Antinuclear

Developing North Australia – at the expense of Aboriginal land rights?

If governments want to work in a “full partnership” with Aboriginal people in The North then they must stop treating their interests in land as something to be dealt with for the convenience of those governments and the powerful interests behind them.

So how are Aboriginal interests treated in Developing North Australia? This is the ‘horrid’ part. At page 4 of Developing North Australia we are told that:

Developing the north will need to be done in full partnership with Indigenous Australians, with a focus on creating opportunities through education, job creation and economic development. These opportunities for Indigenous Australians will contribute to achieving the objectives of the Government’s Indigenous Advancement Strategy.

Noble sentiments but a reliance on the vexed Indigenous Advancement Strategy rings out some very loud warning bells. The first chapter is entitled “Simpler Land Arrangements to Support Investment” and some elements of the plan are welcome–particularly the fast-tracking of outstanding native title claims for resolution within the next ten years, increased funding for native title representative bodies and modest increased support for indigenous ranger groups and pastoral land use pilot projects. A streamlining of the needlessly complex native title Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA) processes, which should be simplified to resemble the standard lease arrangements used widely by the NT land councils, is also welcome.

Overall though, the approach to Aboriginal land interests in Developing North Australia appears very much to be one of “you’ve got something and we want it back.”

This is particularly apparent in the emphasis on “township leasing” that will see control of Aboriginal land in townships–by far the most commercially valuable land in the Aboriginal estate–controlled of a Commonwealth bureaucracy and  measures to “cut red tape” around hard-won cultural heritage protections. The old saw of “Aboriginal home ownership”–creating housing markets in communities largely reliant on welfare income and where no market exists–also gets a run.

The really ‘horrid’ parts of Developing North Australia concern the proposed treatment of exclusive native title and of that hard-won land returned as communal Aboriginal freehold under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976. Both represent the highest form of recognition of Aboriginal land interests and both are targets.

Exclusive native title is, as the High Court found in 1992, that bundle of rights and interests arising from the traditional laws and customs of the relevant Aboriginal group or groups to the possession, occupation, use and enjoyment to the exclusion of all others.

Developing North Australia says that in The North:

… around 13 per cent of Crown land in northern Australia is covered by exclusive native title — an area around 458,000 km2, which is about twice the size of Victoria (PM&C, 2015).

This is a disingenuous and misleading comment that compares apples with quandongs. Victoria has some of the most closely-settled land in the country–The North the least. Victoria has a booming economy, a strong tax base and first world infrastructure and government support services. The North has many fractured and fragile economies, an anaemic tax base, third-world infrastructure and a dearth of government services.

At page 25 Developing North Australia says of exclusive native title:

Indigenous Australians should be able to use their exclusive native title to attract capital necessary for economic development. But banks do not lend against native title because native title is not transferable in the event of a default. Even though they have native title rights, Indigenous people cannot use them as financial security.

Again, this is misleading and fails to note the settled law of native title that government’s–particularly the parochial governments in the north and west–have failed to grasp. It also fails to recognise that, despite resistance by government, exclusive native title holders are using their land for economic development and are keen to do more–on their terms. They just aren’t knocking on the doors of the banks for money to do so…………

In addition to the hundreds of leases and licenses issued to government and non-government agencies, it is well known that many have also been issued over land in and outside of communities for local stores, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal commercial enterprises, mining and resources enterprises and pastoral leases. Most if not all have been done on the same commercial basis as similar leases would be issued in any Australian city or town.

It is a misleading to state that because dealing with Aboriginal land can from time to time be a more complex matter than dealing with non-Aboriginal land–an assertion not supported by any facts or data in the report–that this warrants the fundamental diminution of rights in that land.

If governments want to work in a “full partnership” with Aboriginal people in The North then they must stop treating their interests in land as something to be dealt with for the convenience of those governments and the powerful interests behind them.

Developing North Australia is countersigned by Andrew Robb, an astute minister who understands–and most importantly respects–the rights and interests of Aboriginal Australians in The North, as does Queensland MP Warren Entsch, who has had no small part to play in the development of this plan. Hopefully their useful, informed and pragmatic influence will correct the ‘horrid’ flaws in Developing North Australia.

Whether there is the political will to do so will be the true test of the value ofDeveloping North Australia.

* Bob Gosford is an employed solicitor with the Northern Land Council based in Darwin http://blogs.crikey.com.au/northern/2015/06/19/abbotts-white-paper-for-the-black-tropics-boon-or-boondoggle/

June 19, 2015 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | aboriginal issues, Northern Territory