Introduction
4.1
This chapter examines the approaches and strategies that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have adopted to leverage their title to land for the purposes of economic and social development.
4.2
The evidence presented to the Committee clearly shows that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples want to take up economic opportunities, while also strengthening the fabric of their communities and maintaining their connection with country. The chapter discusses the importance of respect for collective decision-making as an element of self-determination for traditional owner communities.
4.3
The chapter discusses the range of economic enterprises in which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been involved and highlights emerging trends. Particular attention is given to the new initiatives in cultural enterprises, tourism and environmental protection that, in recent years, have opened up broader opportunities beyond long-standing activities such as pastoralism and mining.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait peoples support economic development
4.4
The importance of Indigenous business across Australia as a whole is evidenced in The Contribution of the Indigenous Business Sector to Australia’s Economy Report April 2018 by PwC Indigenous Consulting. The report states that many Indigenous business owners use their business to drive change for their family and wider community’ and that there were social returns on investments into Indigenous businesses, such as:
for every dollar of revenue, Indigenous businesses create $4.41 of economic and social value
Indigenous businesses employ more than 30 times the proportion of Indigenous people than other businesses
Indigenous businesses provide training to their staff
owners of Indigenous businesses reinvest revenue in their communities.
4.5
In northern Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples representatives were consistent in telling the Committee that they supported the economic development of their communities and of the region. They rejected claims that Aboriginal and Torres Strait peoples were reluctant to make use of economic opportunity or that the exercise of native title or lands rights was a barrier to economic activity. But they seek to adopt approaches that uphold their communities’ traditional decision-making processes and laws, preserve and invigorate cultural heritage and support custodianship and stewardship of country.
4.6
They stressed that the task ahead was to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples were empowered to make use of their rights in land in a way that both contributed to the development of the north and supported Indigenous communities, cultures and values. In order to ensure that enterprises are sustainable, Indigenous knowledge and culture should no longer be seen as an encumbrance to the region, but rather be embraced as part of its strengths.
4.7
Such a view was presented to the Committee by the Northern Land Council (NLC):
Too often Aboriginal land tenure, law, culture, and interests are treated as obstacles to investment rather than strengths and opportunities. This view must be challenged. NLC’s constituents are generally supportive of economic development that is culturally, socially, environmentally and economically sustainable. They want an equitable share in the growth of the northern economy, and to see their land tenure and rights translated into economic and social outcomes.
4.8
From a similar perspective, the Kimberley Land Council (KLC) submitted that:
Native title is not and should not be seen as, an impediment to economic development. Rather, it is a means by which to engage with the largest land holding constituency in Northern Australia, being native title holders, to deliver outcomes that are mutually beneficial to all stakeholders. … Past experience proves that, when engaged by government and industry in good faith, Traditional Owners are empowered to identify commercial opportunities which use resources sustainably, thus protecting Indigenous-held core values of country and culture whilst building strong communities and capability.
4.9
Speaking from the perspective of the Yolngu people, Mr Yingiya Mark Guyula MLA stated that:
Yolngu are not opposed to economic initiatives on our lands; quite the opposite. But we need to create pathways for sustainable business development that upholds our traditional decision-making processes and our law, and respects our authority for determining 'economic development' on our country.
4.10
Mr Guyula also emphasised the critical link between economic development, the development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and the protection of heritage:
Really, the idea of community development and economic development must work together here. We want to build our communities through business and responsibility for our land. … Any economic development is strongly tied to our responsibility to protect sacred sites and care for our country, furthermore it must build community and improve our capacity to self-determine our future.
4.11
In the case of the Torres Strait, the Gur A Baradharaw Kod Sea and Land Council (GBK) said that:
In the Torres Strait, many more economic opportunities could be accessed if governments recognised the capabilities of Traditional Owners and their governing bodies, as well as leveraging the cultural knowledge and authority of the native title holding groups. There is much wisdom held by Traditional Owners that could be used to improve fishing practices, for example, and many ideas for economic development held by native title holders to start small businesses, such as food production for export.
4.12
The Central Land Council (CLC) submitted that culturally appropriate support can facilitate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participation in the modern economy:
CLC’s experience and research show that far from lacking enterprise or endeavour, Aboriginal people need to be supported and resourced to engage with the mainstream economy and capitalise on their significant social, cultural and land assets. Critically, this support must align with peoples’ aspirations and cultural traditions and practices.
