With 40% of Australian land mass currently under a successful native title claim, you can see how estimates of up to 80% of Australia being claimed under native title by 2050 are very possible. There are currently 177 native title claims awaiting determination right now.
Transcript
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you for attending today. My questions are to do with native title projections.
Thank you.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. What are the current costs of administrating administering Australian native title claims each year, please?
Kathleen Denley, assistant secretary of the native title unit. So the approximate cost per year is 140 million. I don’t have the exact breakdown, but I can get it for you. The majority of that money goes to the national indigenous Australians agency who pay for native title representative bodies. There’s also money that then goes to, for example the Federal Court, the National Native Title Tribunal. There’s some administered funding that goes to native title respondents funding schemes. There’s also an anthropologist scheme which the department administers for some funding for native title anthropologists and some money that departments such as NIAA and AGD expend.
[Malcolm Roberts] It’s a massive undertaking. Could, could we get the breakdown on notice please?
Certainly
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. Secondly, how many claims have been finalised to date?
Senator just to clarify, do you mean native title claims as distinct from state compensation claims?
[Malcolm Roberts] Yes.
I’ll have to find the exact figure for you Senator. According to the data held by the NNTT as of the 3rd of May, there are 524 determinations and 177 active claimant applications
And of those determinations Senator 416 are consent determinations and 53 were litigated determinations.
[Malcolm Roberts] How many 53 did you say?
Result of litigated determination.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. What human resources are being used to assist progressive progressing native title claims.
Could you
[Malcolm Roberts] How many people in the department are working on that?
Oh, so the native title unit in the attorney General’s department? So I think we have approximately 14 staff. However, the unit is also working on things other than native titles, such as the closing, the gap measures in conjunction with the national indigenous Australian agency
[Malcolm Roberts] And how many people would be employed full-time equivalent on, on government funding outside the department?
Senator, Just before we go onto outside of the department we also, our legal assistance area would also process claims under a number of schemes. I don’t have those details. We’ll take them on notice and I’ll give you an estimate if you
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. Yep. How many claims are currently in the system yet to be finalised? Is that a 177 active?
That’s right. That’s of native title determinations. There are also native title compensation claims that are currently before the courts.
[Malcolm Roberts] How many of them?
I think there’s approximately 15, 14 or 15.
[Malcolm Roberts] When is it considered that the remainder of unfinalised claims will be finalised?
I’d have to take that question on notice. I think there’s a range of cases that are still before the courts for a variety of different reasons. I’d, I’d have to take the question on notice to see if there was a projection by the federal court.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. What proportion of the Australian landmass is currently under finalised native title?
So 40.5% are covered by a determination and 6.3% are covered by a determination that there is no native title or that native title has been extinguished.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, thank you. There have been some assessments made by persons including Warren Mundine and Josephine Cashman. Who’s an indigenous lawyer and activist predicting that that finalised native title claims will cover 70 to 80% of the Australian land mass by the 2050s. Is this estimate reasonably correct? If finalise claims as successful?
I’m not sure I could accurately comment on that particular percentage. What I could say is in terms of the indigenous land estate once Al Rowe or Aboriginal land rights act findings are also taken into account. The overall indigenous land estate is larger. Of course it’s, it’s uncertain what the percentage would be that it would be based on individual circumstances of cases that are before the federal court. But we would, I think, expect that the overall percentage would increase, but I couldn’t comment on that exact percentage.
[Malcolm Roberts] Senator, if I can add to that, of course when the court makes a determination of native title it might be exclusive native title. What might be non-exclusive native title. So we could have land that’s subject to native title but that doesn’t mean that it’s subject to exclusive native title. If you understand where I’m going with that.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. Yep. So it will be, you don’t know whether it’ll be a lot more than the current 46 and a half percent
We would expect it to increase
[Malcolm Roberts] Increase. But you don’t know how much. I’m not not complaining about that. I’m just, just trying to pin it down broadly. So next question, Aboriginal people of Australia currently represent around 3.3% of Australia’s population. Yet native title does not allow individual ownership of land under native title claim, as I understand it. This will effectively lock up a large proportion of Australian land that is no longer available as private freehold property to any individual Australian to purchase. Was this an intended consequence of the introduction of native title to lock up the land?
So the purpose of the native title is to recognise pre-existing interest in land and the court will make that determination based on evidence before it. So if there has been pre-existing laws and customs as the secretary outlined before, it will be it will depend on the individual circumstances as to the extent of those rights. In some instances they may be exclusive but in some instances it may be more limited such as a right to hunt and gather. It could be a right to continue a particular cultural practise. So it will change in every circumstances to the extent of those rights.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, thank you. Is it true that Aboriginal people are not able to build or buy and own their home on land under native title? Because that’s what I’ve been told by people in communities.
So native title isn’t free hold title although exclusive native title in some circumstances has been considered similar by the nature of the rights that are given. However, as I mentioned, it really does depend on the finding of those individual rights.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay.
The native title act also contains the regime where the native title holding groups can themselves decide whether they wish to permit activities, to take place on land that is subject to native title. So it would be open to a native title group to in fact say that if they wish to that they would allow individual members of that group to, to build housing on that land and to have, for example, 99 year type leasehold arrangement. But that’s a matter for the group themselves as to whether they wish to do that or not.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. It is, it’s much more complex than people think then. Is it true that land under native title cannot be used as security for a loan to assist an Aboriginal person? Or is that following on from what you just said?
So, because if someone was to default on a loan, for example native title land, can’t then be repossessed by a financer financier. So that that’s not to say that financial institutions aren’t capable of devising financial ways of actually lending to, to native title groups based upon assets and revenue streams that a native title holding group might have. I mean, a native title holding group might have revenue streams, if they’ve agreed to mining, for example on the land and things like that. So it, again, it’s more complex than it might seem.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay. Thank you. Two more questions. What is the relationship between the United nations and the native title act given the extensive reference to the UN in the acts preamble?
Are you referring to a particular treaty or?
[Malcolm Roberts] No, just a, just a broad understanding of the relationship between the UN and the native title act.
I guess broadly the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous people. I, I’m not sure of the particular reference
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay.
The declaration on the rights of indigenous people postdates the, the native native title act that was passed before that, that declaration. So like my, my colleague, Ms. Stanley, I’m not sure about the references to the UN in the preamble. The native title act is an act passed by this parliament. So it’s, it’s a piece of domestic legislation in that sense.
[Malcolm Roberts] So who would be the best person or agency to do find out more on that?
Look, we, we can take on, on notice.
[Malcolm Roberts] No, could we come and see you? No need to take it on notice.
You actually want a meeting?
[Malcolm Roberts] Yeah. Just a briefing on it. Yeah. Better understanding. Yeah. Thank you. Oh, we intend to, we have been. Has native title improved the living circumstances of the majority of Aboriginal persons in Australia.
Are you asking me for a personal opinion? I’m not sure I can give that sense.
[Malcolm Roberts] That’s probably not
With all due respect to the official, that’s exactly right.
[Malcolm Roberts] That’s fine.
But a briefing will be facilitated for you Senator Robert.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you very much.
Thank you very much Senator Robert.
Thank you.
If I could just interject for a minute to going back to the previous witness I appreciate the answers being direct and concise. It’s very helpful.
