Mr ADAMSON - 1997-02-27
The opposition and the Northern Land Council have so far denied that the Larrakia native title claim is a grab for compensation, and or for control over public recreational areas. We heard some evidence to the contrary in debate in the House yesterday. Is the minister able to provide the House with any new evidence which shows clearly that in fact the Larrakia claimants are seeking compensation at taxpayers' expense as well as firm control over the future of public land in the Darwin-Palmerston region as part of their wide-ranging claim?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the member for Casuarina would be only too aware that areas under the Larrakia claim include such popular and well-developed spots as Casuarina Coastal Reserve, East Point Reserve, Vesteys Beach, Mindil Beach, the Mindil Beach market site, Marlow Lagoon, many of the popular fishing spots around Darwin and a whole range of other sites that have been developed at the expense of the taxpayer. The taxpayer is faced now with the prospect of either having to pay for continued use of and access to these areas, or paying heavy compensation to enable the claimants to be satisfied.
Members opposite have adopted a mealy-mouthed attitude in response to our calls for them to stand up for Territorians and oppose claims over such areas, the concept of payment for continued use of the areas and the prospect of paying compensation for them. Most importantly, they have failed ...
Mr Ah Kit interjecting.
Mr REED: ... to support our calls on the federal government to have the legislation changed, enabling these areas, developed and enjoyed by the taxpayer, to be safeguarded.
The member for Arnhem continues to interject. I expect that the Labor Party will continue to refuse to support the rights of all Territorians to gain access to these areas, notwithstanding the ample evidence that has been provided ...
Mr Bailey: Tell the truth, Michael.
Mr REED: ... that clearly demonstrates that that is the intent of these claims.
I will pick up the interjection from the member for Wanguri. I am telling the truth. People listening to this broadcast will be interested in this very important matter and their continued access to areas which they have paid taxes to have developed. The evidence has been ample. The failure, for example, of the NLC and the claimants to reject the notion of compensation or payments for access to those areas is evidence in itself.
Consider the demands on developers. The claimants wanted a 10% share in a company and $250 000 up-front from a developer. The developer would have been unable to have freehold title to the land the development would have occupied. That is a clear demonstration
Page 1974
that the claimants are after money, not after so-called native title rights. The areas claimed are all highly-developed and highly-utilised and are areas from which they believe the maximum dollars can be extracted.
I have a document that I am pleased to be able to table today. It may finally convince the Leader of the Opposition and members opposite of the very serious nature of the claims made by the Larrakia people and the extent of those claims. It indicates what they expect to be able to get out of the taxpayer. The Leader of the Opposition and the interjecting member for Wanguri may read this document. I hope it will have a deep impact on them, such that they may finally recognise the imposition that is facing Territorians in relation to this claim. I quote from item 5.1 of this document which was part of an agreement that the Northern Land Council was pursuing in relation to the rights of claimants and their native title claims over Darwin:
The following is a listing of substantive issues that the parties intend to address during the negotiation of
the agreement-in-principle. The list is not intended to be restrictive and may be added to by agreement
between the parties.
The first item, the first demand, that the NLC has put forward relates to compensation:
Compensation in respect of past and future use of the land and waters, including compensation to the Larrakia
in the form of rights and interests to land and waters, or in financial form.
That is a clear indication that taxpayers' dollars are the target of this claim, not the traditional rights. There is a long list here ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: Clearly, the member for Wanguri does not want Territorians to hear the scope ...
Mr Bailey: Why don't you tell the truth?
Mr REED: I am telling the truth.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: This is the list of demands that the NLC wanted to negotiate in relation to native title claims over Darwin. It was a matter of some discussion between the government, at officer level, and the Northern Land Council and ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Page 1975
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Nhulunbuy is on a warning.
Mr REED: Why is it that the Labor Party gets so upset ...
Mr Ah Kit: You have had your officers talking ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask honourable members on the opposition benches to refrain from loud interjection. You may interject, but I expect it to be at a reasonable level. It is very difficult for people listening to this on radio to understand or hear what the minister is saying when that level of interjection is occurring.
Mr REED: People listening to the broadcast would be wondering why the Labor members become so upset when information of this kind is provided to them, bearing in mind the difficulty that we have in getting information out of the Northern Land Council about the real intention of the native title claim. These were matters that were being discussed between the Northern Land Council and officers of government until late last year when along came the massive native title claim over all of the public areas of Darwin, Palmerston, Humpty Doo etc. It was at that time that the Northern Territory government said that enough was enough. The claim was out of hand. The demands were becoming more and more extreme ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr REED: People listening to the broadcast want to know what the demands are. Let them hear them. I shall quote further from the document, picking out a few of the items for the interest of honourable members: `... future use of land and waters by the parties ... Certainty and finality of the final agreement ...' That relates to ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr REED: The member for Wanguri will be heard by ...
