Maningrida’s Aboriginal landowners fight plans for offshore fracking
Offshore fracking fight washes up on the pristine shores of Arnhem Land, Guardian, 13 June 14, As a US gas company eyes the potential in the shallows around Maningrida, the traditional owners have vowed to protect their ancestral land – and they’re prepared to go to the high court The first Alice Eather knew of Paltar Petroleum’s plans for her ancestral land was when she read a square-inch notice buried in the back pages of the NT News. The August 2012 announcement detailed an application by the US giant for a license for exploratory oil and gas drilling. If successful, it planned to carry out hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, around the coastline of Maningrida in West Arnhem Land.
“It was the most horrible day of my life,” says 24-year-old Eather. “No one was told a thing. There had been no consultation and the ad said we would be given two months to object.”
Objections from the region’s myriad Aboriginal clans and some 13 language groups have since been vocal and persistent. Almost two years on, leaders from the Protect Arnhem Land campaign say they will take their battle as far as the high court if necessary.
“I had never done any of this in my life,” says Queensland-raised Eather, whose mother is from the Kunibidji people of Maningrida. “But our job is to protect country. If we don’t do this, we are not doing our duty.” The 10-million hectares of Arnhem Land represent a fraction of the some 80% of the Northern Territory which is currently under application for unconventional oil and gas exploration. But the local campaign to halt fracking by Paltar highlights the complexity of trying to protect land in this resource-rich territory.
The town, whose name derives from the phrase “where the dreaming changed shape”, sits on an estuary at the mouth of the Liverpool river and is home to around 2,600, many of whom live on its some 30 homeland centres or “outstations”………
Most of Arnhem Land falls under the 1976 Aboriginal Land Rights Act that grants inalienable freehold title to traditional owners under federal law. This includes the right to veto applications for development or exploration. However the jurisdiction of the Act ends at the low-tide mark and therefore gives no clear rights over sea activity like the seismic and acoustic sampling proposed by Paltar in the shallows around Maningrida….
“The Land Rights Act does not give Aboriginal people a lot of chance to say no to production,” says Stuart Blanch, an environmental lawyer and director of the Environment Centre NT who is advocating for the campaign. “Even if they refuse a license to explore, every five years the developer has a chance to come back and reapply. If they say yes to exploration, they can’t have a change of heart.”
As Blanch notes, this has led investors to offer strong incentives for traditional owners to license their initial applications in the form of generous royalty payments. The Northern Land Council (NLC), the body responsible for mediating applications, has also been accused of keeping traditional owners offside in development negotiations. Where local clan members often have little access to the technicalities of proposals or related legislation in their own language, the remunerative rewards of $10,000-20,000 per owner for granting a license can be alluring.
“The NLC is a creation of the white man under federal law. It survives financially by facilitating developments on Aboriginal land that are recognised under the Act.” he says. “The history is that traditional owners are under pressure to say yes to exploration.”……
Paltar’s application for now remains in limbo in the hands of the NT government who hold the power to approve an offshore exploration license. State bureaucrats have given reassurances that they will take account of traditional owners’ claims, but Eather and others remain sceptical that Paltar will relinquish their plans. Nonetheless, she says the grassroots nature of the Protect Arnhem Land campaign has afforded local clans some agency in what is often an arcane and unnavigable legislative sphere.
“I don’t think Paltar will budge. But the most vital thing is that [the campaign] is community-driven,” she says.
Blackfellas have always felt like they are kept in the dark, that it is the ballandar [white people] who have all the law and all the knowledge. We can make a big change to that.”……http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/13/offshore-fracking-fight-washes-up-arnhem-land
Nuclear waste Dump Court Case – Day 6 – hearing at Tennant Creek, Northern Territory
Muckaty Court Report Day 6- June 9 Day 6 – Federal Court comes to Muckaty Beyond Nuclear Initiative, By Padraic Gibson, 10 June 14, The nuclear waste dump trial traveled to the Muckaty Aboriginal Land Trust on Monday June 9, to hear testimony from Traditional Owners opposed to the nomination of their land.
