Update Native title claims update

Active claims

Wirangu No.2, Wirangu No.3 and Wirangu No.2 Sea claim – Parts B and Nauo No.3

Consent determination February 2023.

Narungga Nation

Consent determination 14 March 2023.

Wilyakali No.1

Consent determination currently scheduled for June 2023.

Nauo/ Nauo No.4

Timetable for determination by second and third quarter of 2022/2023.

Ngadjuri No.2

What will happen in South Australia is we will have two voices; a Voice that is funded by the government, supported by the government, and provides advice to the government and a Voice by the people, for the people, to maintain lore and custom for Aboriginal people at a grassroots level.

South Australia has made history by officially becoming the first state in the country to pass the bill for an Indigenous Voice to Parliament.

The bill for the State Voice passed SA parliament in a special Sunday sitting on March 26, 2023. The rainy weather did not deter an estimated 5,000 South Australians from making their way to a partially blocked-off North Terrace to witness the historic event, which was broadcast on screens outside the Houses of Parliament.

How will it work?

Made up of elected local, regional, and remote Aboriginal representatives, the advisory body will have the ability to address state parliament and cabinet on issues affecting the lives of First Nations South Australians. 12 representatives from six groups will make up the State Voice, elected from local representatives, with an equal number of men and women.

Following a one-off round to establish the body later this year, elections for these representatives will be held alongside state elections. Though the Voice will have the ability to influence state laws, policies and programs, all final decisions will remain with the government of the day. $10 million has been budgeted across four years to set up the Voice and fund it.

What are the concerns of native title bodies?

SA Native Title Services (SANTS) has been vocal about the concerns of the native title holders we represent across the state. While we do support the principle of a Voice to SA Parliament, our major concern is that the State Voice will become a separate entity with the potential to erode and undermine existing First Nations leadership and cultural authority, leading to a lack of recognition and inclusion of native title groups (including Prescribed Bodies Corporate).

Specifically, the legislation creates a conundrum in that the proposed Voice (be it state or local), will be given legislative functions that are already being performed by Traditional Owner bodies. Only Traditional Owners have the responsibility and right to speak for issues impacting them, their Country, their community and their culture. Yet the proposed legislation would seek to give the Voice authority where there is none other than that bestowed by the State. It establishes a well-resourced, regional body to engage in matters of interest with little accountability or authority to or from First Nations.

There is a disregard and disrespect shown to First Nations SA with the undermining of each First Nations group and complexity created where there doesn’t need to be. Each First Nations group is the rights holder of their Country, and no one else should be given authority (especially by the Crown) to perform functions or make decisions about issues over that Country.

No First Nation of SA will wish to give up their hardwon native title rights and interests; their recognition as Traditional Owners, their cultural authority to speak for Country, to speak for community, to speak for culture and to speak on matters of interest to its members and common law holders. This cultural authority should be recognised and respected by the state government to build strong First Nations governance structures that are representative of Traditional Owners, instead of seeking to recognise a legislated body to perform functions already being performed by each First Nations group. Setting up another platform, the Local First Nations Voice is effectively a duplication of work, wasting valuable resources and time.

Furthermore, the establishment of Local First Nations Voices has the potential to create a false narrative about who can speak for Country, create confusion about responsibilities, and create uncertainty by potentially putting each First Nations group and the Local First Nations Voice at loggerheads. It would seem the state government is intent on creating division between Aboriginal people and each First Nation rather than investing in and strengthening First Nations leadership.

Article continued on page 18

Timetable for consent determination in second or third quarter of 2023.

Nauo No.2

Timetable for determination by second and third quarter of 2022/2023.

Yandruwandha Yawarrawarrka

Consent determination negotiations and programming orders in suspension pending outcome of negotiations.

Walka Wani Oodnadatta No.1 and No.2 and Arabana No.2

Judgment in appeal reserved.

Far West Coast (FWC) Sea claim Judgment reserved.

First Peoples of the River Murray and Mallee No.2

Consent determination negotiations and subject to programming orders.

First Nations of the South East No.2 and Ngarrindjeri – Part B

Mediation and timetable for consent determination in 2023.

First Nations of the South East No.1

Discussions regarding the effect of various grants on native title continue.

Malyankapa

Court orders regarding connection.

Compensation claims

Matters continue to be negotiated.