Mr Bailey: We want to sort out certainties. That is what your ...
Mr REED: ... the people listening to this broadcast. They would be more concerned, I am sure, to hear that the Larrakia ...
Mr Bailey: The sky is falling down.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: ... as one of their demands, want a share of taxation. The Larrakia want the role of the Commonwealth. The Larrakia want the management of waters. The Larrakia,
Page 1976
through the NLC, want subsurface ownership. That means that they want control of the water resources that the people of Darwin and its rural areas have access to at present free of charge - artesian waters that currently do not have any encumbrance.
Mrs Hickey: Rubbish!
Mr REED: The Leader of the Opposition says it is rubbish. What then is her interpretation of subsurface ownership?
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will withdraw that comment.
Mr BAILEY: Mr Speaker, I withdraw it.
Mr REED: Mr Speaker, another of the demands in this document is resource revenue sharing - that is, the Larrakia, through the Northern Land Council, want to have their hands on the natural resources of the Northern Territory. They want to apply their own level of taxation.
This Northern Land Council document demonstrates clearly once and for all precisely what the claimants are after, precisely what the native title issues mean and precisely what the risks are to the public areas and to the future development of the Northern Territory, and the constraints that would be placed on the economic development of the Northern Territory, on job creation and, most importantly and probably of greatest concern to Territorians, on the continuance of the lifestyle that we like to enjoy.
Mr Bailey: How are you going to solve it?
Mr REED: The honourable member for Wanguri, John Bailey, asks ...
Mr Bailey: Give us an answer. Give us a solution.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: How do we stop it?
Mr Bailey: Yes, how do you stop it?
Mr REED: You can be a part of ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The minister will please resume his seat. The member for Wanguri is also on a warning. I am fast losing my patience with the front bench of the opposition.
Mr BELL: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I request that you insist that the Deputy Chief Minister refer to members of this Assembly in the way that standing orders requires and not directly by name.
Page 1977
Mr SPEAKER: I support that. In fact, the minister should always refer to members by their correct title. I remind the member for MacDonnell also that, once again this morning, he has referred to myself as the Deputy Speaker.
Mr BELL: My sincere apologies, Mr Speaker.
Mr REED: Mr Speaker, I know it galls honourable members opposite to have this information provided to Territorians. Why don't they want people to know what they are up for? Why don't they want them to know what restrictions will be placed on them? Why will they not support the government in opposing the NLC's being able to obtain access to tax moneys that people pay and being able to gain control over subsurface rights?
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: The member for Wanguri has a short memory.
Mr REED: Why do you want Territory taxpayers to have to pay again for all ...
Mr Bailey: Why can't you sit down and talk?
Mr REED: He wants us to sit down and talk! This is the line they have been taking for the last week, telling us we should negotiate. To negotiate, 2 important points must be established. Firstly, it concedes that native title exists, notwithstanding that it has not yet been proven or established in any way whatsoever. There is only one thing to negotiate and that is how much the taxpayer will pay for continued access to mineral resources, to oil and gas resources, for use of the beaches and for access to the boat ramps to go fishing. Taxpayers have already paid, through their own hard-earned money and their taxes, to develop those areas. It is about time members opposite stood up for Territorians.
The member asked what we should do about it. I will tell him what he can do about it. He can start by standing up for Territorians. He can support the government in saying that he opposes this native title claim over all these facilities and areas of Darwin and those points that have been raised in this document. Secondly, he can stand up for Territorians by saying he will not stand by, as he has in the past ...
Mrs HICKEY: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The member who asked the question asked it of the Deputy Chief Minister. He did not ask it of the member for Wanguri. The Deputy Chief Minister has been on his feet for nearly a quarter of an hour and he is now interrogating my colleague. I believe he should be asked to sit down.
Mr SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition has a point. Some 15 minutes have been spent on this answer, which is quite a long time in Question Time. I ask all ministers to keep answers to a minimum. I point out also that, with fewer interjections, this question would have been answered in possibly half the time. I ask the minister to wind up as quickly as possible.
Mr REED: The question I am answering at the moment is one asked by the member for Wanguri across the floor: `What can you do about it?' The point I am reminding him of is that, as a representative in this parliament of Territorians, he can stand up and oppose the
Page 1978
concept and the demands to pay for continued use of these areas. He can oppose the payment of compensation that Territorians will have to make from their own pockets to be able to continue to enjoy these facilities. He can join this government in approaching the Commonwealth government to have it change the native title legislation to ensure that these facilities, which we have developed and which we enjoy, will not be encumbered and will be removed from native title claim. If he wants to know what to do, it is very simple. He should state his case, support the motion debated last week, support Territorians, oppose native title, say he will not have anything to do with the payment of compensation, and say that he will support us in our approaches to the Commonwealth to have all this nonsense cleared away, enabling us to get on with developing the Territory and to continue to enjoy the lifestyle that we want, unencumbered by native title.
