Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Hansard source

It will come as some surprise to you, but the opposition will be supporting these amendments—which, I might say, I am very pleased to do. And I apologise because in my initial contribution I forgot to recognise the Vernon Islands. The traditional owners of the Vernon Islands would not be happy! So I want to recognise again that the Vernon Islands will be added to schedule 1 of the Land Rights Act. What these amendments will do is allow the land councils to vary their administrative areas. For this to occur, the relevant land councils must request a variation. In this particular instance it is important because it will enable the implementation of agreed settlement arrangements for the Vernon Islands land claim, which required the transfer of the land subject to claim from the jurisdiction of the Northern Land Council to that of the Tiwi Land Council—and that, of itself, is quite important. I commend that particular amendment for its common sense, and I am of the view that the traditional owners will see this as very damn good—and that is a very good thing.

I now want to go briefly to the amendments relating to Mutitjulu. The member for Brand, in his contribution, made a very good speech outlining the economic benefits of land rights to the Northern Territory and Australia and the importance of development on Aboriginal land. Uluru is an iconic cultural heritage place, as well as being environmentally very important, and it is internationally recognised as such. But historically the Anangu traditional owners have not done well out of it despite the fact that upwards of 300,000 people a year—certainly in the past—visit Uluru, and a proportion of the gate entry fee has gone back to the traditional owners. When the land was first transferred, there was not a great relationship between the tourism community and the traditional owners; in fact, there was quite a bit of tension. So, for a whole range of historical reasons, the economic benefits which could have been derived were not.

This piece of legislation is a way of putting a few things right. It is very clear that the Anangu want to be engaged in a way they probably were not engaged 30 years ago and see the benefits derived from this tourism icon, and the Yalara resort, permeate through their communities. That is a challenge; nevertheless, it is very important. What this piece of legislation will do is that, as a result of the leasing arrangements for Mutitjulu, the traditional owners of Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park will benefit from further social and commercial process by gaining control of subleases on their land. The Anangu can maintain care of their country which, as I explained earlier, is so pivotal to their inheritance and life, and they can promote activities that share their country with national and international visitors in an environmentally sustainable and culturally appropriate way. The bill provides for the Aboriginals Benefit Account funds in support of these corporations to which the director of township leasing transfers the sublease. And that is quite important because there needs to be provision of finance to support those relationships. I again commend the legislation that the government has put forward, and the opposition is happy to support the amendments.

Question agreed to.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.

See this speech in context