that only overt slurs as hostility are visible, while recurring institutional patterns that shapes people's health, safety, opportunity and voice remain outside the frame. We are not seeking preferential treatment. We are seeking equity, policy and investment [inaudible] and responsibilities, accountability that communities can see and decisions made with Torres Strait people, not for us. The Torres Strait stands ready to work with the Commonwealth, Queensland and this parliament to build a future founded on dignity, self-determination, resilience and shared prosperity. Koeyma eso. CHAIR: Thank you. We will now proceed to questions, but before we do, can I ask that each of you table your opening statements for the committee? You can just do that by emailing the things you've read out to the secretariat. If that can be provided to the committee, that would be really helpful. Senator Thorpe. Senator THORPE: Thank you for your powerful contributions. I had to cross off all the questions I had because you covered so much; it was brilliant. But I still have questions. I did call for the federal government to allocate a minimum of 10 per cent of all new public and social housing supply to First Peoples in urban, regional and remote areas. That wasn't supported by the Labor federal government. But I did fight for it, and I did put an amendment into the HAFF so that we could get a carve-out. That was knocked out. I'm just one little black sovereign senator in that place. Can you tell us a bit about access to food in the Torres Strait. What response have you had when you've raised this issue with both Queensland and federal governments? Anybody can answer that. Ms Bani : That's a great question. A recent example is that we had a state funded retail freight subsidy that was implemented over the last few years in Torres and PA—in the outer islands as well, I believe. That was quite a significant amount of funding, and I think it was a great win for the region. But, when it came to implementing that funding and getting those benefits directly to the disadvantaged communities, again, as mentioned earlier, there would have been some sort of processes there as to how the money was sent from treasury to the relevant departments and so on. I'd been away for four years, so it was really great to come back to see it. Normally you would go to the shop and a plastic bag of food, one bag, might be $60 or $70, and that meant that we could get probably $2 to $3 in savings. But, over the time, everything else went up. When there was a government investment to tackle one issue, it was generous, but then, in the scheme of things, it didn't really make a difference. Fresh fruit and vegetables, as you would know, are really important for people's health and wellbeing. There have been many attempts and investments to try and get that food source more stabilised in the region. Again, over time, if it's a government funded program, it depends on the government of the day. The communities never get to see the full benefit of it, let alone the change in behaviour and lifestyle to see real health outcomes at the same time, like reduction in diabetes, reduction in amputations, reduction in chronic disease and reduction in multiple burdens of disease. In terms of food, food security is still really important. Gardening is part of our traditional cultures because we're in island environments. But when you try to implement mainstream models of, say, growing iceberg lettuce, which can't grow naturally in the environment—it needs all the extra horticultural sorts of things—it's again creating a bigger issue, because what we're trying to do for our diet is supply food that is only suitable for other climates, for instance. Again, it would be great if we could look at food security. We do need to have things like food banks so we are able to store. Torres Shire Council is looking at how we can have food security, fuel security, energy security—those sorts of things—because if the barge doesn't come, we don't get food. This is part of an ongoing change in policy over the years. We can't even do our cultural practices of trading traditionally, because of all the biosecurity. Some of the feedback that Councillor Tamu, especially, has raised is that we wear the burden of maintaining the border and the burden of maintaining the biosecurity zones. That means that we can't actually trade with each other if one community has great fertile soil. We can probably trade amongst islands, but the biosecurity risk and the management of it by state and Commonwealth means that we can't, say, buy fresh bananas from even a neighbouring island—because you have to go through biosecurity. Again, there are things culturally that we would like to do, but that responsibility of protecting the border and the biosecurity zones means that we're protecting the state and Commonwealth's national agricultural industry, which doesn't get recognised. That's a long answer there. Senator THORPE: Wow. Thank you. Mrs Yorkston : For quite a number of years, we've been advocating for a freight equalisation scheme similar to Tasmania for the Torres Strait and the NPA region. We've been asking, from my understanding, for over two decades now, because we're no dissimilar to there. The only difference with Tasmania's freight equalisation scheme is they had the Tasmanian timber that was exported out, so when the barges went back they were able to bring all the food back. That's why they called it the freight equalisation scheme. That's a federal scheme. For us up here, we've been advocating for a similar scheme. The only difference is, obviously, we only have seafood that's exported out of here. At the same time, we're so far away from Cairns. We're dependent on two barges per week. That services us, and that's where we get all our food in. If there's a natural disaster in Queensland and if the roads are cut off, then we suffer up here—then our shelves get empty and we don't get food here. Food security remains a real issue up here—not only the cost of it but also the quality of it and the ability to secure it here. There was a Queensland