First, a convoy of ten vehicles traveled out to the nominated site. The site is located about 12 kms west of the Stuart Highway, on the southern boundary of the Land Trust. It can be reached along a bituman “haulage road”, built to cart manganese from the Bootu mine out to the Adelaide – Darwin railway line. Having the dump on this well developed road, with access to two major transportation routes – the highway and the railway line – would be perfect for the government, helping explain why they are fighting so hard to defend the Muckaty nomination.
Senior Warlmanpa man Dick Foster, one of the applicants challenging the waste dump, gave the court (and a throng of journalists) a short explanation of the dreaming stories that are significant to the nominated site and how these impact on the rights and responsibilities of different clan groups. His account is in sharp contradiction with the anthropology relied upon by the NLC to justify the waste dump nomination. His traditional knowledge and cultural authority is respected by all sides of this dispute. Mr Foster will give detailed evidence next week.
The convoy then proceeded further north into the Land Trust, stopping at an outstation about 5kms from the Stuart Highway to set up properly to hear evidence.
There was only time to hear the start of evidence from Bunny Nabarula, an 84 year old Warlmanpa Elder who has been a leading spokesperson in the campaign against the dump for 7 years now……….
Evidence from more Traditional Owners opposed to the dump will be given in the court house at Tennant Creek for the rest of this week. For many people, who feel they have been pushed aside and ignored through this whole process, they are eager to put their case to the court. It’s important to note that both the Commonwealth and the NLC argued strongly against the Court coming to the NT. Both parties strongly defend their consultation process. But they also argue that whether or not this nomination was put forward with genuine consent should not actually matter legally, due to draconian provisions in the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Act passed in 2005. http://beyondnuclearinitiative.com/muckaty-court-report-day-6-june-9/
Muckaty Aboriginal landowners don’t want money: they want clean non-radioactive land
Muckaty Station: Traditional owners reject $12 million compensation offer for nuclear waste dump June 11, 2014, Traditional owners who have opposed a nuclear waste dump on Muckaty Station in the Northern Territory say they had no interest in a $12 million compensation package offered by the Commonwealth……..Traditional Owner Ronald Morrison said current generations were guardians who inherited the land from long family lines.
“From our ancestors and our elders, from our elders down to us and from us we’d like to pass it on to our young ones,” Mr Morrison said.
Another traditional owner, Jeannie Sambo, said the money would run out, but the land would be there forever.
“Our land is more important than the money that we live on because as aboriginal people we have more food than buying things from the shop.”
Bunny Nabarula, a Milwayi woman, earlier described the compensation package as “dirty money”, telling the special sitting on country that she was passionate about keeping her land pristine. https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/24209801/muckaty-station-traditional-owners-reject-12-million-compensation-offer-for-nuclear-waste-dump/?source=wan
Northern Land Council threatened Aboriginal opponent of nuclear waste dump?
NLC threats over Muckaty waste dump: court, 9 News 10 June 14If Aboriginal clans at Muckaty wouldn’t accept a nuclear waste dump on their land, the Northern Land Council threatened to decide for them, the Federal Court has heard.
The clans say their will was overruled by a fifth clan who worked with the NLC to approve it……
Yapa Yapa traditional owner Dianne Stokes told the court on Tuesday that she had had a loud disagreement with Kwementyaye Lauder, who drove the decision to accept the site nomination and has since passed away.
She said the NLC’s principal legal officer Ron Levy threatened to take the decision out of her hands.
“(He) said, ‘if youse don’t do this, we’ll do it for you’,” Ms Stokes said, alleging that Mr Levy said he would sue her for going to the media about the issue…….
Outside court, researcher Paddy Gibson, of the Jumbunna House of Learning at the University of Technology Sydney, called on the federal government to drop the nomination after eight years of struggle.
“The Commonwealth government needs to face up to what it’s done to this community, pushing forward this incredibly divisive proposal, and it needs to back off,” he said. http://news.ninemsn.com
Australian government offering Aboriginals basic services in exchange for hosting radioactive trash?
Nuclear waste dump would ‘dispossess’ Indigenous landowners in NT Australian Associated Press theguardian.com, Wednesday 11 June 2014 Researcher says commonwealth’s offer of financial help should not be conditional on outcome of court case over proposed site The commonwealth government is dispossessing Indigenous people by seeking to place a radioactive waste storage facility on their land, a researcher says.
The federal court is sitting in Tennant Creek this week to hear from traditional landowners, who say they were not consulted when the Northern Land Council (NLC) and the commonwealth decided to put forward the site for consideration in 2007.