4.13
Dr Janet Hunt from the Australian National University (ANU) observed that fears that ‘the extension of Indigenous rights in the north … might constrain development have been shown to be unfounded’:
In fact, since the passing of the land rights act in the Northern Territory in 1976 and the Native Title Act nationally in 1993, the northern economy, rather than grinding to a halt, has diversified and grown. An increasing number of Indigenous groups across northern Australia have secured rights and interests in lands, waters, cultural heritage and intellectual property and have negotiated major resource and land use agreements, with beneficial impacts for them and for the wider regional and northern economy.
4.14
Professor Jon Altman and Dr Francis Markham from ANU cautioned against trying to impose a uniform model of economic development that may not be appropriate across all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
In our view the state project to deliver conventional forms of economic development to northern Australia is deeply problematic, arguably incoherent, and most definitely inconsistent. In relation to Indigenous traditional owners this is a project to deliver economic sameness for all in circumstances where sameness might not be possible for, or desired, by all. Indeed, the state quest for sameness might conflict directly with the quest of traditional owners for difference and diversity, although that is not saying that for some diversity might include western forms of development.
Collective decision-making is part of self-determination
4.15
As Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations grapple with the tasks of leveraging their land assets into productive enterprises, they should be encouraged to develop strategies to reconcile the collective nature of communities with the individualistic ethos of the market economy. Western ideas, laws and systems based on individual ownership and the encouragement of individual reward must be made compatible with Indigenous communal approaches to decision-making about the stewardship of ancestral land and the common welfare of traditional owners. While group decision-making processes may seem frustrating for some developers and proponents, they are a key element of self-determination.
4.16
Mr Peter Yu, Chair of the Indigenous Reference Group (IRG) to the Ministerial Forum on Northern Development submitted that a key task was:
…not only to invest in the personal and collective wealth of those communities and the improved infrastructure and services but also to put communities in a position where they can be self-determining in respect of the nature of their continuing customary and cultural practices...
4.17
Similarly, the KLC stressed the importance of ensuring that ‘culturally appropriate negotiation processes can be deployed which ensure that outcomes are sustainable and reflect the collective will of native title holders’.
4.18
Mr Joe Martin-Jard, CEO of the CLC elaborated:
These are collective decisions, and we’ve got an obligation to consult as many people as possible. Do some individuals get frustrated with that process? I’m sure they would, but we’ve got to think about the Aboriginal people who haven’t got a voice, who are vulnerable and who aren’t just pushy. What do they think? So we’ve got to go and ask, and we have to take everyone’s opinions into account.
4.19
Dr Hunt told the Committee:
I don't think we should accept that collective decision-making is necessarily going to be a barrier to development. People have got to have time, people have got to have the education and people have got to have knowledge of the opportunities and let them talk it through.
4.20
The ANU submission also critiqued:
…an unsound belief among governments and industry sectors that collective Indigenous land ownership holds back Indigenous engagement in the market economy; and so by default holds back development of the northern economy’. That argument has largely preferenced philosophical approaches of individualism (Western) over collectivism (Indigenous). But this in fact is a false dichotomy. These days, the market economy is alive and well in many parts of Indigenous collectively owned lands. Development initiatives are progressing on collectively-owned lands.
4.21
Elaborating, the submission stressed the need for:
… a balance between accessing and engaging in mainstream economic development, while also maintaining and attending to deep spiritual and cultural obligations as custodians of land tens of thousands of years in the making.
4.22
The CYLC also drew the Committee’s attention to the importance of collective receipt of economic benefits in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities:
Benefits from the use of land, such as native title compensation, lease rent from Aboriginal freehold and cultural heritage monitoring, should be collectively received by the Traditional Owner group and then distributed to individuals according to the rules of the group.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander economic enterprises
4.23
The Committee noted the range of economic and social development enterprises being pursued by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups under the native title and land rights regimes. It was especially encouraged to observe the growth of investment in recent years. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations are focusing particular efforts on starting enterprises that actively use their land assets, as well as receiving revenues from the activities of third parties.