government summit held here in 2021. As part of that, we were able to negotiate—but it was only temporary—the freight subsidy that we receive now. The freight subsidy is only temporary. We were able to advocate and have $64 million over five years, covering four regions. The four regions are the Torres Strait; the NPA; the gulf, where we've got some Aboriginal communities; and also the communities in Cape York. What happens with that subsidy now is you receive it at the register. So, as long as the retailers here are registered, when you shop here, you get 20 per cent at the check-out. The issue for us is the subsidy was only in place for five years. We're now in the last year, and our communities will struggle once the subsidy goes away. We're asking for a whole of government, bipartisan taskforce to be set up with both the federal and the state governments to be able to have a look at these real issues for us. Too many times, these things are temporary, and, as government changes, they can make changes and it goes away. We don't have infrastructure here for cold storage or for warehouse storage so that we can hold more supplies. So, at any given time, we've only got about three weeks worth of food stock in our region here. We are at the mercy of natural disasters or if anything happens further down the coast of Queensland. It is an issue that we certainly continue to need assistance with. Senator THORPE: Thank you. Ms Yoelu : In saying that, in this time of the season, it's tourist season for us in the NPA, so a lot of the food does go out of stock for us and we suffer in our households and in businesses. Senator THORPE: Yes, of course. Mr Tamu : With the outer islands, around the food security, like Councillor Kabay Tamu from Warraber and from TSIRC said—the freight subsidy that's been around, once again, goes back to the model that they created. They didn't consult with us on how we wanted that freight subsidy to work or how it will support our communities and our people. It's something that's just been implemented on us, and we just have to go with it. In the state's most recent budget that they just adopted, that subsidy has been reduced, so we will soon see the effect throughout the communities. I also want to touch on the local shops that we have, IBIS stores or CEQs. They were built by our people, our old people. They were something that came out of their own pockets to build. But now, today, it's owned by the state. That's something as an aspiration. When we talk about being economically independent and being less reliant on government, they're some of the things that we need to bring back to our region, so our people and our region can own the shops and the industries that are up here. Thank you. Senator THORPE: So it's owned by the Queensland state? Mr Tamu : Yes. Senator THORPE: Recently, at Senate estimates, I asked why the Albanese government refused to increase or index the remote area allowance. This supplement is supposed to help people cover the cost of food here in the Torres Strait. The answer I was given is that people on Centrelink 'already got increases to their payments'. What should the federal government be doing so people here can access nutritious food, just like people in the city? Would that remote area allowance being increased—it hasn't been increased forever, but food and everything else has been increased. What should the federal government be doing here to help people? Mrs Yorkston : It's really important. There are a lot of things that—costs go up but subsidies don't. A fine example for us is, about 10 years ago, the patient travel scheme that helped our people travel for health services was $70 per night for accommodation in Cairns or if you had to travel to Brisbane. We're here now, today, and the subsidy is still $70 per night. Where in Australia would you pay $70 a night, besides a backpackers, and you're sick and you're travelling for health or you're travelling for treatment, and you would have this? Costs rise all the time and subsidies never seem to move. We find that in both state and federal government—all the time, for us here. Is it a tax subsidy or the regional subsidy, Senator, that you're speaking about? The group A subsidy has been $1,173 since I started work in 1992. So that hasn't changed for us either. Senator THORPE: This is a federal remote area allowance that hasn't been increased for decades. My role is to push for the increase, given everything's increasing, and, as you say, the subsidies aren't. It's that allowance that comes from the federal government. I've got one more question and it's for the Torres Strait Island Regional Council. I'll put the rest on notice. For the benefit of the committee, can you explain the significance of the Masig Statement, and, based on current progress, how realistic is it that Torres Strait will achieve self-determination and regional autonomy by 2037? Mr Tamu : That's something that I forgot to raise in the opening statement. I think it's something that's very important to progressing forward the aspirations of our people to self-determination. Since 2022, when we launched the Masig Statement or the Malungu Yangu Wakay, the Voice from the Deep, it is a voice or a statement that's been echoing since 1936 and 1937. It's a statement that represents the longstanding aspirations of our people, our ancestors, back then, to go towards self-determination and to self-manage. Some of the issues talked about back in 1937 are still some of the issues that impact us today. In terms of progressing towards realistically achieving self-determination or regional autonomy by 2037, we really haven't gotten the support from government, including government bodies as well. Before the Masig Statement in 2022, I know that the TSRA, as our Commonwealth statutory body, adopted the adaptation plan towards regional autonomy. It's something that's been discussed through leadership in the region. It's something that we as a region are serious about and that we want to achieve. By 2037, it will be 100 years since the first councillors meeting. You would think that after 100 years