Central Land Council

Senate Committee fails the Land Rights Act

The Central Land Council says passing the amendments to the Land Rights Act in their current state will have serious and irreversible consequences which will cause chaos and uncertainty in the mining industry and take away the control that Aboriginal people have over their private land.

This week the Senate Community Affairs Committee on the Aboriginal Land Rights ( Northern Territory ) amendment Bill 2006 recommended that the amendments Bill be passed.

CLC Director David Ross says that it has taken nine years of parliamentary committees and inquiries into the Land Rights Act to come remotely close to amending the Act in a way which will be beneficial.

“This legislation has served extremely well for 30 years in maintaining the delicate balance of the interests of traditional land owners with that of other interests and should not be tampered with without full and very careful consideration of its ramifications,” he said.

“There are a number of amendments to which we agreed and we are happy to see these passed. However, we have serious concerns about other amendments put forward by the Commonwealth.

“The Minerals Council of Australia shares our concerns regarding the proposals for the delegation of Land Council powers.

“These amendments could leave mining companies dealing with very small under-resourced and ill-informed bodies and pave the way for bitter disputes within families and communities.

“We support genuine improved capacity for delegation but this amendment will give the Minister more control rather than the smaller groups it purportedly supports.

“We also feel strongly that community leasing will divide communities by causing tension between the traditional land owners who receive rent and those who don't. It will impede economic development and raise rents.

“The CLC had suggested an amendment which would have provided leases for housing needs and government facilities for peppercorn rent while retaining traditional land owner control over the balance of the community. This was rejected in favour of an expensive hare-brained scheme,” he said.

The committee did acknowledge the time frame given to hear submissions and deliver its recommendations was too short and that further negotiation and discussion was needed on a number of issues, including leasing, delegation and the abuse of the ABA funds.

“It would be foolhardy to rush through ill considered amendments which don't have consensual support,” Mr Ross said.

“We support splitting the Bill and passing those amendments we have agreed upon while we consider the more contentious ones put forward by the Commonwealth.”

  3 August 2006