4.24
The Cape York Land Council (CYLC) submitted that it was working with communities to take the initiative to ‘use of their own land as a means of production’ and not just through ‘passive non-participation in land use and development, such as through native title compensation payments’. CYLC wanted Indigenous businesses actively ‘engaged in northern development’ and not just ‘moving out of the way of development activities’ by providing consent to investment on their lands by outside interests.
4.25
In the case of the Northern Territory, the NLC informed the Committee:
Both the number and range of initiatives on Aboriginal land have been steadily increasing annually since 2012. As at 30 June 2019, the NLC was managing 723 land use agreements (leases or licences) across 3,687 parcels of land under section 19 of the Land Rights Act; an additional 63 agreements for mineral or petroleum tenements; and a further 32 native title land use agreements.
Aboriginal corporations have an interest in nearly 21 per cent of current section 19 land use agreements. Activities include arts, music and entertainment; agriculture; fisheries; fishing safaris; infrastructure (barge landings, pipelines, lighthouses) and telecommunications; safari hunting; crocodile egg harvesting; sand and gravel extraction; pastoralism; buffalo and feral animal mustering; tourism; and a rocket launching facility. Aboriginal participation is likely to increase, with 29 per cent of the 413 outstanding section 19 expressions of interest being from Indigenous proponents.
4.26
Echoing the emphasis on the importance of using traditional owners’ own cultural approaches to ensure sustainable development, various witnesses and submitters stressed the value of seeking opportunities that allowed traditional owners to stay on country as much as possible.
4.27
For example, Mrs Selena Uibo, Northern Territory Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, emphasised this as a key finding of her consultations throughout the Territory:
We're finding a lot of conversations as I travel, in particular, with homelands and outstations being a really big focus. People are wanting to live on country, stay on country, work on country and provide opportunities for employment without having to go to our regional hubs or into our towns or cities, into our bigger populations. … traditional owners and their families want to look at opportunities for on country delivery of business.
Cultural enterprises and tourism
4.28
The Committee received extensive evidence about cultural enterprises involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts, crafts, music, dance, language and other forms of cultural expression as both sources of income and ways of strengthening communities and connection with country
For many traditional owners, cultural enterprises are a way of achieving economic development in a manner consistent with community values and the exercise of native title rights.
4.29
The NT Government observed that Aboriginal culture is a central part of the tourism industry in the Territory and a major plank of the government’s tourism promotion policy. It submitted that ‘the supply of Aboriginal tourism products and experiences cannot meet the demand’ because of issues such as the problem of finding the people to provide the services, capacity constraints and the costs associated with distance.
4.30
The Queensland Government provided information about its Backing Indigenous Arts (BIA) initiative to ‘build ethical and sustainable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts industries’. It noted that challenges for cultural providers included access to sustainable business support, measuring demand, providing authentic products to counter the ‘fake art’ supply, building connections with the tourism industry and sustainable infrastructure in regional communities to enhance the cultural offering.
4.31
Kimberley Aboriginal Law and Cultural Centre (KALACC) noted that there is strong and growing domestic and international interest in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, and that cultural tourism held great economic potential in northern Australia. KALACC also documented the considerable amount of policy development that has been undertaken by Commonwealth, state and territory governments, but submitted that funding for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural initiatives was still limited. While noting the central role of multiple small-scale cultural enterprises across the region, KALACC also urged governments to provide support for large-scale Indigenous cultural festivals such as the Stomp Em Ground Festival in western Kimberley because they are ‘drawcards’ which showcase culture in general.
4.32
From a similar perspective, one of the recommendations of the IRG to the Ministerial Forum for Northern Development was that there should be:
…support for the development and growth of the cultural economy, including the arts and craft, customary knowledge and applications of bush foods and medicine, biodiversity and ecosystems management etc.
Environmental enterprises
4.33
The Committee was told of emerging opportunities to draw positive linkages between the desire to stay on country, the possibilities of local knowledge and practice, and the growth of environmental enterprises such as carbon farming, ecotourism and renewable energy.