Page 1979
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the member for Casuarina would be only too aware that areas under the Larrakia claim include such popular and well-developed spots as Casuarina Coastal Reserve, East Point Reserve, Vesteys Beach, Mindil Beach, the Mindil Beach market site, Marlow Lagoon, many of the popular fishing spots around Darwin and a whole range of other sites that have been developed at the expense of the taxpayer. The taxpayer is faced now with the prospect of either having to pay for continued use of and access to these areas, or paying heavy compensation to enable the claimants to be satisfied.
Members opposite have adopted a mealy-mouthed attitude in response to our calls for them to stand up for Territorians and oppose claims over such areas, the concept of payment for continued use of the areas and the prospect of paying compensation for them. Most importantly, they have failed ...
Mr Ah Kit interjecting.
Mr REED: ... to support our calls on the federal government to have the legislation changed, enabling these areas, developed and enjoyed by the taxpayer, to be safeguarded.
The member for Arnhem continues to interject. I expect that the Labor Party will continue to refuse to support the rights of all Territorians to gain access to these areas, notwithstanding the ample evidence that has been provided ...
Mr Bailey: Tell the truth, Michael.
Mr REED: ... that clearly demonstrates that that is the intent of these claims.
I will pick up the interjection from the member for Wanguri. I am telling the truth. People listening to this broadcast will be interested in this very important matter and their continued access to areas which they have paid taxes to have developed. The evidence has been ample. The failure, for example, of the NLC and the claimants to reject the notion of compensation or payments for access to those areas is evidence in itself.
Consider the demands on developers. The claimants wanted a 10% share in a company and $250 000 up-front from a developer. The developer would have been unable to have freehold title to the land the development would have occupied. That is a clear demonstration
Page 1974
that the claimants are after money, not after so-called native title rights. The areas claimed are all highly-developed and highly-utilised and are areas from which they believe the maximum dollars can be extracted.
I have a document that I am pleased to be able to table today. It may finally convince the Leader of the Opposition and members opposite of the very serious nature of the claims made by the Larrakia people and the extent of those claims. It indicates what they expect to be able to get out of the taxpayer. The Leader of the Opposition and the interjecting member for Wanguri may read this document. I hope it will have a deep impact on them, such that they may finally recognise the imposition that is facing Territorians in relation to this claim. I quote from item 5.1 of this document which was part of an agreement that the Northern Land Council was pursuing in relation to the rights of claimants and their native title claims over Darwin:
The following is a listing of substantive issues that the parties intend to address during the negotiation of
the agreement-in-principle. The list is not intended to be restrictive and may be added to by agreement
between the parties.
The first item, the first demand, that the NLC has put forward relates to compensation:
Compensation in respect of past and future use of the land and waters, including compensation to the Larrakia
in the form of rights and interests to land and waters, or in financial form.
That is a clear indication that taxpayers' dollars are the target of this claim, not the traditional rights. There is a long list here ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: Clearly, the member for Wanguri does not want Territorians to hear the scope ...
Mr Bailey: Why don't you tell the truth?
Mr REED: I am telling the truth.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: This is the list of demands that the NLC wanted to negotiate in relation to native title claims over Darwin. It was a matter of some discussion between the government, at officer level, and the Northern Land Council and ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Page 1975
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Nhulunbuy is on a warning.
Mr REED: Why is it that the Labor Party gets so upset ...
Mr Ah Kit: You have had your officers talking ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask honourable members on the opposition benches to refrain from loud interjection. You may interject, but I expect it to be at a reasonable level. It is very difficult for people listening to this on radio to understand or hear what the minister is saying when that level of interjection is occurring.
Mr REED: People listening to the broadcast would be wondering why the Labor members become so upset when information of this kind is provided to them, bearing in mind the difficulty that we have in getting information out of the Northern Land Council about the real intention of the native title claim. These were matters that were being discussed between the Northern Land Council and officers of government until late last year when along came the massive native title claim over all of the public areas of Darwin, Palmerston, Humpty Doo etc. It was at that time that the Northern Territory government said that enough was enough. The claim was out of hand. The demands were becoming more and more extreme ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr REED: People listening to the broadcast want to know what the demands are. Let them hear them. I shall quote further from the document, picking out a few of the items for the interest of honourable members: `... future use of land and waters by the parties ... Certainty and finality of the final agreement ...' That relates to ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr REED: The member for Wanguri will be heard by ...
Mr Bailey: We want to sort out certainties. That is what your ...
Mr REED: ... the people listening to this broadcast. They would be more concerned, I am sure, to hear that the Larrakia ...
