Antinuclear

South Australia: Labor and Liberal toe the BHP Billiton line on Roxby Downs Indenture Bill

Roxby debate exposes BHPB radioactive racism    Greens MLC Mark Parnell has questioned why the SA government, under the Roxby Downs Indenture Ratification Amendment Bill 2011, is allowing BHP Billiton to continue to override the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988.

The answers in Hansard reveal BHP Billiton’s continued radioactive racism and of the failure of the State to respect or to protect Aboriginal people’s interests including Aboriginal Heritage. The ALP and the Liberals voted together to prevent the Greens deleting Clause 8 of the Bill and repealing Section 9 of the Roxby Downs Indenture Ratification Act 1892:

Extracts: The Hon. G.E. GAGO: I have been advised that that is what the agreement was at the time and that BHP currently are only willing to consider the continuation of the current arrangements.

… I have been advised that BHP insisted that the current arrangements continue and they were not prepared to consider changes to that.

… I have been advised that BHP were satisfied with the current arrangements and insisted on the continuation of these arrangements, and the government did not consult further than that.

ROXBY DOWNS (INDENTURE RATIFICATION) (AMENDMENT OF INDENTURE) AMENDMENT BILL

In committee. Legislative Council, Thursday 24^th November 2011. Page 4699-4717 (the second of three Hansard sections on that day re the Roxby Indenture) http://hansard.parliament.sa.gov.au/pages/loaddoc.aspx?e=2&eD=2011_11_24&c=26

… Clause 8 – Amendment of section 9 – Application of the Aboriginal Heritage Act to the Stuart Shelf Area and the Olympic Dam Area:

The Hon. M. PARNELL: I want to delete this clause, and I want to speak to it, as well. This is a most remarkable clause that deals with a most remarkable section of the current act. Section 9, which relates to the application of the Aboriginal Heritage Act to the Stuart Shelf and Olympic Dam areas. My main difficulty with this provision is that it imposes an outdated set of legal privileges to the company over Aboriginal heritage legislation. ….

why on earth did the government not take the opportunity in relation to the renegotiation of this indenture to at least insist that the current Aboriginal Heritage Act be the basis for the dealings between this company and Aboriginal people in South Australia…

Clearly, the grant of freehold title will extinguish native title. How will that process be handled and what is the situation if traditional owners do not want the company to have freehold?…

. The issue of freeholding is fundamental to the indenture—it is in the indenture. I have a couple more questions on it and then we will proceed if that is the committee’s will. Clause 24 of the indenture sets out that the freehold land reverts back to the state at the expiry period of the special mining lease. My question of the minister is: what responsibilities are then effectively avoided on BHP’s part and what responsibilities then become the responsibility of the state once that reversion of freehold has occurred?….

We know that radioactive waste, and that is what we are talking about here, is dangerous for tens of thousands of years. I think we are kidding ourselves if we think that we can impose standards on a company that will keep us safe for that period of time, allow the company to walk away and not expect that, ultimately, it will be the state that picks up the tab….

Clause passed…. http://hansard.parliament.sa.gov.au/pages/loaddoc.aspx?e=2&eD=2011_11_24&c=26

November 28, 2011 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, South Australia | South Australia