Sentences with phrase «land use agreements»

Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, Nineteenth Report of the Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, Second Interim Report for the s. 206 (d) Inquiry Indigenous Land Use Agreements, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, September 2001 («PJC Report»).

«There is overwhelming evidence that representative bodies are not receiving adequate funding to enable them to assist with the negotiation of ILUAs within the timeframes proponents require or prefer», Commonwealth Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, Second Interim Report for the s206 (d) Inquiry: Indigenous Land Use Agreements, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2001, p99.

While the native title system is able to deliver social and cultural outcomes through determinations of native title, Indigenous land use agreements (ILUAs) are one of the only ways in which native title holders can pursue economic development.

will facilitate the negotiation of more Indigenous Land Use Agreements and ensure that traditional owners and their representatives are adequately resourced for this task

Aurora also provides online resources for PBCs including information on Indigenous land use agreements, future acts, free prior and informed consent and decision making, and legal requirements for PBC consultation and decision making.

While the CERD acknowledged that the provisions introduced by the 1998 amendments to the Native Title Act regarding Indigenous Land Use Agreements, as well as the creation of the Indigenous Land Fund in 1995 to purchase land for Indigenous Australians unable to benefit from recognition of native title, the Commission also notes that the intended response to the Mabo decision by the Australian Government in 1992 has not yet been implemented in its entirety.

It also acknowledges the provisions introduced by the 1998 amendments to the Native Title Act regarding Indigenous Land Use Agreements, as well as the creation of the Indigenous Land Fund in 1995 to purchase land for indigenous Australians unable to benefit from recognition of native title.

The Report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund into Indigenous Land Use Agreements [7] noted that many representative bodies were unable to engage fully in the agreement - making process due to insufficient resources and recommended that more financial resources be made available to native title representative bodies for the negotiation of Indigenous Land Use Agreements.

I expressed concern about the use of connection reports in my submission to the Inquiry into Indigenous Land Use Agreements by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund.

For example, two of the key mechanisms provided by native title that can enable us to exercise self - determination are the negotiation of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) or native title settlement agreements; and the establishment of Prescribed Bodies Corporate (PBCs) that are set up to manage determined native title rights and interests and the distribution of any benefits secured.

Senior, C, «The Yandicoogina Process: A model for negotiating land use agreements», in Land, Rights, Laws: Issues of Native Title Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, February 1998.

The Agreements Discussion Paper suggests that «future act» agreements (Indigenous Land Use Agreements and s 31 agreements) would be required to be registered with the body.

Appendix 2: Submission of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner to the Inquiry into Indigenous Land Use Agreements by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander...

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund (the PJC) initiated an Inquiry into the operation and effectiveness of Indigenous Land Use Agreements in 2000.

The NSW Government supports the use of the Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA's) to provide a flexible and cooperative means of resolving native title issues to achieve fair and equitable outcomes for all parties.

Part of this chapter is based on my Submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, Inquiry Into Indigenous Land Use Agreements (PJC Inquiry), August 2001.

Appendix 2: Submission of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner to the Inquiry into Indigenous Land Use Agreements by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund

Attorney - General's Department, Submission to the Inquiry Into Indigenous Land Use Agreements by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, Number 38, p33.

1995 - No. 43 Handling of Claims to Native Title 1998 - No. 66 Compliance with new procedures under the Commonwealth's Native Title Act 1998 - No. 77 Native Title Legislation 1999 - No. 23 Native Title and Indigenous Land Use Agreements 2001 - No. 06 Partnerships: A New Way of Doing Business with Aboriginal People

The nature of this impact on the protection of native title was explained by Darryl Pearce, Chief Executive Officer of the Noongar Land Council before the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund during their Inquiry into Indigenous Land Use Agreements (the «PJC Inquiry»)[22]:

Indigenous Land Use Agreements 6.

Our survey questions were designed to identify the degree of traditional owner understanding of the policy and legislative contexts of land use agreements, as well as ascertaining the extent of their knowledge about programs and funding to support land agreements.