Mr Bailey: The sky is falling down.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: ... as one of their demands, want a share of taxation. The Larrakia want the role of the Commonwealth. The Larrakia want the management of waters. The Larrakia,
Page 1976
through the NLC, want subsurface ownership. That means that they want control of the water resources that the people of Darwin and its rural areas have access to at present free of charge - artesian waters that currently do not have any encumbrance.
Mrs Hickey: Rubbish!
Mr REED: The Leader of the Opposition says it is rubbish. What then is her interpretation of subsurface ownership?
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will withdraw that comment.
Mr BAILEY: Mr Speaker, I withdraw it.
Mr REED: Mr Speaker, another of the demands in this document is resource revenue sharing - that is, the Larrakia, through the Northern Land Council, want to have their hands on the natural resources of the Northern Territory. They want to apply their own level of taxation.
This Northern Land Council document demonstrates clearly once and for all precisely what the claimants are after, precisely what the native title issues mean and precisely what the risks are to the public areas and to the future development of the Northern Territory, and the constraints that would be placed on the economic development of the Northern Territory, on job creation and, most importantly and probably of greatest concern to Territorians, on the continuance of the lifestyle that we like to enjoy.
Mr Bailey: How are you going to solve it?
Mr REED: The honourable member for Wanguri, John Bailey, asks ...
Mr Bailey: Give us an answer. Give us a solution.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: How do we stop it?
Mr Bailey: Yes, how do you stop it?
Mr REED: You can be a part of ...
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The minister will please resume his seat. The member for Wanguri is also on a warning. I am fast losing my patience with the front bench of the opposition.
Mr BELL: A point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker! I request that you insist that the Deputy Chief Minister refer to members of this Assembly in the way that standing orders requires and not directly by name.
Page 1977
Mr SPEAKER: I support that. In fact, the minister should always refer to members by their correct title. I remind the member for MacDonnell also that, once again this morning, he has referred to myself as the Deputy Speaker.
Mr BELL: My sincere apologies, Mr Speaker.
Mr REED: Mr Speaker, I know it galls honourable members opposite to have this information provided to Territorians. Why don't they want people to know what they are up for? Why don't they want them to know what restrictions will be placed on them? Why will they not support the government in opposing the NLC's being able to obtain access to tax moneys that people pay and being able to gain control over subsurface rights?
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: The member for Wanguri has a short memory.
Mr REED: Why do you want Territory taxpayers to have to pay again for all ...
Mr Bailey: Why can't you sit down and talk?
Mr REED: He wants us to sit down and talk! This is the line they have been taking for the last week, telling us we should negotiate. To negotiate, 2 important points must be established. Firstly, it concedes that native title exists, notwithstanding that it has not yet been proven or established in any way whatsoever. There is only one thing to negotiate and that is how much the taxpayer will pay for continued access to mineral resources, to oil and gas resources, for use of the beaches and for access to the boat ramps to go fishing. Taxpayers have already paid, through their own hard-earned money and their taxes, to develop those areas. It is about time members opposite stood up for Territorians.
The member asked what we should do about it. I will tell him what he can do about it. He can start by standing up for Territorians. He can support the government in saying that he opposes this native title claim over all these facilities and areas of Darwin and those points that have been raised in this document. Secondly, he can stand up for Territorians by saying he will not stand by, as he has in the past ...
Mrs HICKEY: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The member who asked the question asked it of the Deputy Chief Minister. He did not ask it of the member for Wanguri. The Deputy Chief Minister has been on his feet for nearly a quarter of an hour and he is now interrogating my colleague. I believe he should be asked to sit down.
Mr SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition has a point. Some 15 minutes have been spent on this answer, which is quite a long time in Question Time. I ask all ministers to keep answers to a minimum. I point out also that, with fewer interjections, this question would have been answered in possibly half the time. I ask the minister to wind up as quickly as possible.
Mr REED: The question I am answering at the moment is one asked by the member for Wanguri across the floor: `What can you do about it?' The point I am reminding him of is that, as a representative in this parliament of Territorians, he can stand up and oppose the
Page 1978
concept and the demands to pay for continued use of these areas. He can oppose the payment of compensation that Territorians will have to make from their own pockets to be able to continue to enjoy these facilities. He can join this government in approaching the Commonwealth government to have it change the native title legislation to ensure that these facilities, which we have developed and which we enjoy, will not be encumbered and will be removed from native title claim. If he wants to know what to do, it is very simple. He should state his case, support the motion debated last week, support Territorians, oppose native title, say he will not have anything to do with the payment of compensation, and say that he will support us in our approaches to the Commonwealth to have all this nonsense cleared away, enabling us to get on with developing the Territory and to continue to enjoy the lifestyle that we want, unencumbered by native title.
Page 1979
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016