Sentences with phrase «for traditional owner»

Native title agreement - making provides an opportunity for the traditional owner group to bring to the negotiation table its agenda for economic and social development.

If Traditional Owners lose this mechanism, the ability to secure benefits for Traditional Owner communities will be greatly diminished, which in turn will undermine efforts to close the gap.

This is particularly important where the funding situation is such that decisions made about which claims and other projects are to be given priority will have a great bearing on access to justice for some traditional owner groups.

Native title agreements can be utilised to define participatory rights for traditional owner groups, thus counteracting the limitations of the NTA and the native title determinations it produces.

While the Commonwealth has failed to envisage a development role for native title, the opportunity exists within native title negotiations and agreement - making to build the governance models necessary to achieve sustainable development for the traditional owner group.

Native title provides a limited framework for traditional owner groups to enter negotiations with companies seeking access to their land and resources.

Opportunities for Traditional Owner groups to engage in a future carbon emissions trading scheme has great potential to lift the economic base of Traditional Owner communities.

In those consultations I will be asking whether economic and social development for traditional owner groups is a goal that others are willing to support and, if so, how that support can best be provided.

These are: negotiation of a consent determinations; negotiation of an agreement which complements or extends consent determinations, and negotiation of agreements not containing native title determinations but which utilise the native title process to enable outcomes for traditional owner groups.

For instance, the issues of capacity development and governance for traditional owner groups may be addressed through avenues other than agreement making, such as programme funding.

There are few policy parameters to ensure consistent and dependable outcomes for traditional owner groups.

While there are many examples of native title agreements that do provide economic and social development outcomes for traditional owner groups these are not usually a result of applying native title policy goals, but rather come out of the intersection of native title with the States» other policy priorities.

Native title agreement making provides an opportunity for the traditional owner group to bring its agenda for economic and social development to the negotiation table.

access to land for traditional owner groups, ranging from management of national parks through to transferring land for economic development or cultural purposes:

In those consultations, the Commissioner will be asking whether economic and social development for traditional owner groups is a goal that others are willing to support and, if so, how that support can best be provided.

The Federal Court's management of native title cases affects the degree to which parties can pursue an approach promoting economic development for traditional owner groups.

As explained earlier, achieving economic development for traditional owner groups often requires a multi-disciplinary approach.

For instance, some asked why an agreement (e.g., for mining or exploration leading to economic development for the traditional owner group) should be made only with a traditional owner group, or with their interests paramount.

While this recognises the need for traditional owner consent, it qualifies this consent and allows for it to be overridden through compulsory acquisition.

PBC's provide a corporate structure for traditional owner political status.

Developing a native title policy consistent with these principles will enhance the capacity of the native title system to deliver real outcomes for traditional owner groups and the communities they live in.

State governments must be commended for funding negotiations and other initiatives that increase the potential for beneficial economic and social development outcomes for traditional owner groups.

The principles presented in this Report for promoting economic and social development through native title, seek to integrate the structures and values that are important to Indigenous peoples with the processes that will maximize the economic and social development outcomes for traditional owner groups.

This approach is exemplified in an enterprise concept for traditional owner economic development conceived by the Northern Queensland Land Council (NQLC).

The proposal in this report to redirect the native title system to economic and social development benefits for the traditional owner group needs to consider the divisions that this might generate if the living conditions for the rest of the community were not also being addressed.

Many respondents, including government, discussed how this process of managing the relationships which underpin decision making and governance can cause difficulties for traditional owner groups at the outset of the native title process.

The questions that I will be exploring through future consultations with government at all levels and with other stakeholders in the native title system is whether economic and social development for traditional owner groups is a goal that they want to achieve from the native title system, and if so, how it can best be done.

Like the legal tests that they replace, connection reports need to satisfy the two issues raised above if they are to provide a basis for encouraging economic and social development for the traditional owner group.

Native title needs to move beyond the legal framework into a policy framework that ensures consistent and dependable outcomes for traditional owner groups.

The principles discussed in chapter 2 outline the essential requirements for promoting economic and social development for traditional owner groups through the native title system.

This giant monolith of red rock, formed around 550 million years ago, holds incredible spiritual meaning for the traditional owners of the land and even a visitor can not help to be moved in it's presence.

This agreement allows for Traditional Owners to take their rightful place in the future development of the Cox Peninsula and greater Darwin.

These elements allow for traditional owners» full participation in all aspects of assessment, planning, implementation and monitoring of a project.

One respondent, who has been involved in providing workshops to NTRBs under the Capacity Building Program, said the overwhelming feedback from NTRBs was: «we're all right, but what about capacity building for traditional owners?»

If the goal of traditional owners is employment on a mine site, there must be a strategy to achieve this goal and an opportunity for education, employment and training for traditional owners so that they can benefit from their agreement.

One participant cautioned that, in seeking economic development outcomes for traditional owners, negotiators needed to be careful not to alienate any local «white community».

They also provide an opportunity for traditional owners and NTRBs to try different governance structures and processes before they establish formal structures that are more difficult to change.

Despite this, the changing and transforming nature of the relationship between Indigenous Australia and the broader Australian context provides greater opportunity for traditional owners to assess, design and modify governing structures to respond to their changing needs and values but most importantly to provide effective governance.

Respondents also noted that current funding for NTRBs does not adequately support NTRB functions under the NTA, let alone providing assistance for traditional owners to develop their capacity.

The role of non-Indigenous stakeholders, including government and industry, in social and economic development for traditional owners was discussed frequently during the consultations.

As you would know, before the Mabo decision in 1992, [6] Western Australia's land management system made no provision for traditional owners.

In my Native Title Report 2004, I suggested ways to improve social and economic outcomes for traditional owners from native title.

During the consultations, the issues raised, in relation to maximising economic opportunities for traditional owners through the agreement making process, included:

In some jurisdictions, the return of land was intended to provide an economic base for the traditional owners, but in no jurisdiction was this, the sole objective.

The outcome of these negotiations will have significant implications for the Traditional Owners, who have identified a number of different benefits that can be achieved through their newly recognised rights.

This respondent noted that a consulting role for traditional owners on government authorities and boards is not enough to ensure a sustainable economic livelihood.

The future act timeframes of the native title system create immense pressure for traditional owners and NTRBs to deliver outcomes.

Second, sustainability is broadly supported by governments and industry, providing a foundation for traditional owners to negotiate for more «sustainable» outcomes through native title.

For example, a negotiated mining agreement that includes favourable emp loyment opportunities for traditional owners, is unlikely to deliver actual employ ment unless it includes a training and education scheme which allows traditional owners to become work ready.

Formalising the links between traditional owners and the communities that they live in through local and regional structures will provide a framework to consider the issues that arise for traditional owners, both as members of the local community and as part of a larger network of traditional owners in the region.