Native Title Land Claims
NATIVE TITLE LAND CLAIMS
Matter of Public Importance
Discussion resumed from an earlier hour.
Mr YEADON (Granville - Minister for Land and Water Conservation) [7.30 p.m.]: It is fair to say that New South Wales has led the way in using the provisions of the Native Title Act to mediate just and equitable outcomes. I cite the agreements on Crescent Head and Byron Bay as two outstanding examples of the State leading the way on native title. Those two agreements were different in nature, but brought about the same conclusion, which was a well- and widely-accepted agreement within the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities.
I turn to the schedule which the Commonwealth has developed. It is not up to New South Wales to determine which leases are included. Although there have been discussions between the States and Commonwealth about native title, the Commonwealth Government, on the basis of legal advice, has determined which leases are to be included in the schedule. If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition wishes to take issue with the Commonwealth Government’s legal advice, I suggest that he raise it with either his Federal colleagues or the Federal legal advisers who have furnished the Commonwealth with legal information. He is certainly free to do that without reference to this House.
The Commonwealth schedule is included in a Commonwealth bill and obviously the Commonwealth Government determines the content of its bills. Much as New South Wales would appreciate having the power to dictate to the Commonwealth Government on some issues and legislation, the reality is that the State has no power to do so. Indeed, there is a whole range of issues on which the State would like to be in a position to dictate to the Commonwealth. One example is the Federal cutbacks to health funding - cutbacks that the State Government is struggling with. Another is that bids to improve literacy have been met with Commonwealth threats of further education funding cutbacks.
The State is left powerless to address these issues, so why does the Leader of the National Party take this inappropriate approach in New South Wales? The answer is obvious when one reads the press release he issued this afternoon: he is covering his back and the back of State members. The Leader of the National Party knows damn well that the Federal Government has charge and carriage of this matter. He needs to go to Canberra to sort out this issue with his colleagues and stop the theatrics that he is playing at in this Chamber. [Time expired.]
Mr SLACK-SMITH (Barwon) [7.33 p.m.]: The High Court Wik decision has placed many farmers and miners in the Western Lands Division in a state of uncertainty, insecurity and dormancy. More than 1,500 families and 5,000 opal miners do not know whether their lands are secure. Therefore plans for fencing, water improvements - as the Minister is fully aware - stocking and general business practice in Western Lands Division leases have been virtually brought to a halt. Western Lands leases, contrary to popular opinion, can be bought and sold the same as any other business or holding in New South Wales. It is exactly the same as in the case of many other types of real estate.
The Federal Solicitor-General, Dennis Rose, QC, has found that Western Lands Division leases are common law leases and that they differ from pastoral leases. The uncertainty is having an effect on land prices. Who would buy land that was under threat of a land claim? Recently in the Australian the Premier was reported as saying that he would not let our farmers down. That is a joke! It is another broken promise: he has scuttled the Western Lands people yet again. This type of land title has a clause stating "exclusive possession to the lessee"; and that clause is under threat.
This is not a race issue; it is a rights issue. If the Carr Labor Government claims that it is a racist issue, then it should tell that to the many miners of Lightning Ridge who are of Aboriginal extraction, and to land-holders on Western Lands Division leases who have Aboriginal holdings. I refer of course to Warrengulla Station, which has 10,000 hectares - or 24,000 acres - under threat from the Eulah-i Dixon clan. This is a threat from people never known to belong to the local area. Some areas are under claims from two or more clans. This is a total disaster.
Page 518
The honourable member for Broken Hill said that he would "keep Mr Carr honest and make sure he keeps his promise and not leave New South Wales farmers out in the cold". I thank the honourable member for Broken Hill, because he has just chucked away his seat at the next election. The 6,500 people affected by this will not forget that he cannot keep the Premier honest. The Premier cannot fob off or pass the buck as the New South Wales Government is the administrator of the Western Division leases and has failed to include those leases in the schedule. The Premier is bending over backwards to appease the ill-informed trendies in his city electorates. He cannot wash his hands of this matter. He has acknowledged his responsibility and duty and he should let all people, black and white, get on with their lives without this threat of uncertainty.
Mr ARMSTRONG (Lachlan - Leader of the National Party) [7.36 p.m.], in reply: This debate has demonstrated two things quite clearly: firstly, that unfortunately the Minister for Land and Water Conservation either has an appalling lack of knowledge and understanding of his responsibilities, particularly in matters pertaining to the Wik decision, or, secondly, that he is quite prepared to avoid addressing any data or specifications of his responsibilities contained under the Western Lands Leasehold Act. It is quite simple. This is one of the oldest land Acts that we have in New South Wales; the Crown Lands Occupation Act goes back to 1861.
Tonight the Minister has failed to address any specific issues. Clearly, the Premier is not prepared to back the statements he made earlier this year. When I drew attention to this, Government members indicated that they doubted the veracity of my comments. In support of my allegations, I have the transcript of the program broadcast on radio 2UE on Tuesday, 29 April 1997. I am prepared to table it in full to put to rest the spurious rejection by members of the Labor Party of the Premier’s statements on that day. I seek leave to table the transcript.
Leave not granted.
I suspected that that would be the case, and I am sure that you, Mr Acting-Speaker, are as disappointed as I am. It is unfortunate that the Government will not accept the transcript. I realise that that is embarrassing, but the bottom line is that many untruths have been told about the Wik matter, particularly in this debate today. The Minister continued to repeat in various forms that this is a Commonwealth matter. When will the Minister acknowledge that the title of all lands in New South Wales is vested in the Crown?
It is incumbent upon the Government of the day to indicate to the Governor any changes it wishes to make in title, distribution of title, or allocation in this State, and that goes for leases too. All leases of Crown lands come under the State and the incumbent government has the responsibility to advise the Governor accordingly. When will the Minister acknowledge that and accept his responsibilities? It has been established on legal advice that the Premier sat on it from 21 January this year - for nine months. He had obtained legal advice that he was not going to release the advice until we questioned the matter in this House this week.
Because the Premier was reported in the Australian on 23 January we were able to catch him out on withholding information on one of the most important fundamental factors in the management of land, giving confidence to the pastoralists of the Western Division. It gave them confidence to continue to manage those leases in an environmental and productive fashion, and to continue to contribute to the economy of New South Wales. Most importantly it gave them confidence to continue to enhance the environmental conditions of land covered by those leases so that they can pass it to future generations, hopefully in a better condition than they found them.
The Minister has spelt out the New South Wales Government’s policy on Wik and for that we thank him. He will do nothing. He has totally abrogated his responsibility. I have one question: when will the Government of New South Wales request the Commonwealth to take over responsibility for the title of all lands in New South Wales? Obviously the Government is not prepared to honour its responsibility and Ministers are not prepared to honour the obligations they assumed when they were sworn in as Ministers of the Crown in New South Wales. It is a most disgraceful act, rejection of fundamental and basic responsibilities by this Minister and by the Premier of New South Wales. The Minister for Land and Water Conservation has rejected his own statements and has failed to honour his obligations. That once again reinforces his attitude.
Discussion concluded.