Privatise Aboriginal land rights? - the lessons from PNG

The PNG experience tells us that poor communities can be tricked out of their community assets by registration and privatisation arguments, and that a few business people from those communities - usurping the rights and assets of those communities - may benefit from their separate deals with big companies.

However the wiser heads in the PNG community remind us of the enormous social security and community benefits of retaining their central cultural institution of customary land. Andrew Lakau says that "the extended kinship system and customary land holdings are the only viable options to provide support and security to the needy in the various communities throughout PNG". Josepha Kanawi adds that "[Peoples'] economic independence ... is achieved only through being in affinity with their land ... [and] land groups are the source of authority for institutions of state and government" in Papua New Guinea.

Rob Welsh of the NSW Metropolitan Aboriginal Land Council has the better perspective, when he says, "home ownership and private business opportunities for our people is the way forward. However these programs should be in addition to, not instead of community based land rights, business ventures and services." Those doing best in Papua New Guinea (apart from the operators and robbers) are those who have kept their community land and developed opportunities in the cash economy.

The same mining companies, banks and their paid ideologues are pushing for the privatisation of Indigenous land in both Papua New Guinea and Australia. Beware of their phoney expressed concerns for Indigenous welfare. They have the same deceitful arguments, and similar disguised self-interest.