Four clans from the Muckaty area, 120km north of Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory, say they were cut out of the process in favour of the Lauder family of the Ngapa clan.
The family were paid $200,000 and promised a further financial package of $12 million to pay for a road, educational scholarships and other initiatives benefiting all indigenous groups on Muckaty Station.
Paddy Gibson, a researcher with the Jumbunna House of Learning at the University of Technology Sydney, said the money should be released to the traditional owners regardless of the outcome of the case.
“It’s not money going into people’s back pockets as cash, it’s money they’re saying is going to be spent on basic services,” he told reporters in Tennant Creek on Tuesday.
“It’s an absolute disgrace that Aboriginal people in this region, who are some of the most impoverished people in the country, are being told they’re not going to be able to access basic services if not for establishing a nuclear waste dump.”……
“Our ancestors passed it to our elders and our elders passed it to us and we want to pass it to our young ones,” said Ronald Morrison of the Milwayi. “The dump would destroy our land and bush tucker for our living and for our next generation. We want to keep it clean for all of us.”…….http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/nuclear-waste-dump-would-dispossess-indigenous-landowners
Aboriginal clans do not want their land poisoned by nuclear waste
Nuclear waste will poison land: elder https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/24214130/nuclear-waste-will-poison-land-elder/
NEDA VANOVAC June 11, 2014, The spirit people of Muckaty don’t want “poison” stored on their land in the form of a nuclear waste dump, the Federal Court has heard. The court is sitting in Tennant Creek this week to hear evidence from four clans who are against the radioactive waste storage facility being placed on their land, 120km north of the Northern Territory town.
The clans say their will was overruled by a fifth clan which worked with the Northern Land Council (NLC) and the Commonwealth government to approve it.
Milwayi woman Pamela Brown originally agreed to the radioactive waste storage proposal, thinking it would be a rubbish dump that would hold predominantly medical waste. “They said they would put gloves and gowns there from the hospital, that it’s not poisonous,” she told the court on Wednesday.
But her younger sister who was living in Adelaide reminded her of the long-term health effects experienced by Aboriginal people living at Maralinga, near Woomera in South Australia, in the aftermath of the British nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s and 60s. Ms Brown said she was also concerned by the explosion at Chernobyl.
“I don’t want any poison on our country,” she said. “I want my country for the future generations so I can teach them and they can get out there. “If the dump goes ahead, there will be destruction (of the land),” she said. “The spirit is alive. The spirit people don’t want any rubbish put on their country.”
Muckaty Station covers 221,000ha and seven Aboriginal groups claim land within it.
One of the key issues of the case is determining who owns the roughly two square kilometres which would house the dump: the Lauder family of the Ngapa clan have been acknowledged as traditional owners by the NLC, but the Milwayi people say the land is theirs.
Ms Brown told the court that maps used for the successful land rights claim of 1993 showed the Milwayi were traditional owners of the site, but said the maps had since been redrawn.
“All these names got juggled up by the new map the NLC did … they moved the sites around,” she said. “They changed the whole map.”
But the NLC says there was no claim that the land belonged to the Milwayi when the site was first proposed in 2006.
The hearings continue.
Federal Court hears from determined Aboriginal elders at Muckaty, Northern Territory
Indigenous elder speaks out at NT nuclear waste dump trial, Guardian, 10 June 14 Bunny Nabarula threatens to ‘block the road and let the truck run us over’ if a waste dump is approved on her traditional land A central Australian Indigenous elder has threatened to throw herself in front of a road train if a proposed radioactive waste management facility is approved to be built on her ancestral lands.
The federal court held a special sitting at the Muckaty community on Monday, 120km north of Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory, to hear the evidence of Milwayi traditional owner Bunny Nabarula, about 84.
Members of the Lauder family of the Ngapa clan laid false claim to the land when they along with the Northern Land Council (NLC) nominated the site for a national nuclear waste storage facility, say members of four other clans who are against it.
In 2007 the NLC nominated the site to the commonwealth and agreed on a package of $9m to be held in a charitable trust, $2m for a road on Indigenous land and $1m for scholarships over five years. A $200,000 payment was made to a narrow group of Indigenous families, which Nabarula dismissed as dirty money.
