Comments on: Land rights before breakfast http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2007/08/16/land-rights-before-breakfast/ a linguist without a language Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:47:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Long Road » Legislative ‘Debate’ http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2007/08/16/land-rights-before-breakfast/comment-page-1/#comment-439 Long Road » Legislative ‘Debate’ Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:24:04 +0000 http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2007/08/16/land-rights-before-breakfast/#comment-439 [...] and coming clean about the real ‘problem’ for Aboriginal communities: land rights! See this post by Jangari. This administration, and all of the Ministers for Indigenous Affairs that have held the post under [...] [...] and coming clean about the real ‘problem’ for Aboriginal communities: land rights! See this post by Jangari. This administration, and all of the Ministers for Indigenous Affairs that have held the post under [...]

]]> By: Jane http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2007/08/16/land-rights-before-breakfast/comment-page-1/#comment-440 Jane Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:25:28 +0000 http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2007/08/16/land-rights-before-breakfast/#comment-440 <b>Normalisation</b> Check out yesterday's Hansard, and you can see why Tangentyere might be worried. Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia) (11.59 pm)... Will the government guarantee that, if it exercises the power either to resume or forfeit the leases, they will then be used exclusively for the benefit of Aboriginal people and they will only be used for that? Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory—Minister for Community Services) (12.00 pm)—The intention would be that, if you would look at any other suburb in Australia, that would be the circumstances of the lease arrangements. It would be the same as Mawson or Belconnen in the Australia Capital Territory. There will be no difference. They will just be like normal suburbs. Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia) (12.00 pm)—That provides the answer but it is not a satisfactory answer. In other words, you are making no guarantees when you take away these people’s land, because that is what you are doing. Let us be clear: that is why Tangentyere council and the members of that community said, ‘No, we won’t hand over the leases because we do not want to hand over the hard fought for control of our land.’ What you are saying—if I have interpreted you correctly, and again I am happy if I am wrong—is that it will not now be for the benefit of Aboriginal people. You are going to treat those lands like any other suburb. That is what you just said. You have answered the question but it is a totally unsatisfactory answer and I think the community, when hearing that answer, will be extremely distressed. That is why they did not want to hand over the leases in the first place and it is why they said no. You would not negotiate; they were prepared to negotiate. What you have just said is exactly what they are scared of. Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory—Minister for Community Services) (12.02 pm)—...I do not want to get into a debate about what is in the wider benefit, but I would have thought that, yes, it is normalisation. We stand by that. It will be just an ordinary place where people live, not a dark place that is completely different from the surrounding suburbs because of some particular difference in the way that it is governed. ---- Elsewhere in it Scullion says that, of course if a traditional owner was being a nuisance the Government could throw the TO off the lease, and I think also that they could sublease the land to non-Aboriginal people and businesses. Normalisation

Check out yesterday’s Hansard, and you can see why Tangentyere might be worried.

Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia) (11.59
pm)… Will the government guarantee that, if it exercises the power either to resume or forfeit the leases, they will then be used exclusively for the benefit of Aboriginal people and they will only be used for that?

Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory—Minister
for Community Services) (12.00 pm)—The intention would be that, if you would look at any other suburb in Australia, that would be the circumstances of the lease arrangements. It would be the same as Mawson or Belconnen in the Australia Capital Territory. There will be no difference. They will just be like normal suburbs.

Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia) (12.00 pm)—That provides the answer but it is not a satisfactory answer. In other words, you are making no guarantees when you take away these people’s land, because that is what you are doing. Let us be clear: that is why Tangentyere council and the members of that community said, ‘No, we won’t hand over the leases because we do not want to hand over the hard fought for control of our land.’ What you are saying—if I have interpreted you correctly, and again I am happy if I am
wrong—is that it will not now be for the benefit of Aboriginal people. You are going to treat those lands like any other suburb. That is what you just said. You have answered the question but it is a totally unsatisfactory answer and I think the community, when hearing that answer, will be extremely distressed. That is why they did not want to hand over the leases in the first place and it is why they said no. You would not negotiate; they were prepared to negotiate. What you have just said is exactly what they are scared of.

Senator SCULLION (Northern Territory—Minister for Community Services) (12.02 pm)—…I do not want to get into a debate about what is in the wider benefit, but I would have thought that, yes, it is normalisation. We stand by that. It will be just an ordinary place where people live, not a dark place that is completely different from the surrounding suburbs because of some particular difference in the way that it is governed.
—-
Elsewhere in it Scullion says that, of course if a traditional owner was being a nuisance the Government could throw the TO off the lease, and I think also that they could sublease the land to non-Aboriginal people and businesses.

]]>