Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1510 together.

Leave granted.

I move:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 4), omit the table item.

We also oppose schedule 2 in the following terms:

(2) Schedule 2, page 47 (line 1) to page 60 (line 6), to be opposed.

I seek the Senate's support for my amendment which would remove the streamlining for mining destruction on country in schedule 2. The Australian Greens can't support the bill unless schedule 2 is taken out. The Australian Greens will not act against the interests of traditional owners, of land and water defenders, of our environment, of country, land, water and sky. Schedule 2 gives land councils too much decision-making power and flexibility. We will not do it. We have not seen any evidence of free, prior and informed consent. The land councils are not representative of all traditional owners. In fact, in some instances, the land councils are only representatives of themselves. Listen to the people.

I stood outside this place this morning with Ms Burney, the Labor member for Barton. We stood side by side, supporting traditional owners and their fight to protect our heritage. I thank Ms Burney for being there this morning and for her staunch words about protecting culture and First Nations heritage. She said: 'What's absolutely fundamental is free, prior and informed consent.' And I have to say that this is a priority for Labor. Cultural heritage is a living thing; it's not static. And Labor will enter into a proper consultation process. I agree with the member for Barton: free, prior and informed consent is what we need. I could not have said it better. Labor saying one thing on the lawns to the media and voting a completely different way in this chamber is why people don't trust them. We can do the right thing. We can do it today, right here right now. Vote in here like you said out there you were going to vote. Do the right thing by the people.

Yingiya 'Mark' Guyula, the member for Mulka in the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly, wrote a submission to the inquiry into this bill. He wrote:

I have now spoken widely to elders and leaders in my electorate and they do not know about any changes to the ALRA. I have also spoken to members of the Land Councils from my own electorate and more broadly across the regions, and they have advised that they do not know the detail of the Bill.

The Australian Human Rights Commission asked the committee looking into this bill for more time and said:

Our key recommendation is that the Committee should request a significantly longer time frame for the Inquiry in order to properly consider the Bill and ensure that the amendments have the genuine free prior and informed consent (FPIC) of the Aboriginal Territorians who will be impacted, including but not limited to Traditional Owners.

Staunch defender of country Rikki Dank wrote in her submission:

Thanks, but NO THANKS!

The proposed amendments to the Aboriginal Land Right Act do nothing more than to further erode the already meagre rights of First Nations in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia. They masquerade as 'progressive' legislation when, in fact, they represent a reincarnation of successive waves of colonial policy initiatives designed to usurp Our rights and transfer them to the Settlers.

Do you know who wants this bill? The Minerals Council of Australia. Do you know why? So they can extract and steal even more profit while destroying country, culture and songlines. That should tell you everything you need to know about who this bill is really meant to serve.

The Australian Greens cannot support the bill unless schedule 2 is removed. It's as simple as that. Please think about free, prior and informed consent every time you look at your dot paintings and every time you come to a rally and scream out 'black lives matter'. Thank you.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor opposes these amendments. The amendments in schedule 2 of the bill are largely administrative and technical in nature. They are designed to increase efficiencies for all parties, including traditional owners. The land councils have given evidence that, rather than these changes being proposed by mining companies, these changes have been put forward by traditional owners themselves to avoid the frustration of having to attend multiple meetings when they have already made their views clear to a land council. In other words, they were requested by traditional owners, not by miners. Labor respects the wishes of traditional owners. Importantly, none of these changes dilute the protections in the act for traditional owners. They maintain the right to a veto. That is one of the strongest protections of its kind in the country.

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support the amendments on sheet 1510. The proposed amendments would omit the commencement date for entire schedule 2—mining. And the changes to part 4 proposed in the bill would not take effect. These amendments follow from an independent review in 2013 and have the agreement of the Northern Territory government and the four Northern Territory land councils, in consultation with key resource sector peak bodies. Importantly, the reforms preserve existing strong protections for traditional owners, including their right to free, prior and informed consent and their right to veto exploration and mining proposals on their land. The proposed amendment would not achieve increased confidence and clarity for all stakeholders and would not empower traditional owners to take advantage of opportunities on their land.

The CHAIR ( 19:50 ): I just advise the Senate that we are dealing with schedule 2 on sheet 1510. The question is that schedule 2 stand as printed.

The CHAIR ( 18:51 ): I will just advise the Senate that Senator Thorpe also moved sheet No. 1 on sheet 1510, but as a consequence of the outcome of the first one that falls away because it's consequential. So I'm in the hands of the Senate. Senator Thorpe.

Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1454 together:

(1) Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 13), after item 3, insert:

3A After subsection 64 (4)

Insert:

(4AA) The Minister must consult the Northern Territory Aboriginal Investment Corporation before giving a direction under subsection (4).

(2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (before line 10), before paragraph 65BB(a), insert:

(aa) to advise the Minister in relation to debiting the Account for the purposes of making payments under subsection 64(4);

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support amendment sheet 1454. Requiring the corporation to advise the minister on beneficial payments will entrench the current system of government approval of beneficial payments from the ABA corporations, moving decisions about Aboriginal money out of Canberra and into the Northern Territory from government into Aboriginal hands.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor will not be supporting these amendments. As stated in the explanatory memorandum, the bill has been designed to transfer responsibility for making beneficial payments under the land rights act from the minister to the NTAI Corporation. Conferring an advisory role on the NTAI Corporation could potentially undermine this intention and give rise to confusion about its function.

The CHAIR (18:54): The question is that amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1454, as moved by Senator Thorpe, be agreed to.

Question negatived.

Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move Greens amendments (1) to (7) on sheet 1449, revised:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 6), insert:

(2) Schedule 1, item 4, page 5 (after line 20), at the end of section 64AA, add:

(5) The Minister must give a direction under subsection (4) at least once in each financial year starting on or after the third 1 July that occurs after the commencement of this section.

(3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 21 (line 7), after "independent", insert "Aboriginal".

(4) Schedule 1, item 6, page 21 (lines 21 to 25), omit subsection 65ED(3), substitute:

(3) A person is not eligible for appointment as a Board member under subsection (1) unless the person is an Aboriginal person.

(5) Schedule 1, item 6, page 21 (after line 33), after paragraph 65ED(4)(d), insert:

; or (e) holds a right that relates to an area in the Northern Territory and arises under any Australian law dealing with the rights of Aboriginal persons in relation to land or waters, including if the person is:

(i) a traditional Aboriginal owner of an area of land that is held by a Land Trust; or

(ii) a native title holder (within the meaning of the Native Title Act 1993) whose approved determination of native title (within the meaning of that Act) relates to an area in the Northern Territory; or

(iii) a registered native title claimant (within the meaning of the Native Title Act 1993) whose claimant application (within the meaning of that Act) relates to an area in the Northern Territory; or

(f) lives outside the Northern Territory.

(6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 38 (line 26), omit "7 years", substitute "3 years".

(7) Schedule 3, page 75 (after line 16), at the end of the Schedule, add:

Part 5 — Review of operation of Schedule

45 Review of operation of Schedule

(1) The Minister must cause a review of the operation of the amendments made by this Schedule to be undertaken as soon as possible after the end of 5 years after the commencement of Part 1 of this Schedule.

(2) The persons undertaking the review must give the Minister a written report of the review. The report must not include information that is commercially sensitive.

(3) The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the review to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the report is given to the Minister.

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support the amendments on sheet 1449 as they are unnecessary. The corporations funding process is consistent with the funding of the NT land councils and ensures the ABA balance remains sufficient to fund its other obligations, including distributions to traditional owners. The bill already enables the board to appoint Aboriginal people who are not landholders to the independent and land council positions and is focused on bringing specific skills and expertise to the board. A seven-year statutory review allows time for the corporation to be reviewed against a full strategic investment plan period. Ongoing review and evaluation is a more efficient mechanism to review the impact of the other amendments in the bill. Traditional owners will retain the right of free, prior and informed group consent, including their right to veto any mining and exploration on Aboriginal land in the Northern Territory.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor will not be supporting these amendments. The bill already provides for the new corporation to have an Aboriginal controlled board and an appropriately timed statutory review. The new corporation should be afforded the opportunity to demonstrate success from its strategic investments. A review in just three years time would not provide adequate time and risks setting the new corporation up to fail, thus undermining rather than supporting increased Aboriginal control over the funds of the ABA. There will be opportunities to scrutinise the corporation's strategic investment plan and progress reports, which Labor supports being tabled in parliament. We intend to make full use of these opportunities to ensure that the corporation is operating appropriately.

The CHAIR: We are dealing with amendments (1) to (7) on sheet 1449, revised, and moved by leave by Senator Thorpe. The question is that the amendments be agreed to.

Question negatived.

Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move Greens amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1514:

(1) Schedule 1, item 19, page 46 (line 4), omit "may", substitute "must".