4.34
Making the link between local knowledge and environmental initiatives, Mr Ronald Archer from the North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance (NAILSMA) submitted that ‘caring for country should be an economy’, while the CYLC observed that environmental protection enterprises are ‘a modern economic activity based on traditional knowledge and practice’, and that:
Environmental conservation therefore must be considered a form of economic development in northern Australia, and Traditional Owners must be heavily involved in this economic activity on Aboriginal freehold land and other land they traditionally own.
4.35
The CYLC noted that:
Environmental services include carbon sequestration, biodiversity and threatened species protection, landscape protection, erosion management, water quality improvement, and control of pests and weeds.
4.36
In a similar vein, the CLC submitted that payment for ecosystems services (PES) was a burgeoning growth area for Aborigines and Torres Strait Islander peoples:
Common objectives of these services include maintaining or improving water availability and quality, protecting or restoring land to restore other ecological functions and store carbon, and enhancing biodiversity conservation ... The success of the savanna burning industry, particularly in the Northern half of the NT, indicates the scale of opportunity available from markets based on natural and cultural assets in the NT.
PES opportunities identified in the NT include:
land management activities such as feral animal management, mine site rehabilitation, water resource monitoring, grazing management
commercial activities such as culture-based ecotourism, sustainable agriculture, and medicinal plant harvesting
contractual services such as infrastructure maintenance and remote community emergency management.
4.37
Taking the example of carbon farming, Mr Archer stressed its economic benefits when linked to informed local decision-making:
NAILSMA played key roles in developing commercial carbon farming methods that now bring in income of millions of dollars to remote regions and their communities that previously lacked funding and functional local economies. In all of its work NAILSMA emphasises empowerment of local people, and makes informed decisions about activities on their lands and full and active participation in related work and services.
4.38
The CYLC used the case of carbon abatement to highlight the need to ensure that traditional owners are not marginalised in such new economic fields:
Carbon abatement and sequestration through savannah burning provides an important opportunity for Traditional Owners on Cape York. CYLC is supporting Traditional Owners to have their rights recognised so that they achieve the benefits from this industry to which they are entitled. ... The experience on Cape York has been that there has been a rush by outside aggregators to monopolise this opportunity without respecting the rights of Traditional Owners.
4.39
The CLC cited a successful instance of carbon abatement managed by Aboriginal organisations:
The Karlantijpa North Savanna Burning Project is CLC region’s only savanna burning project. It has enabled Mudbarra traditional owners to access and work on their country during the burning season and improve regional bushfire management. The sale of the project’s carbon credits through the Emissions Reduction Fund enables it to be self-sustaining. In its first two years, the project has generated over 17,000 carbon credits and secured a
5-year contract with the Emissions Reduction Fund to sell a portion of these.
Whilst the Karlantijpa North Kurrawarra Nyura Mala Aboriginal Corporation controls the project, the CLC supports it through a management agreement to generate and sell the credits and pursue further growth. Following this project’s success, the CLC is also pursuing opportunities for further carbon abatement projects in Central Australia and generating income from voluntary carbon markets by leveraging social benefits of projects.
4.40
The KLC provided information about savanna fire carbon projects that have ‘generated $10M in income direct to native title holders and resulted in significant reduction to wildfire across the region’. Techniques employed have been showcased internationally and replicated in a pilot project in Botswana.
4.41
The Australia Government’s Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI), has registered 75 projects across northern Australia worth over $100 million and employing more than 400 Indigenous Rangers (discussed below).
4.42
Activities such as savanna burning, fire management, weed control and feral animal operations are broad-scale environmental management activities that inevitably cross boundaries of different Aboriginal land titles. They were mentioned by Mr Archer as examples of collective employment opportunities that can ‘get youth back out on country’ regardless of whether they were from areas with exclusive or non-exclusive native title or other form of tenure.
4.43
The NLC highlighted the importance of ‘flexible, adaptive and creative’ thinking in developing economic activities that were compatible with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander approaches and skills:
The commercial space launch facility now under construction on Aboriginal land near Nhulunbuy provides a recent example of thinking outside the mainstream. The Northern Territory has been identified as a prime location for large-scale renewable energy projects, offering the possibility of Aboriginal people becoming ‘solar farmers’ on their land. Aboriginal people are already key players in the emerging carbon farming and bush foods sectors where there is substantial opportunity for growth. Aquaculture and blue carbon farming [carbon stored in coastal and marine ecosystems] is another promising industry in the Aboriginal economy.
