Debate resumed from 13 February, on motion by Mr Ruddock:

That this bill be now read a second time.

upon which Mr Kelvin Thomson moved by way of amendment:

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House acknowledges;

(1)

that the native title system is currently mired in bureaucracy, and urgently needs a considered and practical approach from the Government;

(a)

to resolve native title claims effectively, expeditiously and fairly; and

(b)

to ensure Indigenous Australians are able to take full advantage of their legal rights;

(2)

the recent findings of Griffith University study which found that ‘federal policy and legislative and budgetary initiatives during the last decade have substantially weakened the negotiating position of Aboriginal people; and

(3)

that the amendments proposed by the Government;

(a)

represent a missed opportunity to remedy the real causes of delay and bottleneck in the native title system;

(b)

overlook calls from the Minerals Council of Australia and successive ATSI Social Justice Commissioners to properly resource Native Title Representative Bodies and Prescribed Bodies Corporate;

(c)

contain changes which, despite being intended to improve the performance of Native Title Representative Bodies, will adversely effect their capacity to represent and pursue Indigenous interests; and

(d)

run the risk of making the claims resolution process slower and more bureaucratic”.

See this item in context