- Thank you for attending today.
My questions are to do with native title projections.
- 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.
- It's a massive undertaking.
Could, could we get the breakdown on notice please?
- Certainly
- 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?
- 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 climate applications
- And of those determinations Senator 416
are consent determinations
and 53 were litigated determinations.
- How many 53 did you say?
- Result of litigated determination.
- Thank you.
What human resources are being used to
assist progressive progressing native title claims.
- Could you
- 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
- And how many people would be employed full-time
equivalent on, on government funding outside the department?
- Senate, 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
- 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.
- How many of them?
- I think there's approximately 15, 14 or 15.
- When is it considered that the remainder
of unfinalized 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.
- 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.
- 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
fi 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.
- 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.
- 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
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 great to mining, for example
on the land and things like that.
So it, again, it's more complex than it might seem.
- 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 axe preamble?
- Are you referring to a particular treaty or?
- 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
- 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.
- SO who would be the best person
or agency to do find out more on that?
- Look, we, we can take on, on notice.
- No, could we come and see you?
No need to take it on notice.
- You actually want a meeting?
- 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.
- That's probably not
- With all due respect to the official,
that's exactly right.
- That's fine.
- But a briefing will be facilitated for you Senator Robert.
- Thank you very much.
- Thank you very much Senator Robert.
- Thank you.
Integrity.
- 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.