a lot of changes would have taken place for our people. We would be managing our own affairs. We would be moving towards becoming our own state or territory. Even with the support that we've being getting and even with the 1997 Commonwealth inquiry report, Torres Strait Islanders: a new deal, towards greater autonomy for the Torres Strait, where recommendations were made, they were not followed up, pursued or supported by governments from then till now. Senator THORPE: Maybe government don't want you to self-determine. Mr Tamu : Exactly. Senator THORPE: They want to be the mission managers all the time and control your life. Mr Tamu : That's where you talk about systematic racism and all of that. I think that's the biggest thing for our region. When you talk about racism, they just want to control and oppress our people, who continue to be oppressed by government. CHAIR: Mr Venning. Mr VENNING: Most of my questions have been answered, but I want to pick up on one practical point. One of the witnesses talked about the concept of decolonisation for some of those remote Torres Strait and Far North Queensland communities. What does that look like in practice? Ms Bani : That's a very good question. As we were sharing before—with the multiple layers of racism going from personal experience to systemic and historical and all sorts of things—decolonisation and the impact is, similarly, the same exercise as well. Senator Thorpe, you mentioned how the statement could help improve. First of all, English is not our first language. When a lot of our people talk, and take protocol and key leadership roles very seriously, they're speaking from the heart. They're speaking from wisdom. They're speaking from ancestral knowledge. It's really hard to break that down into English terms. With those statements, going back to 1994 and to 1936, that drive is still the same drive. It's something that we live and breathe every day. When we're holding roles under the local government act and trying to not only demonstrate that there are better ways but that when we say to do things culturally or decolonise thinking, there's real merit in the translation piece, which our people are now really able to articulate because we have been allowed to enter these positions now, to have a say and to influence. When we raise things like decolonisation, there needs to be a full audit of all the state and Commonwealth funding that comes into the region. That would be really good, and we need to be part of that as well. This is one of the recommendations, and I'd like to see if it's possible to leave our proposal here. Just as this inquiry is really important in tackling racism, there needs to be a bigger inquiry about the way money is being spent in the region. Yes, we have a lot of our First Nations people in these roles, but they are bound by the policies of the day. When we talk about things like looking at funding models and some of the interpretation of how we've been explaining greater autonomy, it's really about streamlining services. It's making sure that the dollar hits the ground. It's making sure the investment time and energy is attacking the root causes of these issues. It's ensuring that there's governance at every level, including at a household and individual level, of people's autonomy to decide what they get to eat and what jobs that they would like to aspire to. It is something that is not a one-word answer. To be able to address it, just like racism, we need to acknowledge that there are multiple layers of it, from individual experience to the system. There's also work that needs to be done on a strategy to ensure that it is an ongoing, fully integrated solution that is multipronged and multifaceted as it's in a very sensitive space. Under the protection act, our parents weren't allowed to move; they had to get permission. They weren't even allowed to leave the islands. They weren't even allowed to marry who they wanted to. Those are our parents. It's not like colonisation happened 200 or 300 years ago; we're still in it, so we need to be able to create a space—which our leadership, by holding these roles, can now do—to look at it for what it is. Our up and coming generation need to be armed with an understanding of our history, so big credit to TSIRC for being able to keep pushing and driving that. That needs to be something that we should be able to do. We're getting better at saying: 'This leadership is going to make sure that these key statements focus directly on decolonisation of thinking." We will also be able to create better models that will then guarantee that there are fit-for-place, fit-for-purpose, real outcomes. What we're also finding in the Torres Shire Council is that it's cheaper and it's better use of public taxpayers' money to work with the community and the people and draw on the cultural knowledge that has been established for thousands of years. If you look at the cultures of any community—First Nations or elsewhere—they are designed around seasonal practices in line with feast and famine. Protocols and cultural respect, including welcome to country, are to ensure that you're having safe engagements, you're all on the same page, and there's no need to go to war. These things are still standing. We're still living on the same land. I wanted to let you know that, if anything, we need to elevate our models of doing things because we'll find that it's not necessarily something that the government or history can actually address because they haven't been privy to thousands of years of living on country and knowing the best way to do things. It was a simple question but a big answer. Mr VENNING: A perennial issue—and we've seen it become more relevant today—is if federal funding is actually delivering outcomes. When you've got remote locations, you've got a difference in cultures. Far North Queensland couldn't be any more different from Canberra. In terms of getting that funding to deliver better outcomes, what are one or two practical changes that you would like to see from those funding structures and those governance structures? Mr Poipoi : We in the