Footnotes

Chapter 2 - Provisions

[1]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 4.

[2]        New section 94D replaces existing section 136A, and covers the same subject.

[3]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 10.

[4]        This discretion would be retained under proposed section 87(5).

[5]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 32.

[6]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 32.

[7]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 47.

[8]        Item 39 would have the effect of saving the application of existing sections 203AE, AF and AG, for the purposes of any relevant matters that remain outstanding at the time of the commencement of the amendments.

[9]        Items 31 and 32.

Chapter 3 - Issues

[1]        See, for example, Northern Territory Government, submission 7, p. 1; Federal Court of Australia, Submission 1, p. 1.

[2]        Mr Tony McAvoy, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 19. The Council's substantive argument related to the burden of proof for proving an ongoing connection to land and the role this allegedly plays in denying 'right and proper' ascertainment of native title rights.

[3]        See, for example, the National Native Title Council, as per previous footnote. See also Torres Strait Regional Authority, Submission 5, pp 4–5 regarding funding for PBCs.

[4]        National Native Title Tribunal, Submission 3, p. 1.

[5]        Mr Graham Neate, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, pp 10–11.

[6]        National Native Title Tribunal, Submission 3, p. 5.

[7]        National Native Title Tribunal, Submission 3, p. 1.

[8]        Mr Graham Neate, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 9. The committee was subsequently informed by the Registrar of the federal Court, Mr Warwick Soden, that the Court intended to conduct the new scheme within its present budget, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 47.

[9]        National Native Title Tribunal, Submission 3, p. 2.

[10]      See, for example, National Native Title Tribunal, Submission 3, p. 6.

[11]      Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Inquiry into the Native Title Amendment Bill 2006 [Provisions], Minority Report of the Australian Labor Party and the Australian Greens, pp 63, 65.

[12]      Mr Warwick Soden, Submission 1, pp 1–2.

[13]      Mr Warwick Soden, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 49.

[14]      Mr Warwick Soden, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 49.

[15]      Mr Warwick Soden, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 56.

[16]      Mr Warwick Soden, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 49.

[17]      Mr Warwick Soden, Submission 1, p. 1. These are available on the Department's website at http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/RWP73DB7F92B8E8CE99CA25723A00803C08#submissions.

[18]      Comments from the Australian Human Rights Commission are dealt with later in this chapter.

[19]      Torres Strait Regional Authority, Submission 5.

Additional Comments by Liberal Senators

[1] Committee report, p. 11.

[2] Mr Jeffrey Murphy, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 43.

[3] Federal Court of Australia, Submission 1, p. 2.

[4] Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 51.

[5] Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 26.

[6] NNTT, Submission 3, p. 1.

[7] Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 54. Mr Soden said that the proposed Practice Note will be 'very comprehensive' and 'will give an explanation of what is expected and will list a whole lot of options that the court will focus upon'.

[8] s. 111 Native Title Act 1993.

[9] s. 110 Native Title Act 1993.

[10] In his submission for example, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner (ATSISJC) notes that 'it is possible that the Court could chose a mediator who is entirely inappropriate for the Indigenous claimants. For example, if a mediator has intimate knowledge of the area and the claimant group, or other Indigenous groups residing in the area, then he or she may run the mediation with a predetermined outcome in mind'.

[11] ATSISJC, Submission 8, p. 16.

[12] NNTT Submission 3, p. 12.

[13] Native Title Amendment Bill 2009, Explanatory Memorandum  para 1.78.

[14] NNTT, Submission 3, p. 13.

[15] Native Title Amendment Bill 2009, Explanatory Memorandum, para 1.36.

[16] Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 3.

[17] Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009 p. 4.

Additional Comments from the Australian Greens

[1] Preamble to the Native Title Act 1993.

[2] Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 20.

[3] Justice Robert French, Lifting the burden of native title – some modest proposals for improvement, Federal Court, Native Title User Group, Adelaide, 9 July 2008, p. 1. (emphasis added).

[4] Australian Human Rights Commission, submission 8, p. 4.

[5] Hon. Robert McClelland MP, Second Reading speech, House Hansard 19 March 2009.

[6] Australian Human Rights Commission, submission 8, p. 48.

[7] Mr Tony McAvoy, NNTC, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 23.

[8] Mr Tony McAvoy, NNTC, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 23.

[9] Mr Tony McAvoy, NNTC, Committee Hansard, 16 April 2009, p. 20.

[10] Justice Robert French, Lifting the burden of native title – some modest proposals for improvement,   Federal Court, Native Title User Group, Adelaide, 9 July 2008, pp 11–12.

[11] AHRC, submission 8, p. 49.

[12] AHRC, submission 8, p. 50.

[13] AHRC, submission 8, p. 51.

[14] AHRC, submission 8, p. 51.

[15] Justice Robert French, Lifting the burden of native title – some modest proposals for improvement, Federal Court, Native Title User Group, Adelaide, 9 July 2008, p. 11.

[16] AHRC, submission 8, p. 50.

[17] AHRC, submission 8, p. 50.