4.44
The NLC mentioned its activities with the Community Planning and Development Program as examples where it had worked with traditional owner groups wanting to ‘drive their own development through sustainable community projects and secure long lasting benefits from the land and water rights’. The NLC stressed that this ‘represents a shift from an ideology for individual benefits to a community benefits approach’.
4.45
The Committee was told of various initiatives around the production of solar power. This included plans for major investments by third parties to export power from Aboriginal lands through the negotiation of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs), and small-scale projects to provide solar power in individual communities.
4.46
One illustrative example of community-level solar is the Renewable Energy Sector Strategy implemented by Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) which has ‘successfully assisted in replacing diesel-fired electricity generation with renewable energy and storage solutions’ in remote communities. This has included the provision of solar panels by Aboriginal-owned businesses. These projects have allowed people to ‘live more independently on their own country’, and included aspects such as air-conditioning for schools to help improve educational outcomes. IBA observed that:
…the shift to solar power has the potential to strengthen cultural ties to country and sites plus songlines and the ability to explore sustainable land use activities that bring jobs, training and an income – building a sustainable economy on homelands.
4.47
This finding was echoed by the submission from ANU academics which concluded that:
Realising access to affordable and reliable renewable energy services has also been proven to be a great enabler of social development, education and training on many remote communities.
Indigenous Rangers
4.48
The Indigenous Ranger Program was mentioned on several occasions to the Committee as a successful example of support which ‘underpin[s] Indigenous groups’ capacity to provide commercial environmental services’.
4.49
The NNTC submitted that:
Ranger work provides people in remote communities with meaningful employment, training and development opportunities in natural and cultural resource management, and opportunities for intergenerational knowledge transfer and the maintenance of connection to country. A number of studies have reported the economic, environmental and social benefits associated with ranger employment – amongst them the proven net reduction in government support.
4.50
The Program is highly regarded in Aboriginal communities, with the Committee receiving evidence that communities that were not yet participating in the scheme had aspirations to become part of it as a way of ‘managing their land and passing on traditional knowledge and land management practices’.
4.51
According to the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA), the Program ‘has created more than 2,100 full-time, part-time and casual jobs in land and sea management around the country’, including northern Australia. With the extension of Australian Government funding from
2021 to 2028, $746 million will be provided to 80 ranger organisations, which support 1,900 jobs and ‘allow ranger groups to be more strategic with their land and sea country management.’
4.52
The NT Government informed the Committee that it had provided $6.1 million in various types of support to that Indigenous Ranger groups in 2017-18. In 2021, an additional $11.9 million over four years was provided. It stated that Ranger activities are:
…supported by a variety of resources including grant income from governments and philanthropic organisations; fee for service income for biosecurity, land and sea management and resource development; and commercial revenue from community-based enterprises and carbon abatement projects.
4.53
The NT Government went on to note, however, that Ranger groups needed secure long-term support:
Most Aboriginal Ranger groups remain significantly under-resourced to tackle the scale of the management tasks they are faced with. Funding uncertainty and lack of resources, combined with gaps in capability and/or inadequate strategic planning, mean that conservation and other outcomes are often not fully realised.
4.54
The need for a longer-term perspective on funding for Rangers and other similar activities was further emphasised by Mr Archer:
The broader thinking is we've got 10- to 15-year aspirations for people on country, but we've only got one- to three-year funding cycles that we have to operate within. It is trying to balance what the opportunities are and what the available funding is. Taking into consideration what people on the ground are telling us to do is a continual balance we're trying to find.
Pastoralism
4.55
The pastoral industry, along with mining, has been, and remains, one of the main forms of land use in northern Australia. The pastoral industry has, however, had a history of difficult relations with Aboriginal communities, including the dispossession of land and the exploitation of Aboriginal workers and their families. Moreover, past overgrazing and the use of marginal lands has led to serious environmental damage and degradation of country.
4.56
In addition, as pointed out by the CLC,
…the lands held by Aboriginal people are those which were never considered suitable for pastoralism, or are characterised by poor productivity and extreme ecological and infrastructure degradation. … Overall, beneficial Aboriginal engagement in the pastoral industry appears to be static or declining...