She told the court her Milwayi people had principal claim to the land, and that the Ngapa dreaming just passed through it……..http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/09/indigenous-elder-speaks-out-nuclear-waste-dump-trial
Federal Court holds nuclear waste dump dispute hearing at Muckaty – the government’s planned dump site
Muckaty Station: Federal Court hears Indigenous clan’s cultural stories at proposed nuclear waste dump site, ABC News 10 June 14 By Robert Herrick A traditional land owner has yelled and sworn during a Federal Court hearing examining plans to build a nuclear waste dump in Central Australia. Bunny Nabarula, a Milwayi woman, stood up and cursed before the court as she vented frustration over the kind of legacy a facility for storage of low and intermediate-grade nuclear waste at Muckaty Station, near Tennant Creek, would be for future generations.
She told a special sitting of the court, on country, that she was passionate about keeping her land pristine and a $12 million compensation package was “dirty money”.
The court is holding a rare hearing on country as it considers a challenge to plans to build a nuclear waste storage site on the remote station.
The Northern Land Council nominated the site on behalf of members of the Ngapa group, but four other clans have laid claim to the land and say it is adjacent to a sacred site……..
Traditional owner Kylie Sambo says a hearing on the station gives the Federal Court a real understanding of the land’s cultural significance.”I reckon its very important because they need to see how how we feel about the country and how the country is to us and actually be out here on country and getting the feeling and knowing and understanding that we have,” she said.
Another traditional owner Dick Foster pointed out the culturally significant parts of the site, important for passage to a sacred area where men’s business takes place. Paddy Gibson from the Jumbunna House of Learning says many traditional owners have been given the impression the waste is not very harmful.
“Some of the most dangerous waste in the world is a spent nuclear fuel rod and that’s what from day one has been the issue that’s in contention here, that they want to use this as a dumping ground for some of Australia’s most toxic industrial waste,” he said……http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-09/muckaty-station-federal-court-hearing/5510346
Ranger uranium mine safety records documents conveniently disappear
Documents showing inspections at Ranger uranium mine go missing, 1057 ABC Darwin, By Xavier La Canna 5 June 14, Despite a big diesel spill at the Northern Territory’s Ranger uranium mine in 1995, an investigation into the operation has found paperwork to show diesel tanks are being routinely inspected has gone missing. On Thursday giving Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) was given the green light to recommence processing operations at Ranger after a one-million litre radio-active spill last year sparked a shut-down.ERA claimed there had been no environmental damage was caused by the spill, but processing was suspended in the wake of the incident.
It is understood processing operations will recommence immediately following the decision by the federal and NT governments.
But 19 years after a 12,000 litre diesel spill at the site caused bird deaths, the review found problems with the documentation of diesel tank inspections.
“Diesel Tanks A and B are missing documentation relating to their one-monthly routine inspections and five-yearly external inspections,” the review found……..
Dave Sweeney from the Australian Conservation Foundation said he was disappointed Ranger was allowed to recommence processing even though a report into the cause of the failure had not been publicly tabled.
Mr Sweeney said the government had a well-worn path of refusing to comment when incidents happened at Ranger because it could jeopardize the independence of inquiries, then refusing to release the full findings of reports because it was “commercial in confidence”.
Ranger, which began production in 1981, is one of the world’s largest uranium mines and is located within the World Heritage listed Kakadu National Park. http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2014/06/05/4019591.htm
Muckaty Court Report Day 3 – When is a nuclear waste dump not a nuclear waste dump?
Muckaty Court report Day 3- June 4 when is a dump not a dump? By Padraic Gibson Beyond Nuclear Initiative, 5 June 14 “…...Mr Merkel handed up to the court two anthropologist reports completed by the NLC specifically for the waste dump nomination in 2006. Mr Merkel argued there were differences between the first report, prepared exclusively by the NLC anthropologists, and the second, which had been both “heavily edited” and “rewritten” by NLC principal lawyer Ron Levy, despite his signature being absent…….
More significant than an argument about who has primary responsibility however, is the emphasis in the original report on shared responsibility for sites across Muckaty by all clan groups. Mr Yarrow argued that this fundamental principle that underpins the land grant had been abandoned by the NLC in their nomination of the site on Muckaty……
Despite the focus of the legal proceedings on the alleged misconduct of the NLC, from the perspective of the campaign against the Muckaty dump, the Commonwealth submissions provided an important reminder that the central problem here is the discriminatory actions of the government in targeting impoverished Aboriginal communities for some of Australia’s most toxic industrial waste.
