House debates

Tuesday, 27 November 2012

Questions without Notice

Native Title

2:24 pm

Photo of Julia GillardJulia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question and thank him for asking a question which is about a policy matter and a policy matter of extreme importance to the nation's future—that is, how we deal with the legitimate aspirations of Indigenous Australians for control of land, how we deal with land rights and with native title. I am proud that the government has a strong record on native title, that Labor has a strong record on native title and that, in this year, we have marked the 20th anniversary of the Mabo decision. The Mabo decision is one of those things that make you reflect on the nature of political debate and how that political debate is viewed with the remove of history. A divisive political debate where Labor was opposed every step of the way by the conservatives, where they sought to persuade Australians that their backyard was at risk, is now, with the remove of 20 years, accepted as bipartisan settled policy. It might remind people of a few other things that are being debated in this parliament during the course of this year.

Our 2009 reforms to the Native Title Act gave the Federal Court a central role in managing native title claims. Since those reforms, the rate of consent determinations has increased almost fourfold, and I think we would all be very happy to see that: parties working together and coming together for consent determinations. The Attorney-General has recently introduced legislation to bring native title mediation under the control of the Federal Court to ensure that all parties have proper ability to be heard, along with the authority and procedural fairness that comes from court processes. We are now also introducing further reforms to native title, including clearer good-faith provisions, and the Attorney-General is introducing these this week.

In relation to specific changes to native title respondent funding, I can advise the member that these funding changes are nothing new. They were announced in the 2011 budget along with changes to legal financial assistance schemes across a wide range of areas. They follow an independent review on how government can best ensure that finite legal resources, the assistance funds, can help those in need.

The government has provided commercially viable businesses with generous government funding for native title claims for the past 20 years. Now that native title processes are well established, it is not necessary for taxpayers' money to go to commercially viable organisations for native title matters. The revised scheme will continue to provide assistance for new or novel matters and for the costs of disbursements related to native title claims.

I hope that information assists the member. I know that he is very passionate about the pursuit of such issues, and I thank him for the question.

Comments

No comments