4.57
Nevertheless, many Aboriginal people continue to be interested in the pastoral industry. It has the advantage of providing opportunities to stay on country and can thus help sustain communities and support efforts to care for country, including in conjunction with environmental activities, as discussed above.
4.58
The CLC has therefore advocated efforts to maintain some Aboriginal connection to the pastoral industry through a ‘collective regional approach’ that links:
…small areas of productive Aboriginal lands to create efficient production units and scale and a management structure which enables a degree of autonomy for discrete business groups as well as coordinated production and marketing, stability and efficiency.
To this end, the CLC told the Committee it had initiated a ‘land capability and infrastructure assessment’ and a ‘feasibility pilot study’.
4.59
In the case of Queensland, the CYLC mentioned land tenure issues as an issue that needed resolution to facilitate Aboriginal use of land for pastoralism and, through this, to other activities. CYLC noted the obstacles to the negotiation of ILUAs where native title coexists with pastoral leases and that:
…a more prospective alternative approach to remove unnecessary pastoral lease restrictions would be to transfer the underlying ownership of pastoral land from the State to Aboriginal freehold tenure held by an Aboriginal corporation, on the condition that any existing pastoral lease is converted to a lease under the Aboriginal Land Act 1991. The conditions of the new ALA lease could then allow commercial land use activities in addition to pastoralism, such as tourism, timber harvesting or small retail outlets.
4.60
The Committee was told of successful instances of Aboriginal pastoral ventures across northern Australia. One was Kimberley Agriculture and Pastoral Company (KAPCO), a fully Aboriginal owned initiative which is ‘revitalising Aboriginal pastoral industry in the Kimberley and is a cooperative comprising four Indigenous-owned pastoral stations’ with a 50,000-strong herd. The enterprise takes advantage of ‘economies of scale by working together to develop a year-round supply chain leveraging modern breeding, herd management and cropping techniques’ while providing on-country employment and skills training.
Mining
4.61
The relationship between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in northern Australia and the mining industry has been historically problematic. Until the mining boom of the 1960s, the industry had little impact on the lives of traditional owners, but from that time on mining was a cause of destruction of Aboriginal cultural heritage in parts of the region, culminating in the destruction of the 46,000 year old heritage at Juukan Gorge in Western Australia.
4.62
Today, as a result of the passage of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976 (ALRA), the Native Title Act 1993 (NTA) and state/territory legislation, proponents are now obliged to negotiate some form of agreement with traditional owners who have title to land suitable for mineral exploration or extraction.
4.63
With mining being a major component of the northern economy, income from royalties and ‘native title monies associated with minerals agreements’ have become assets for some communities. There are also Aboriginal people employed in mining, and others owning or employed in businesses supplying goods and services to the industry. The NNTC observed that:
Income flowing from these agreements has supported significant outcomes for community development- enabling constituents to self-direct funding to community priorities.
4.64
There are, however, critical challenges for traditional owner groups trying to make the best use of their title to land where mining activity takes place.
4.65
This Committee’s A way forward: Final report into the destruction of Indigenous heritage sites at Juukan Gorge emphasised that the current provisions of the NTA create an unequal bargaining position between traditional owners and proponents. The report recommended that the Commonwealth Government conduct a review of the Act to address these inequalities.
4.66
The Minerals Council of Australia submitted that there is a ‘complex and interrelated range of factors that may prevent Traditional Owners and Indigenous organisations from deriving further benefits from native title and land rights and interests’. These include:
Socio-economic conditions such as the impact of historical exclusion and the remoteness and disadvantage of many communities located near mining activity
Lack of adequate tailored resources, training and other support for traditional owner organisations
Inflexible policy frameworks, especially arrangements for the management of assets from mining that inhibit traditional owners from utilising native title monies in a way that supports long-term economic development.
4.67
As noted in this Committee’s A way forward: Final report into the destruction of Indigenous heritage sites at Juukan Gorge:
The mining industry has somewhat helped to address [economic] challenges by providing royalties in return for agreements with traditional owners related to mining on country. Unfortunately, the mining industry’s provision of royalties often comes at the cost of heritage. While in some cases traditional owners agree to make this trade off, alternatives must be provided to ensure that traditional owners have other options to consider for the economic benefit of their communities.
