Sentences with phrase «economic and social development of»

Native Title Representative Bodies and Prescribed Bodies Corporate are the major entities through which the economic and social development of native title groups will occur.

Chapter one of the Report seeks to develop a human rights framework for economic and social development of Indigenous people based on their distinct identity.

The failure to co-ordinate the goals of native title negotiations with the State's strategies to address the economic and social development of Indigenous people not only isolates the native title process from broader policy objectives; it limits the capacity of those broader policies to achieve their objective of addressing the economic and social conditions of Indigenous people's lives.

The failure to co-ordinate the goals of native title negotiations with the State's strategies to address the economic and social development of Indigenous people generally not only isolates the native title process from broader policy objectives; it limits the capacity of those broader policies to achieve their objective of addressing the economic and social conditions of Indigenous people's lives.

Having discussed a foundation for the economic and social development of Indigenous people based on the realisation of their human rights, chapter one proceeds to explore this notion of development in the context of native title.

Of particular concern is the effect of the Commonwealth's funding of native title system in determining whether the native title process can contribute to the economic and social development of Indigenous peoples.

Does the policy contribute to the economic and social development of the group in accordance with international human rights principles?

The failure to co-ordinate the goals of native title negotiations with the State's strategies to address the economic and social development of Indigenous people not only isolates the native title process from these broader policy objectives; it limits the capacity of the broader policy to achieve its objectives.

The ALRM as a relatively small NTRB does not currently have the capacity to comprehensively promote the economic and social development of the Indigenous people it represents.

For me as Social Justice Commissioner, specifically charged by statute to report on the effect of the Native Title Act upon the human rights of Indigenous Australians, the challenge is to develop a framework that recognises the distinctiveness of Indigenous identity as it is shaped by our adherence to traditional laws and customs, while at the same time seeking to maximise the capacity of native title to contribute to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups and the communities they live in.

A relationship that also needs to be considered in redirecting the native title system to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups is the effect this might have on the relationship between traditional owners and other members of their communities.

How does the native title system operate to improve or impede the economic and social development of the native title parties?

(4) It was also discussed in Chapter 3 how many state Governments are conducting native title negotiations within this narrow legal framework by focusing primarily on the settlement of native title claims rather than the economic and social development of the traditional owner group.

While this element presently dominates the native title process, there is another component that has the capacity to redirect native title towards the economic and social development of Indigenous people in a way which is consistent with their right to development.

Meaningful regional agreements are capable of addressing many of the outstanding land issues following the decision and provide a foundation for the economic and social development of Aboriginal communities in western New South Wales.

The two major policy responses to emerge from the reconciliation process which do facilitate the economic and social development of Indigenous people are, firstly, a «whole - of - government» approach to Indigenous policy and secondly, partnerships between government and Indigenous communities.

The failure to co-ordinate the goals of native title negotiations with the State's strategies to address the economic and social development of Indigenous people not only limits the native title process; it also limits the capacity of the broader policy to achieve its objectives.

Overall, the Native Title Report 2004 seeks to develop a framework that recognises the distinctiveness of Indigenous identity as it is shaped by an adherence to traditional laws and customs, while at the same time seeking to maximise the contribution that the native title system can make to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups and the communities they live in.

Articulating the underlying purpose of the negotiation process at a policy level in terms of the economic and social development of the traditional owner group would also clarify the relationship between negotiations at the three levels discussed above (negotiating consent determinations, negotiating agreements ancillary to a determination, and negotiating agreements which do not include a native title determination).

This enables the Aboriginal Land Council to use the land as leverage for the economic and social development of the local Aboriginal community.

Underlying this approach is an understanding of the opportunity that native title presents to governments guided by a broader policy direction towards the economic and social development of Indigenous people.

Some States, guided by a broader policy direction towards the economic and social development of traditional owner groups, proceed to negotiate with native title claim groups when they are certain that the group with whom they are negotiating are the traditional owners of the relevant land.

