Chaney drops native title tribunal

Please accept my resignation. I don't care to belong to any club that will have me as a member. Groucho Marx

And so it was with Indigenous Australia’s most respected eminent ally, Fred Chaney, adopting the lines made famous by Groucho Marx as he announced his resignation as director on the Native Title Tribunal (NTT).

I’ve taken liberty with a little poetic licence on Groucho’s quote and asserted a wishful exaggerated stance for Mr Chaney - knowing unquestionably that he is far too honourable a man to use such facetious language in the presence of others.

For a man who comes from a very influential family in Western Australia, Mr Chaney is rather unique in that he not only found Indigenous people good company prior to his illustrious career as a federal politician and during his lengthy term in office, but also continues a pro-active relationship with Indigenous people well after his exit from the nation’s capital.

I know many prominent non-Indigenous people, who start out in life wanting to improve the awful living conditions our mob have had to endure, but as soon as their public profile engages in an upward trajectory their interest level for all things Indigenous wanes and in most cases terminates - never to be revived again.

For instance - Mr Chaney did voluntary work with the Aboriginal Legal Service in Perth after graduating from Law School, as did Queensland Premier Peter Beattie as a young solicitor with the Aboriginal Legal Service in Brisbane, but to compare the interest level of both men in our mob today is like comparing chalk and cheese.

In addition to his appointment with the Tribunal, Mr Chaney served as co-chair of Reconciliation Australia Ltd from 2000 to 2005 and continues as a director on the Board. In 2005, he was appointed chair of Desert Knowledge Australia.

Entering the Senate in 1974, Mr Chaney was Leader of the Opposition in the Senate from 1983 until 1990 when he became the member for Pearce in the House of Representatives, a position he held until 1993. His ministerial appointments included Aboriginal Affairs, Social Security, and minister assisting the Minister for National Development and Energy.

My father, Jim, was Chairman of the National Aboriginal Conference (forerunner to ATSIC) and had many round table meetings with Mr Chaney when he was the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs. Dad, a staunch Labor Party card carrying member from the early 1960s, says without reservation that Mr Chaney was the best Minister for Aboriginal Affairs we have ever had.

I’ve no reason to question the high praise showered on the former Liberal Party minister from a man who’s seen them all come and go with varying degrees of success. Mr Chaney, from dad’s point of view, sits at the top of the political tree when handing out report cards on former ministers, for his commitment to advancing the cause of Indigenous Australians.

When I first heard of Mr Chaney’s resignation I must admit I was relieved to hear a man of his standing publicly declaring the NTT a failure in its delivery of just outcomes for traditional owners. And by this very courageous act Mr Chaney vindicated the general concern that we in the broader Indigenous community have had for a long time about the effectiveness of the NTT as an organisation.

Jenny Macklin, Labor's spokeswoman for Indigenous affairs, quoted in ABC Online on March 14, said the resignation of the respected Native Title Tribunal director highlights the problems in the current system.

"He has concerns like many Aboriginal people, many mining companies, that they need certainty in this system," she said. "The native title resolution system needs to be properly resourced so that everybody involved can get resolution as quickly and as fairly as possible."

As far as Mr Chaney was concerned the NTT failed to adequately address and resolve ILUA related matters that came before them.

So what is an ILUA?

An Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) is a voluntary agreement between a native title group and others about the use and management of land and water.

ILUAs allow people to negotiate flexible, pragmatic agreements to suit their particular circumstances. ILUAs can be made separately from the formal native title process but they may also be part of a native title determination. ILUAs can be formed on the following topics:

• native title holders agreeing to a future development;
• how native title rights coexist with the rights of other people;
• access to an area;
• extinguishment of native title; and
• compensation.

Sadly, anyone who has been involved with the native title registration process and Indigenous Land Use Agreements will know that the cards on native title are stacked firmly in the soft hands of mining company executives.