4.68
For representative bodies to effectively negotiate agreements in fulfilment of the principle of free, prior and informed consent, they need to be well resourced and have strong institutional capacity. As discussed above, traditional owners should also be supported to pursue other alternative sources of income that which do not place cultural heritage at risk but, on the contrary, positively develop living cultures into the future.
4.69
Nevertheless, given that mining is a key sector in the north, traditional owners should be empowered to become involved in mining-related activities in deeper and more sophisticated ways and to diversify their employment and business operations. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples should be more than the passive recipients of royalties.
4.70
The limitations of the current situation was highlighted by the CLC which submitted that:
…multipliers for local Aboriginal people from [mining] activities are relatively low, as local communities are often poorly placed to provide the goods or services sought by these industries, including labour…
4.71
To develop better outcomes, CYLC told the Committee that if traditional owners consent to mining development they:
…should be a major partner in delivering outcomes. This approach is a significant move away from royalty-based outcomes and is being promoted in mining and related industries where Traditional Owners seek joint venture agreements to provide services and undertake other activities to support development.
4.72
The negotiation of improved agreements in turn requires a strengthened knowledge base amongst traditional owner groups. The NNTC made the point that:
…the reality is that Aboriginal people are consulted and asked to make decisions in the context of extreme poverty, disadvantage and an economy from which they are largely excluded. As a result, proposals for development often involve an understandable level of community distrust and opposition.
4.73
The NNTC supported the view that:
…big project development will not work unless it is accompanied by a range of structural reforms to support Indigenous economic inclusion and traditional owner’s informed consent for development.
4.74
In relation to the issue of knowledge for informed consent, there is criticism from both proponent and traditional owner points of view about the effect of the NT Supreme Court’s Stockdale Decision of 1992 which requires traditional owners to agree to both proposed mineral exploration and mining at the same time. Traditional owners are not able to first agree to exploration, and then later refuse agreement on mining when they know the full details about proposed activities. In the words of Ms Stoll, this means that ‘traditional owners have to make a very important decision when they have the least amount of information’.
4.75
The Committee heard agreement that the post-Stockdale arrangement was unsatisfactory from the perspective of both traditional owner and mining proponents. Rectifying this situation would require amendments to the ALRA to enable traditional owners and proponents to negotiate agreements at both the exploration and mining stage.
4.76
The Office of Northern Australia (ONA) emphasised the need for traditional owners to have comprehensive technical data about their land:
Some landholders feel constrained in realising the economic potential of their land, at times, with limited access to mapping data sets that help describe the environment, infrastructure and services for their land. Multiple landholders and communities lack access to the technology and training to apply this information to best use their land.
4.77
A good example of the development of traditional owners’ expertise, complementing their existing knowledge of country, was highlighted by
Mr Rodger Barnes from the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) at the University of Queensland. CSRM research found that traditional owners ‘value the opportunity to provide professional services to mining companies within the domain of environmental management and rehabilitation’, and that they are ‘motivated by opportunities to participate in work meaningful to them as custodians of their land’.
4.78
Mr Barnes noted that ‘these outcomes are important steps in addressing underlying social, historical, and cultural factors contributing to poor
socio-economic conditions’ in remote communities. He stressed, however, that such communities still needed government assistance and that
‘fee-for-service will not replace or usurp the need for continued government funding’.
4.79
The NLC stated that:
Each stage of the minerals and energy resource development process (exploration and feasibility, construction, operations, mine closure and rehabilitation, and post-closure land use) affords opportunities for industry to engage with local Aboriginal businesses and labour.
But the NLC also observed that many mining projects only provided ‘entry level’ or low-skilled employment and that the ability of Aboriginal communities to take advantage of projects could be ‘described as severely constrained’. The Council therefore urged proponents and governments to work together to develop capacity building and training programs for traditional owners in mining areas, targeted at each stage of the project life, from exploration to rehabilitation.