The genesis of the Muckaty dump nomination is the Commonwealth push to establish a waste dump on Aboriginal land. The court heard evidence of Commonwealth representatives starting to attend full council meetings of the Northern Land Council in late 2005, to pitch the idea of a dump to Aboriginal land owners……..
As Traditional Owners have consistently pointed out – if this stuff is so safe, why do you want to put it so far away from the cities?
The second ideological argument put strongly by the Commonwealth, both in their submissions to court and in their presentations to Traditional Owners during consultations, is that the waste dump is needed to allow for the continued operation of nuclear medicine in Australia. This argument has been comprehensively rebuffed by health professionals, such as Dr Michael Fonda from the Public Health Association, who has highlighted the cruelty of making Traditional Owners, who live in communities that suffer from developing world health conditions, feel guilty that somehow their opposition to a waste dump would be an impediment to others receiving health care.
See for example the short video: Nuclear Furphies and Political Follies……..
No mention was made about provisions in the 2005 Radioactive Waste Management Act which stipulate that the Commonwealth will not hand back any land that had been contaminated. This also ignores the fact that the “low level” waste is set be buried, with no intention of recovery.
The nature of the waste dump then, is shaping up to be a central issue in the case……..
In my discussions with Muckaty Traditional owners over the last seven years, key witnesses relied upon by the Commonwealth have strongly rejected the assertion that they ever consented to the waste dump, or ever said the decision should rest with the narrow family group in question. Next week they will have a chance to be heard directly, as the court relocates to the Northern Territory for hearings both at Muckaty itself and in Tennant Creek http://beyondnuclearinitiative.com/muckaty-court-report-day-3-june-4/
Lawyer for Norther Land Council accused of ‘doctoring’ anthropologists’ report about proposed nuclear waste dump site
Indigenous land owners accuse lawyer of manipulating nuclear waste storage report June 4, 2014 – Jane Lee Legal Affairs Reporter for The Age A lawyer who was key to the Howard government’s plan to store nuclear waste on indigenous land has been accused of manipulating the legal process required to ensure its approval.
Traditional owners from four indigenous clans are challenging the Ngapa clan’s 2007 nomination of Muckaty Station for the dump site in the Federal Court in Melbourne. The owners, including Aboriginal elders, argue they did not consent to the nomination, were not consulted on the agreement reached and were misled on the government’s proposal for the nuclear storage site.
Ron Levy was then the chief legal counsel for the Northern Land Council, which was set up to help indigenous people in the Northern Territory acquire and manage traditional lands. Mr Levy will be called as a witness later in the five-week case before Justice Anthony North.
Ron Merkel, QC, for the traditional owers, told the court on Thursday that Mr Levy “personally edited” anthropologists’ views in a Council report which concluded that only the Ngapa Lauder clan owned the site. Mr Levy also wrote a new section in the final report, reflecting his view that the Land Commissioner could depart from judges’ previous decisions on land claims, “if relevant material was before the commissioner.”
Mr Merkel said that he did this “(so) that the Lauder Ngupas would be recognised by the Northern Land Council as the only traditional owners of the site so their consent could be secured.” The site nomination could then “jump a hurdle” of having to consult in more detail about about the plan with other clans, he said………..
Mr Merkel told the court on Tuesday that Mr Levy, who controlled the consultation process, also failed to tell the full Northern Land Council or traditional owners about the only up-front $200,000 payment given to traditional owners for the site nomination or the terms of their agreement.
But he later told the federal goverrnment that he had all traditional owners’ full consent.
Mr Merkel said there was no explanation for this “unless … Mr Levy had a plan from the outset about how to achieve the end result and he did”. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/indigenous-land-owners-accuse-lawyer-of-manipulating-nuclear-waste-storage-report-20140604-39jk8.html#ixzz33nhZjp26.
