Barry Haase (Kalgoorlie, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Roads and Transport) Share this | Hansard source

That is the most recent occurrence. The stories are: ‘I was excluded. Mrs X has just received her royalty cheque and I’m getting nothing. It’s not fair. The person that’s administering the distribution of the funds is corrupt; they’ve got their own family on that group and they are getting all the money and we’re not. They’ve got a new air-conditioner, washing machine, Toyota’—or whatever—’We’ve been excluded. We live in poverty. We’ve been ignored by the courts. We’re the real people; all of these remotely Indigenous people that have got a bit of education have swamped and snowed our legitimate claim.’ The stories go on and on and on. We are led to believe by the government today that these amendments are going to, once again, create nirvana. It is simply not true.

Much needs to be done in relation to this act to change the public colour behind it, to change the philosophy behind it, to change the attitude of those who milk it dry for everything it is worth, including this latest $50 million. I can see those in the industry saying today, ‘Will I put another metre or two metres on the yacht?’ There has been a great deal of good done by this in 16 years, and it has all been for whiteys, whiteys who are milking this act dry for every last cent they can get.

The member for Banks talks about being proud to be part of the legal profession prior to entering this place. I am sure he is. I am sure that it is an honourable occupation and it does much good, but it has certainly also got a free ride on the back of this 1993 act. For 16 years governments of different colour have been feeding funds into that system and lawyers are continuing to enjoy a lifestyle that they would not otherwise be entitled to—they would actually have to get out and do some real, hard work. To say that I and the majority of my people are disappointed with the Native Title Act is an understatement.

Before we are sat down by time, a few stats were mentioned by previous speakers. From 1997 to 2006, 81 determinations were made and 600 were waiting to be made. The cost to taxpayers was $900 million, or some $11.1 million per determination. There are currently around 500 claimant applications to be determined. Of those, 100 are in Western Australia and most of those are in my electorate. I digress for a moment again. There are 100 determinations waiting regarding native title in Western Australia. Can we collectively imagine how many billions of dollars of investment are being held up and how many hundreds, if not thousands, of local jobs are not being created because these determinations are being held up? What gets in the way of these determinations? The process—the claims and counterclaims by individuals as to the correctness of the identity of the individual establishing their right as a member of a claimant group.

I digress further. When the Mabo issue was around, the people of Australia were incorrectly assured that the boundaries dividing one claimant group, one kin group, from another in Australia were so easily defined that every Indigenous person in Australia knew of these boundaries. They were assured that determinations would be made readily—that some mediation may be required but basically determinations would be made quickly and easily—because everyone knew where the boundaries were, just as they did in the Mabo situation. But historians who know their stuff will tell you, and demonstrate it very clearly, that the drawing of boundaries in the Torres Strait and the establishment of boundaries on the Australian mainland are chalk and cheese. There is absolutely no comparison, and that is the basis for all of the delays in making determinations.

So mining companies, explorers, are being absolutely frustrated by this act in getting equipment onto country, developing resources and providing jobs so that Indigenous people can get off welfare and become independent and enjoy all of the benefits of self-sustainability. That is what we really want for Indigenous people. Certainly on this side of the House we do not want Indigenous people to be captives of the welfare system and dependent upon the government for handouts. We would like them to stand alone. We would like them to be proud members of the Australian working community, not tethered to a welfare cheque which some would believe philosophically ties them to vote in a particular way. So we need to resolve these 500 claimant applications. We certainly need to get those that determine outcomes for mining companies well and truly resolved so as we can provide jobs.

Historically—this is something we can really look forward to; this amendment today is endeavouring to convince us that all this will change—the average time to process an unopposed native title claim, notwithstanding that there is almost no such thing these days, has been 12 months, for determinations by consent it has been five years and nine months and for determinations by litigation it has been seven years. So if a mining or exploration company fronts up in good faith, tries to identify those in a community who might legitimately speak for country—and that is an ongoing practical problem, because once a deal is struck today another mob stick their hand up and say, ‘You got the wrong people; you’ve got to now compensate us as well’—and eventually gets onto country and carries out all of the surveys necessary, at huge cost to that company, and then strikes something that is worth having, we are now expecting them to hang around for seven years before shareholders can get a return by developing a resource in the ground. It is la-la land. And it is preventing jobs. That is what we ought to be talking about here. If we really want to ease our collective conscience in Australia, we ought to be about creating jobs for Indigenous people.

In conclusion, I simply reiterate that the act of 1993 made great changes in Australia, and the aspiration was to improve the lot of Indigenous people. It has not done that. Irrefutably, it has not achieved what it set out to achieve. We make amendments in this House today in an endeavour to achieve what we set out to 16 years ago. I do not believe the amendment will make the improvement of the situation as we expect, but it has focused our attention on the subject once again, and that cannot be a bad thing. But this is an ongoing problem that needs a real solution. It does need bipartisan support. I sincerely hope that in the future Aboriginal people will have jobs in this community. (Time expired)

See this speech in context