4.80
The MCA provided a list of key attributes that should ideally be part of agreements between proponents and traditional owners:
specialised employment and training initiatives to recruit, retain and support career advancement of Indigenous employees
business development to support Indigenous business owners and entrepreneurs to secure supply and procurement contracts across the mining supply chain
assistance to enable Traditional Owners and Traditional Owner organisations (such as Prescribed Bodies Corporate) to develop specialist governance and strategic management skills necessary to discharge statutory duties and unlock enterprise development opportunities
social investment to address social determinants and improve quality of life and employment outcomes for Traditional Owners. Investments may include financial and in-kind support to support education outcomes, health improvements and cultural activities.
4.81
The Committee was told of an encouraging instance of a traditional owner group initiating its own mining operation:
In Nhulunbuy, the Gulkula training mine is being presented as 100 per cent Indigenous owned and operated. Winchelsea Island, just off Groote Eylandt in the archipelago there, is moving into manganese mining ... actual extraction—not just service provision but the other requirements of the individual mine sites as well. It's not just the ancillary service side of things that's being taken care of; it's direct mining opportunities as well...
4.82
A further example of a wholly Aboriginal owned business servicing the mining industry and using traditional expertise is Kakadu Native Plants, which has:
…successfully provided plants, undertaken rehabilitation works and carried out land management such as fuel reduction burns on the Ranger uranium mine and Jabiluka mineral lease.
Committee Comment
4.83
The Committee considers it to be abundantly clear that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples support the economic development of northern Australia. The majority of the land mass of the north is under some form of land rights or native title and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and are eager to leverage their land tenure and rights and see them translated into high quality economic, social and cultural outcomes. In so doing, they will contribute to the health and prosperity of their communities and to progress in the region as a whole.
4.84
As part of their efforts to participate in commercial and other activities, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples seek to adopt approaches which uphold their communities’ traditional laws and decision-making processes and which support custodianship and stewardship of country. Collective decision-making needs to be understood and respected by both governments and business as a key part of self-determination.
4.85
There are limits to the extent that conventional approaches to economic development in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, based on individual incentive and reward, can be effective. There is a need to support communities to explore strategies that look to wider horizons, that make use of traditional knowledge and help keep people on country, or at least connected to their land.
4.86
Despite the declining relative importance of pastoralism in Aboriginal communities, efforts by traditional owner groups to reorganise and rationalise pastoral activities should be encouraged. In relation to mining, the principle challenges are to ensure that traditional owners have the resourcing and capacity to negotiate good quality agreements with proponents, and to move beyond the passive receipt of royalties and into a broad-based role for communities and Aboriginal businesses in support services and even mining itself.
4.87
The Committee considers that there is growing potential in areas such as cultural enterprises and tourism, as well as environmental protection initiatives such as the savanna burning, land management, carbon abatement and renewable energy. These have the special feature of linking with the objectives of using traditional knowledge of country. They will not, however, always be market-based or provide full economic self-sufficiency, and will usually need to be accompanied by forms of government program assistance. For example, the Indigenous Rangers program has been a very successful initiative and could be expanded in scope, but is based on government funding. But the intangible personal and community benefits of this support will help obviate the need for costly government interventions if communities fall into dysfunction.
4.88
The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth, state and territory governments in northern Australia work with traditional owners to support research and development on community-based economic activities that use traditional knowledge and support care for country and connection with country. These should include, but not be restricted to, activities such as environmental protection, land management using traditional methods, fire control, carbon abatement and renewable energy.
4.89
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government provide enhanced support for the Indigenous Rangers program, including the provision of secure long-term funding to facilitate strategic planning for sustainable environmental outcomes.
4.90
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government, in cooperation with the states and territories in northern Australia, provide support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and traditional owners to work with mining proponents and pastoral interests to maximise long-term benefits from agreements, including employment and training strategies.
As recommended in A way forward: Final report into the destruction of Indigenous heritage sites at Juukan Gorge, this should include a review of the Native Title Act 1993, with the aim of addressing inequalities between traditional owners and development proponents in the agreement-making process, including:
current operation of the future act regime
adherence to the principles of Free, Prior and Informed Consent as set out in the UN Convention of the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP)
prohibition of ‘gag clauses’
making explicit the authority and responsibilities of PBCs and representative bodies
4.91
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government consider amendments to the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976 (Cth) to reverse the effect of the High Court’s Stockdale judgement and enable traditional owners and mining proponents to negotiate agreements at both the exploration and mining stages of mining projects.