MINING AMENDMENT BILL 2000 Second Reading Speech

Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches

MINING AMENDMENT BILL 2000

(This an uncorrected proof of the daily report. It is made available under the condition that it is recognised as such.)

Mr Speaker, in August 1999, the Senate disallowed the Territory’s alternative provisions for processing mining and petroleum applications over land where there may be co-existing native title. This included applications over pastoral lease land. Such leases cover about 50% of the Northern Territory. At the time, the Territory government considered that the prospects of having the alternative schemes approved were good. We had engaged in a process of intense consultations with the two large land councils and had gone out of our way to address every genuine issue they had raised. At the end of that process the points of disagreement were few. In respect of the remaining issues the Territory maintains that no responsible government could have acceded to the demands. An objective, informed analysis would confirm this position.

In rejecting the Territory’s schemes, the Senate ignored the warnings as to the consequences of having the federal process imposed on the states and territories. It also ignored the fact that the Territory’s schemes complied with the standards set by the federal parliament. By acting in this way the federal parliament has yet again failed to deliver for Aboriginal Territorians. By acting in this way the federal parliament has yet again failed regional Australia and has maintained its inglorious and spectacularly unsuccessful record on Aboriginal policy issues.

Following disallowance, the Territory attempted to ascertain whether anything could be done to address the alleged outstanding issues. It soon became apparent, however, that no matter how good the Territory scheme was, anything that moved away from the iconic ‘right to negotiate’ system would have been rejected. So be it. The federal parliament has forced the Territory to use its land administration procedures and looks like doing the same to the states. The federal parliament has forced the Native Title Act upon us and will be held responsible for the consequences.

The Territory will try to process development applications through the Commonwealth future act process to the best of our ability; not withstanding our belief that the system is dysfunctional and conceptually flawed. At last assessment it was estimated that it will take approximately 300 years to clear the nation-wide backlog of future act applications and that there is over 100 years of native title determinations awaiting consideration by the federal court. Administrative costs for just the federal government were in excess of $68m last year. There have been significant increases in these costs every year that the federal act has been in place.

This money should have been used for the benefit of Aboriginal people. It should be used to promote development and to generate employment. Instead it is being wasted on incredibly complex procedural requirements that create impediments to jobs. Where is the net result for Territory Aboriginals for their share of this expenditure? What have they gained from having fewer employment opportunities and less investment in the regions where they live?

Until the Senate rescinds its disallowance, the only way the Territory can deal with mining and petroleum applications is to use the right to negotiate process. The Territory has no choice but to proceed down this path. It can no longer continue to wait for an efficient, workable system. The Territory has not abandoned its alternative provisions. They remain in the statute books and would become operative as soon as the Senate stops opposing state and territory schemes. It remains the Territory’s firm view that sooner, rather than later, the Commonwealth process will fail and will need to be replaced or significantly modified. When this happens, returning land administration to the states and territories will be the first inevitable step.

When all steps to reverse the Senate’s appalling decision had been exhausted, the government directed that there be a review of the mining and petroleum acts to see if any adjustments had to be made to allow them to operate. A number of technical issues were identified and the current bills have been drafted to deal with these matters. Given that applications have to comply with the requirements of the Territory act under which they were made, as well as the requirements of the right to negotiate process, most of the amendments are to clarify or signpost which provisions of which act are to apply, and when. This is particularly necessary because the Territory’s alternative schemes still sit in the Mining Act and the Petroleum Act and currently operate in respect of some applications, for example applications for interests solely for infrastructure purposes.

Turning now to the bills themselves. The proposed amendments to the Mining Act and to the Mining Amendment Act (No.2) 1998 deal with the following issues:

· clarifies that the provisions dealing with extractive minerals apply to both pastoral lease land as well as other land in the Territory. The existence of these provisions does not preclude other methods of dealing with extractive material as allowed by the Native Title Act.

· the act requires public notification that applications have been made. The amendment provides that where the Territory’s alternative provisions are not operative, potential native title claimants are dealt with under the Native Title Act.

· specifies that the provision dealing with notification of a grant on terms different to those recommended by the tribunal, refers to the Territory’s Land and Mining Tribunal and not the national Native Title Tribunal. Hence this provision is only operative when the Territory’s alternative provisions apply.

· consolidates the transitional provisions to make them easier to follow. The transitional provisions provide how applications made under previous versions of the Mining Act can be upgraded to comply with new requirements imposed by subsequent amendments.

· streamlines the procedures to be used to activate applications that are being held in abeyance. They also put in place a procedure to bring the application of the transitional provisions to an end, at which time all new applications will have to be made in compliance of the procedures of the act as it stands at that time.

The provisions of the Petroleum Amendment bill deal with basically the same matters. That is, it has provisions clarifying the procedures for public notification and for simplifying the transitional procedures. There are specific provisions preserving the effect of notices of existing applications made over Aboriginal land within the meaning of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act (Northern Territory) 1976. The future act provisions of the Native Title Act do not apply to such applications and hence there is no need to disregard existing notices or to do anything to them in order to make them comply with the requirements of the amended act.

The proposed amendments to the mining and petroleum acts do not make any substantive changes to existing procedures. As noted previously, they are intended to clarify or simplify the steps that have to be taken when both Territory legislation and Commonwealth legislation is to be complied with.

I commend the bills to honourable members.

[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]