13th Jun 2017, 7:21 PM – Senate Native Title Amendment (Indigenous Land Use Agreements) Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Disappointment with consultation

The majority voted in favour of an amendment introduced by Labor Party Senator Malarndirri McCarthy (NT), which means the amendment was successful.

What was the amendment?

The amendment didn't change the bill at all, it just added words to the motion of whether to agree with the bill's main idea. In parliamentary jargon, it added the words below to the motion that the bill be read for a second time.

Wording of the amendment

At the end of the motion [to read the bill for a second time], add:

but the Senate expresses its disappointment with the regrettable way in which the Government has managed the process for consultation on the changes contained in the Bill, which has been a source of unnecessary angst, confusion and delay."

What is this bill all about?

The bill is a response to McGlade v Native Title Registrar & Ors [2017] FCAFC 10, which considers whether an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) can be registered with the Native Title Registrar even if not all named parties have signed. An Indigenous Land Use Agreement is a voluntary agreement that native title groups can negotiate with other parties in relation to the use of land and waters.

In that case, the Federal Court ruled that all parties must sign, which meant the Noongar Native Title agreement could not be registered (read more in ABC News).

This happened on 2 February, and the Government immediately moved to protect existing agreements with this bill. According to the explanatory memorandum, its purpose is to:

• confirm the legal status and enforceability of agreements which have been registered by the Native Title Registrar on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements without the signature of all members of a registered native title claimant (RNTC)
• enable registration of agreements which have been made but have not yet been registered on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements, and
• ensure that in the future, area ILUAs can be registered without requiring every member of the RNTC to be a party to the agreement.

More detail and background information is available in the bills digest.