Senate debates

Wednesday, 14 June 2017

Bills

Native Title Amendment (Indigenous Land Use Agreements) Bill 2017; In Committee

11:39 am

Photo of Rachel SiewertRachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—could I have our vote of 'No' recorded, please?

The CHAIR: So recorded.

by leave—I move Greens amendments (1), (2) and (5) on sheet 8161 together:

(1) Schedule 1, item 9, page 5 (line 26), at the end of subitem (1), add:

; and (e) the agreement was registered on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements on or before 2 February 2017.

(2) Schedule 1, item 9, page 5 (lines 30 to 32), omit “Without limiting subitem (2), if on or before 2 February 2017 the agreement was registered on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements, then the”, substitute “The”.

(5) Schedule 1, item 12, page 7 (lines 13 to 16), omit subitem (1), substitute:

  (1) This item applies to an agreement if, if the agreement had been registered on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements on or before 2 February 2017, item 9 would have applied to the agreement except for the application of subitem 9(4).

We also oppose schedule 1 in the following terms:

(3) Schedule 1, item 10, page 6 (lines 11 to 27), to be opposed.

(4) Schedule 1, item 11, page 6 (line 28) to page 7 (line 11), to be opposed.

We are opposed to clause 10, which deals with validating the applications that are currently before the registrar—in other words, where agreements have been discussed, applications have been made and they are before the registrar. The Adani agreement is one of those. The other amendments there relate to the consequences that taking that section out have. Because these are counted as agreements they are also included under clause 9 in the bill, so we are amending that to address that situation. We are also amending clause 12 because it is a different situation for the south-west agreements. That is the basis of these amendments. We think that, if we take out of the process the Adani application and those pending agreements that are clearly not registered and clearly do not have consensus decisions, that would be a more satisfactory approach to dealing with the particular matters.

Comments

No comments