Time that Northern Territory’s Chief Minister Adam Giles came clean about nuclear wastes
GILES NEEDS TO COME CLEAN ON NUCLEAR DUMP STANCE http://territorylabor.com.au/giles-needs-to-come-clean-on-nuclear-dump-stance/ Gerry McCarthy , 4 June 2014 Local Member for Barkly, Gerry McCarthy, today called on the Chief Minister, Adam Giles, to stand alongside Territory Labor and other Territorians who do not want a nuclear waste dump in the Territory.“Territorians are adamant that they do not want a Nuclear Waste Dump at Muckaty Station,” Mr McCarthy said.
Mr McCarthy said Adam Giles needs to come clean to Territorians about where he stands on the issue.
“It has been alleged that Adam Giles is an ardent supporter of a having nuclear waste facility in the Territory,” Mr McCarthy said.
“By his silence it appears the Chief Minister does support the proposed nuclear waste dump at Muckaty. “Territory Labor and many Territorians are concerned about the risk of potentially dangerous nuclear waste that will be transported on our roads, rail and through our ports to reach the proposed facility.
“The Chief Minister needs to assure Territorians that he will not stand by and let the Federal Government turn the Territory into a nuclear waste dump.”
The Member for Barkly said representatives of traditional owners against a nuclear waste dump at Muckaty were in the High Court in Melbourne currently trying to end the 7 year struggle to establish the first purpose built nuclear waste dump facility in the Territory. The High Court hearings will collect evidence in Tennant Creek and Darwin later this month. Media contact: Cathryn Tilmouth 
0427 500 667
Northern Land Council bars journalist from visiting Muckaty – planned nuclear waste dump site
There is a very important wider issue in all this – irrespective of my visit – “If the radioactive waste facility goes ahead, will journalists and indigenous rights advocates like me be able to have access to freely visit it and report on any issues associated with its operation?”
Northern Land Council puts out ‘Not Welcome’ mat for site visit at Muckaty. #wasteontrial http://songlines.org.au/2014/06/04/northern-land-council-puts-out-not-welcome-mat-for-site-visit-at-muckaty-wasteontrial/ June 4, 2014 by Bruce Reyburn One of the hallmarks of an open democracy is the ability of the media and human rights advocates to go freely to contested places where they can report on what they see and learn in the process.
As I have just found, this is not the case in one part of Australia.In keeping with the tight provisions of the Australian government legislation for a radioactive waste facility, a site on “Muckaty” was ‘volunteered’ by one small ‘local descent group’ (or part thereof) of Warlmanpa people in return for a few million dollars – and then nominated to the Australian government by the Northern Land Council. All done by the book, according to the NLC.
Other Warlmanpa at Muckaty objected to this process – hence the present Federal Court case presently underway in Melbourne, thence Tennant Creek, Darwin, Melbourne.
The Northern Land Council is a respondent in this Federal Court case, along with the Commonwealth of Australia.
Under the Aboriginal Land Rights (NT) Act a permit is required to enter onto Aboriginal land (as defined by that Act).
Issuing permits is a function of the relevant Aboriginal Land Council to process permit applications.
Soon after I decided to blow the budget and travel to Tennant Creek to see old friends and listen to Warlmanpa people’s evidence in their Federal Court case, I realised that the Federal Court would travel to Muckaty to view the site nominated for the Australian government’s radioactive waste facility. This proposed radioactive waste facility site is on Aboriginal Land gained by a traditional Aboriginal land claim under that Act, and has a pastoral lease “Muckaty” over it. Muckaty is in that part of the Northern Territory covered by the Northern Land Council.
Therefore I would need a permit to visit Muckaty and the proposed site if I got the opportunity, either as part of the court case or separately during my short visit, with Warlmanpa people who might want me to help tell their story to the wider world.
Accordingly, I made an application to the Northern Land Council, nominating a couple of different dates and mentioning that I aimed to write about these matters on myhttp://www.songlines.org.au blog.
When I did not get a reply back I sent an email to the NLC asking about the progress of my permit application. Copies of that correspondence are included below My application does not appear to have been referred to the traditional owners of Muckaty, but the NLC legal section.
On the basis of that I have been effectively blocked from visiting the proposed radioactive waste site…..
The main question in my mind is this – “Is the decision of the Northern Land Council to deny me access to visit the proposed radioactive waste site a decision which:
(a) truly reflects the wishes of the traditional owners of Muckaty, in whose name the Northern Land Council operates or
(b) was it a decision based on other than normal considerations and
(c) if it was not normal practice, was the decision in keeping with the relevant legislation regarding the role of the NLC in processing permits?”