(2) Schedule 1, item 19, page 46 (after line 5), after subitem (4), insert:

(4A) The Minister must table a copy of any progress report given to the Minister in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the Minister receives the report.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor supports this amendment, which would require the minister to request progress reports on the NTAI Corporation's strategic investment plan. We note that this was a recommendation of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee. It is appropriate and consistent with principles of transparency that progress reports should be open to parliamentary scrutiny. There are various options available to the minister to allow for the removal or confidentiality of any genuinely sensitive material.

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government opposes these amendments. The bill includes strong transparency arrangements, including tabling a strategic investment plan in parliament. The strategic investment plan will include consultation with Aboriginal people and organisations in the Northern Territory.

The CHAIR (19:02): We are dealing with amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1514, moved by leave by Senator Thorpe. The question is that the amendments be agreed to.

Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move Greens amendments (1) to (4) on sheet 1477 together.

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:

(2) Schedule 3, item 25, page 70 (lines 29 and 30), omit "it is satisfied that".

(3) Schedule 3, item 25, page 71 (lines 14 and 15), subsection 12D(7) to be opposed.

(4) Page 78 (after line 18), at the end of the Bill, add:

Schedule 5 — Ensuring the consent of traditional Aboriginal owners etc.

Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976

1 Subsection 11A(3)

Omit "it is satisfied that".

2 Subsection 11A(6)

Repeal the subsection.

3 Subsection 19(5)

Omit "the Land Council is satisfied that".

4 Subsection 19(6)

Repeal the subsection, substitute:

(6) If:

(a) a Land Council gives a direction for a proposed grant, transfer or surrender of an estate or interest in land; and

(b) the person to whom the grant, transfer or surrender was made procured the direction of the Land Council by fraud;

the grant, transfer or surrender is invalid.

5 Subsection 19A(2)

Omit "it is satisfied that".

6 Subsection 19A(3)

Repeal the subsection, substitute:

(3) If:

(a) a Land Council gives a direction for a grant of a lease; and

(b) the approved entity to whom the grant was made procured the direction of the Land Council by fraud;

the grant is invalid.

7 Subsection 21E(2)

Omit "the Council is satisfied that".

8 Subsection 23(3)

Omit "the Land Council is satisfied that".

9 Subsection 28(4)

Repeal the subsection.

10 Paragraphs 42(6)(a) and (b)

Omit "it is satisfied that".

11 Paragraphs 43(2)(a) to (c)

Repeal the paragraphs, substitute:

(a) it has, as far as practicable, consulted the traditional Aboriginal owners (if any) of the land concerning the terms and conditions; and

(b) the traditional Aboriginal owners understand the nature and purpose of the terms and conditions and, as a group, consent to them; and

(c) it has, as far as practicable, consulted any other Aboriginal community or group that may be affected by the grant of the licence concerning the terms and conditions; and

(d) the community or group has had an adequate opportunity to express its views to the Land Council; and

(e) the terms and conditions are reasonable.

12 Paragraphs 46(4)(a) to (c)

Repeal the paragraphs, substitute:

(a) it has, as far as practicable, consulted the traditional Aboriginal owners (if any) of the land concerning the terms and conditions; and

(b) the traditional Aboriginal owners understand the nature and purpose of the terms and conditions and, as a group, consent to them; and

(c) it has, as far as practicable, consulted any other Aboriginal community or group that may be affected by the grant of the mining interest concerning the terms and conditions; and

(d) the community or group has had an adequate opportunity to express its view to the Land Council; and

(e) the terms and conditions are reasonable.

13 Subsection 48A(4)

Omit "it is satisfied that".

14 Subsection 48D(3)

Repeal the subsection.

15 Subsection 67B(3)

Omit "it is satisfied that".

16 Subsection 67B(5)

Repeal the subsection.

17 Subsection 68(2)

Omit "the Land Council is satisfied that".

Zed Seselja (ACT, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support the amendments on sheet 1477. The existing land rights act includes provisions to guarantee the free, prior and informed consent of traditional Aboriginal owners. Existing section 77A outlines the process to be followed where traditional Aboriginal owners are required to have consented. To omit the requirement for a land council to be satisfied in endorsing this consent would be contrary to the operation of the act and have unintended consequences.

Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor will not be supporting these amendments which seek to amend multiple provisions of the land rights act. No concerns have been raised about these existing provisions. The land rights act contains some of the strongest protections in the country to ensure the consent of traditional owners to activities on their land. It would be unwise to tamper with these provisions without a thorough process of consultation and review.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that Greens amendments (1) to (4) on sheet 1477 be agreed to.

Question negatived.

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: The question is that subsection 12D(7) in item 25 of schedule 3 stand as printed.

Question agreed to.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.

Bill reported with an amendment; report adopted.