NPA heavily rely on road freight from Cairns up to NPA, which helps not only us but Torres Shire and TSIRC. We heavily rely on the DRFA for the funding of our roads north of Laura. The PDR, Peninsula Developmental Road, is under TMR, and all the access roads going into communities are under Cook Shire. Road freight is only available to us six months a year, at the most. If I can make a quick comparison between road freight and sea freight, a local civil contractor had quote for both road freight and sea freight for a 20-tonne machine from Cairns to Seisia in the NPA. The road freight was $5½ thousand to $6,000. If it leaves Cairns today, it gets to NPA tomorrow. The sea freight quoted was $45,000 to $48,000 from Cairns to Seisia in four or five days, at the most. That's the difference, and that's why we rely on the DRFA funding for our roads, which can benefit not only us but TSIRC and Torres Shire. Mr VENNING: Thank you for that. CHAIR: Mr Gee. Mr GEE: Thank you all very much for your evidence and your contribution to the work of this committee. Mrs Yorkston, I have a couple of matters arising from your statements—firstly, your observations on the Housing Australia Future Fund. I won't ask you about that, but I have to tell you that I agree with you. I find the Housing Australia Future Fund very citycentric. I've had conversations with the minister that it is not getting out to regional Australia where it needs to be, obviously including this region as well. So I take on board what you said, but I won't ask you any questions on that because we're running short on time. Can you elaborate on your comments regarding alcohol management plans and explain a little bit more to the committee the issues surrounding that so that we can get a better understanding and also anyone listening remotely to this hearing can get a better understanding of what you meant by that. Mrs Yorkston : In relation to the alcohol management plans, known as AMPs, the Fitzgerald inquiry happened in the state of Queensland over two decades ago, in 2004. Through the inquiry they looked at a lot of factors—domestic and family violence, things that were happening in Indigenous communities and how they were related to alcohol. One of the recommendations that came out of the Fitzgerald inquiry was to implement alcohol management plans, AMPs. That's in the state of Queensland. They are only in Indigenous communities and they're only in the Aboriginal communities. For example, the communities from Cairns up to Cape York all have AMPs. However, here on Thursday Island and on the outer islands they don't have an AMP. What the AMP does is put a restriction on alcohol. Some communities are dry communities because of the AMP. In our community there are restrictions on carriage limits and restrictions on what alcohol can be sold. The impact for us there is that, as soon as the AMPs came in, we also reduced tavern time. Each community had canteens and taverns. Instead of having, from 10 am to 10 pm, a licensed venue open where you could drink in moderation, you could only open for two hours a day, or two hours a day three times a week. That brought in binge drinking because then people were buying alcohol and they were consuming it fast because they couldn't take it away. Our community members would also travel from Bamaga or the NPA to Thursday Island in this sort of weather and risk their lives just to be able to buy alcohol, because you could come here to the Grand Hotel and purchase anything. The discrimination for us, or where that racism exists, is that we haven't had an appropriate review of it, because it's now got other compounding effects. Sly grogging came in. People are now buying casks in remote communities for $250 each. That's just a four-litre wine cask. Drugs have also come in really hard now as well. We've got more drugs. We now have ice and meth in our communities. The discrimination part of it also is that you get fined—if they catch you with a bottle of wine and you shouldn't have it, you then get a fine. Then, when the post office doesn't work and you don't get your mail, your fine then turns into a SPER one. After the SPER fine you then lose your licence. So there's all of this effect that keeps happening. All we're saying is it's about time—it has to be reviewed. It's about time that we be realistic about the discrimination here and the racism that's against the Indigenous communities. Also, when they put the alcohol management plans in place, there were no rehabilitation centres put in place either. Again, it was pulling out a service and discriminating against our people but not putting a support mechanism in place to help our communities. Mr GEE: Why can't it be reviewed? Mrs Yorkston : We have asked numerous times for the state government to review it. Government, every time they change, promise us they'll do a review, but no review. No full review has been done to actually measure the benefits—because, 20 years ago, our families were not homeless in Cairns and staying in Cairns longer because they cannot get alcohol in our communities. So we're seeing a lot of different effects happening now that weren't here 20 years ago. CHAIR: We have gone over time, so we might conclude there. Thank you very much for the time you've given the committee today and for your fulsome opening statements that will be really helpful for the committee when you get to table those, and for your answers. I expect you'll get a number of questions on notice from the committee. When that happens, if you can, please respond to the committee by 21 August. The secretariat will be in touch with all the things that you need to know about that and with the written questions on notice from committee members as well. If there is a problem or a challenge in meeting that timeframe, feel free to let the secretariat know. You'll be sent a transcript from the evidence today, and you can have a read through it. If there is anything that's wrong in there, any errors that you find, you can ask that those things be fixed. Thank you very much on behalf of the committee. Proceedings suspended from 12:10 to 12:47 .