There is a very important wider issue in all this – irrespective of my visit – “If the radioactive waste facility goes ahead, will journalists and indigenous rights advocates like me be able to have access to freely visit it and report on any issues associated with its operation?”
Muckaty nuclear waste case highlights financial irregularities in the project
Financial irregularities in Muckaty compo http://localtoday.com.au/get-local/local-news/137684-financial-irregularities-in-muckaty-compo.html By AAP 03/06/14 There were financial irregularities in the compensation package for indigenous people who face a nuclear waste dump on their land, a court has heard. A $200,000 up-front payment to a narrow group of indigenous families was not part of the package that was negotiated, lawyer Ron Merkel QC told the Federal Court on Tuesday.
Mr Merkel pointed to letters and meeting minutes which showed the Northern Land Council’s (NLC) 2007 discussions with the Commonwealth, in which it secured use of the remote land near Tennant Creek as a radioactive waste management facility.Negotiations ultimately arrived at a package of $9 million to be held in a charitable trust, $2 million for a road on Aboriginal land and $1 million, over five years, for scholarships.
“There was no mention of a $200,000 payment, which was the only payment to go directly into pockets,” Mr Merkel said.
“It was the only money to be paid up-front.”
A $200,000 payment was made to a narrow group of indigenous families who, Mr Merkel said, did not represent all traditional owners of the land.
The court was also told the same group was cited in letters in which the NLC sought to reassure the federal government it had obtained informed consent from all traditional landowners.
The case is being heard by Justice Anthony North, who also sought to confirm whether Mr Merkel’s clients were opposed to “the dump or the deal”. “My clients are not trying to get a penny of this,” Mr Merkel said. “They were never given the right to consent or not to consent and if they were included, as they should have been, then the NLC would not have got consent (of all traditional land owners) at all.”
Highlighting process flaws was the only legal avenue to challenge the project, Mr Merkel said, and his clients did not want it to proceed.
The Commonwealth and the NLC are yet to make opening submissions.
Forty witnesses will be called for the hearings being held in Melbourne, Muckaty Station, Tennant Creek and Darwin.
Federal Court hears of invalid plan to dump nuclear waste on Aboriginal land
Nuclear waste dump on Aboriginal land invalid, court told The West Australian, 3 June 14. Sydney (AFP) – The earmarking of a remote Australian outback area as a nuclear waste dump was invalid because officials failed to contact all traditional Aboriginal landowners affected, a court heard Monday.Muckaty Station in the Northern Territory was nominated in early 2007 as a site to store low and intermediate radioactive waste under a deal negotiated with the Aboriginal Ngapa clan.
While Australia does not use nuclear power, it needs a site to store waste, including processed fuel rods from the country’s only nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights, on the outskirts of Sydney,…..Opponents have fought against the dump for years, with a trial starting in the Federal Court in Melbourne Monday alleging Muckaty’s nomination was invalid due to a failure of the government and the land council to obtain the consent of all Aboriginal owners.
“What we’re here to say is ‘no more’ and that this process was so legally flawed that it is invalid,” Ron Merkel, who is representing traditional owners, told the court.
“The opposition is in no small part based on a spiritual affiliation to the land and that radioactive waste will poison the land,” he said in comments cited by Australian Associated Press.
The court was told the consent of all groups with a claim to the land was required for the facility to go ahead, but some Aboriginals whose country was affected have never had a chance to voice their concerns until now……..Speaking to reporters, Kylie Sambo, of the Warlmanpa people, said the idea of a waste facility on the land, which is in the centre of the country, was “poison”.
“We don’t want it to spoil our country because we love our land and we’ve been there for centuries,” she said. “My uncle once told me, ‘You may think you own the land, but in fact the land owns us’.”
The Australian Conservation Foundation said the case raised questions about the country’s management of long-lived radioactive waste.
“Australia has never has an independent assessment of how best to manage radioactive waste; now we urgently need one,” campaigner Dave Sweeney said.
The case is set to run for five weeks. https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/world/a/24084083/nuclear-waste-dump-on-aboriginal-land-invalid-court-told/
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 