While the subject of native title negotiations may be quite different, ranging from consent determinations, agreements ancillary to a determination, to agreements which do not include a native title determination, the relationship between these three levels of negotiation is clarified by understanding their common underlying purpose - the economic and social development of the traditional owner group.

This has had the effect of limiting the capacity of native title law to provide a sound basis for the economic and social development of Indigenous people.

Nor do they necessarily direct native title negotiations to the economic and social development of Indigenous peoples.

Even in these circumstances, the assessment model limits the opportunity that negotiation offers governments keen to address the economic and social development of Indigenous people.

However, it is unlikely that the creation of capital alone will contribute to the economic and social development of Indigenous communities.

As indicated in my discussion of State and Territory policies (96) a preference for negotiation over litigation provides an invaluable opportunity for governments and traditional owner groups to ensure that native title agreements respond to policies directed to the economic and social development of the native title claim group rather than to the demands of the legal system.

That is, recognising Indigenous identity in all its complexity; and maximising the capacity of native title to contribute to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups and the communities they live in.

However, there are limitations to an approach in which agreements generated by the intersection of these two processes, land management and native title, are the only basis for the economic and social development of Indigenous people.

The above principles provide a sound basis on which to redirect the native title system towards the economic and social development of traditional owner groups.

A policy framework which aimed at the economic and social development of traditional owner groups and provided mechanisms to achieve it, would provide important parameters for this type of negotiation.

Where the economic and social development of traditional owner groups is a priority of government, the question is not whether negotiations will proceed, but how they will proceed.

The following issues were raised in the consultations as necessary to establishing relationships that can contribute to the economic and social development of the traditional owner group:

In the Northern Territory a similar commitment to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups is demonstrated in the way the government conducts native title negotiations.

However coordination of native title policy with broader Indigenous policies directed to economic and social development of Indigenous people should not weaken the capacity of specific Indigenous policy areas to pursue these goals.

As indicated in my previous discussions of State and Commonwealth policies, their preference for negotiation over litigation is the first step in ensuring that native title agreements can be directed to the broader policy goal of addressing the economic and social development of the native title claim group rather than the demands of the legal system.

This approach is comprehensive and could be further applied to ensure that the government's policy direction in all native title agreements is towards the economic and social development of Indigenous people.

These principles provide a foundation for redirecting the native title process towards the economic and social development of traditional owner groups.

Nevertheless NTRBs repeatedly raised some key issues that must be reappraised in order to direct native title to the economic and social development of the traditional owner groups in their areas.

In turn, native title can contribute to realising the objectives of the government's broader Indigenous affairs policy - the economic and social development of all Indigenous peoples.

And what is the role of government and industry in supporting the economic and social development of traditional owners?

Redirecting the native title system to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups might be effectively pursued through a regional strategy.

Redirecting the native title system to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups in the way suggested above requires considerable resources.

The principles recognise the distinctiveness of traditional owner identity, but also show how native title can be used to contribute to the economic and social development of traditional owner groups.

While the discussions in chapters 1 and 2 recommend increasing the governance options available to traditional owners, their capacity to contribute to the economic and social development of the traditional owner group will be expanded by integrating these structures into the local and regional tiers of governance.

The chapter suggests that failure to co-ordinate the goals of native title negotiations with these broader policies aimed at addressing the economic and social development of Indigenous people, not only limits the native title process; it also limits the capacity of the broader Indigenous policy to achieve its objectives.

Before going specifically to the principles it is important to note that the overarching goal of the principles - the economic and social development of the traditional owner group, is consistent with the goals of the broader Indigenous policy which posits a range of economic and social development outcomes as urgent priorities.

In order for this to happen these stakeholders must develop policies that put the economic and social development of the traditional owner group as a goal of the native title process.

Some respondents cautioned that when redirecting native title to the economic and social development of the traditional owner group care needs to be taken that people holding existing rights in those areas are not disadvantaged.