And why shouldn’t the mining company executives feel smug about their position on all land matters when the state and federal governments, the recipients of billions of dollars in mining taxes during the present resources boom, show bias towards them in legal disputes with traditional owners.

Federal Treasurer Peter Costello, on giving his ANZ Asia Keynote Address in Singapore, September 17, 2006, confirmed that more than $32 billion of new investment has occurred in the mining sector alone since the start of 2004.

Costello went on to say:

“This investment is increasing the capacity of the Australian economy and providing a basis for future economic growth. In particular, the increased capacity in the mining sector is expected to support an improvement in Australia’s export volumes.

“Australia is thus well positioned to reap the benefits of the global commodity boom. This boom has seen the terms-of-trade increase to its equal highest level since 1974.”

Costello, not one for being modest on his government’s achievements provides further evidence of their strength in the fiscal management of the country: “ABS data indicate that household net nominal wealth is now over $5 trillion, almost three times the level when our government first took office 10 years ago.”

It’s a pity he didn’t reveal the latest ABS statistics on Indigenous disadvantage in his paper. Now that would surely have made his well-heeled guests choke on their main course during his keynote address.

However, with the exception of a few successful ILUAs negotiated between traditional owners and mining company executives that produced some meaningful employment opportunities and financial outcomes for their respective communities, the vast majority of traditional land owners remain impoverished.

All these once proud custodians can do is sit helplessly by and watch as multi-national corporation bosses and their share holders grow fatter by the day from resources being mined around the clock from their land - often at great personal fear of potential desecration to their secret or sacred country.

Quenten Aguius, traditional owner, Adjahdura Land Traditional Owners Group - in an open letter on February 1, 2006 - made some pertinent points when he said:

The ILUA (Indigenous Land Use Agreement) process has failed the traditional owners of Adjahdura Land and is pulling the wool over the public's eyes.

Aboriginal people living on this country (Adjahdura Land: Yorke Peninsula, South Australia) are made up of:

• traditional owners - with cultural knowledge;
• traditional owners - with little cultural knowledge; and
• and non-traditional owners - with little or no cultural knowledge.

White fellas don't understand the difference between non-traditional and traditional owners. The direct descendants of the traditional owners are the true traditional owners of this country.

If you were to ask the majority of Aboriginal people on Adjahdura Land, traditional and non-traditional owners, what they thought of the Narungga Local Government ILUA, they would say they don't like it.

As traditional owners, we have been forced into a process we have little control over. Government want these ILUAs - they are pulling the strings, and the ILUA negotiating committees are like puppets - most are non-traditional owners of this country and they are doing the government's bidding.

This Narungga ILUA offers very little:

• one job for one black fella for five years;
• a majority white and non-traditional owner liaison committee will have their say about matters they know little about;
• if government want to build on the land (heritage protected or not), this ILUA gives local and state government the right to extinguish all traditional owners’ native title rights to the land, including building over our cultural sites; and
• government says this ILUA offers Aboriginal heritage protection, but the truth is, governments have recent history of not properly protecting our cultural sites - the Aboriginal Heritage Act is interpreted by government and a white minister who knows very little about Aboriginal culture and traditions.

Hopefully Mr Chaney’s recent resignation might force the government to rethink and make appropriate changes to the function of the NTT and in the process begin to restore confidence in organisation of Indigenous leaders like the Quenten Aguius of this world.

But then again perhaps that is wishful thinking on my part - but wouldn’t it be great if the NTT president, Graeme Neate; deputy presidents, The Hon. Christopher Sumner AM and John Sosso; full-time members, John Catlin, Graham Fletcher, Alistair McFarlane, Dan O’Dea, Dr Gaye Sculthorpe; and part-time members, Professor Laurence Boulle, Robert Faulkner PSM, Neville MacPherson and Ruth Wade  all follow Mr Chaney and adopt the line of Groucho Marx by saying:

Please accept my resignation. I don't care to belong to any club that will have me as a member.