The Commission notes that there are existing mechanisms for sharing agreements, such as the Agreement, Treaties and Negotiated Settlements Project, hosted by Melbourne University, and the National Native Title Tribunal's Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs).

Under the native title regime for example, traditional owners can be parties to Indigenous Land Use Agreements.

state and local governments where Indigenous land use agreements and other native title agreements have been negotiated; and

«The State should encourage and promote the use of agreements - protocols, regional heritage agreements, memoranda of understanding and Indigenous Land Use Agreements - as part of moving towards greater use of agreement to resolve native title issues», Report, p89.

Recent Native Title Reports recognise that there have been a number of determinations of native title as well as Indigenous Land Use Agreements which have provided recognition and protection to some native title holders.

Further, that the process for certification of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA) in the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) be used as a model for developing replacement provisions to ensure the informed consent of traditional owners.

negotiations regarding Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs), Future Acts, Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) and Regional Partnership Agreements (RPAs).

the government recognises that some litigation is necessary and inevitable, however it has been actively promoting and encouraging alternatives to litigation, such as consent determinations and Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs).

(89) These fact sheets provide general information about native title, future acts and indigenous land use agreements.

Existing mechanisms for sharing agreements, such as the Agreement, Treaties and Negotiated Settlements Project, hosted by Melbourne University, and the NNTT's Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (the Tribunal's Register) could be utilised more effectively for this purpose.

The Protocol noted that the Framework is to provide for the development of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) that permit recognition, protection, and exercise of native title rights and interests, and also provides for a simplified future acts regime.

In 1999 the Premier issued a Memorandum in relation to the use of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) to resolve native title matters.

Methods for promoting negotiation and land use agreements were also put forward.

Some mechanisms such as consent determinations and Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) already exist, but their use as tools for recognition could be promoted and made more attractive and accessible to the parties.

Strategies: Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) follow best practice processes and guidelines; sites of environmental significance protected from inappropriate development; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people managing their natural resources.

Strategies: Facilitated access to commercial advice for native title holders negotiating land use agreements for economic opportunity; hold discussions with Department of Conservation about potential for Aboriginal participation in cultural tourism projects.

I also consider how the process of negotiating Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) and alternate land processes, such as state and territory land rights and cultural heritage legislation, can contribute to lateral violence within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

Sections 251A and 251B require authorisation through a process of decision - making, either in accordance with traditional laws and customs or otherwise agreed to, in relation to the making of indigenous land use agreements and native title determination applications.

In addition, the Queensland Government has advised me that the State is «in the process of seeking to negotiate throughout Queensland a number of other Indigenous Land Use Agreements which have native title consent for public housing and infrastructure for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as their subject matter».

Following the High Court's decision in Miriuwung Gajerrong which put in doubt the valid declaration of a number of national parks in the Northern Territory, native title and land rights issues were settled over 27 national parks and reserves in the Territory through 31 Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs).

Once an ILUA negotiation is concluded, the Native Title Registrar must apply a compliance test to determine that it is ready to be registered and included on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements.

There have also been 280 Indigenous land use agreements registered on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (as at 30 June 2007).

Furthermore, at the local level, treaty - making is already entrenched in Australian public policy and practice through Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs).

The inalienability of Aboriginal land held does not necessarily significantly restrict the capacity of Indigenous people to raise capital for business ventures or to make commercial use of inalienable freehold land, as there are a number of methods of raising finance and securing loans against the land other than mortgages.137 In addition, land use agreements, similar in concept to Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), could be used to establish unique agreements within communities covering many issues.138 Government attention is more appropriately directed to assisting Indigenous people to overcome any difficulties they have in meeting financial obstacles to such solutions than to overturning legislation that has done simple justice to a people who have been deprived of their land without their consent and without compensation.

Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) are already available to parties to negotiate the building of houses, and other essential services, for Indigenous communities.

Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) should be the preferred mechanism for negotiating arrangements regarding public housing and infrastructure

This has lead to an increasing number of Indigenous land use agreements (ILUAs), and to contracts outside of the native title system.

The existing Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA) provisions would remain as an option for future acts otherwise covered by the new process.