Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The Greens will be supporting these opposition amendments. As I outlined in my contribution to the second reading debate, we have a number of concerns about the potential coercive powers of the tribunal. We do not think it is appropriate for a body that is supposed to be mediating between parties to have these sorts of powers. We believe it could potentially disadvantage the negotiations rather than improve them in terms of requiring evidence to be produced. It takes it more into the judicial realm than we believe is appropriate for a body that is responsible for mediation.

We have a number of concerns about the way some of the tribunals have been performing in the different states around Australia and the way some of the outcomes have not been delivering for native title holders. We think the government should have concentrated on those weaknesses with the tribunals rather than going down the path that it has. I refer to the comments I made in my second reading contribution about the findings of Professor O’Faircheallaigh from Griffith University that show some serious shortcomings in what has been delivered for native title holders in the so-called negotiations and in the so-called mediated outcomes, which by far are in favour of the mining companies rather than native title holders. We suggest there are some very significant shortcomings with the current process. These are not addressed in the amendments to the legislation and we believe this will result in further negative outcomes for native title holders. We do not believe this is the way to go. We have made that point abundantly clear and will be supporting the ALP amendments.