Margaret Culbong
The South West Settlement negotiated between the Western Australian Government and the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC) has been voted on. Premier Colin Barnett has thanked the SWALSC for its management of the authorisation meetings and the voting process. But the voting process may have only engaged less than a thousand citizens. Leading Elders – Margaret Culbong, John Pell, Bev Port-Louis, Diane Yappo and Howard Riley have said that the voting process disengaged Noongars.
Noongars, who many believe should be known as Bibbullmun, number thereabouts 40,000. But those eligible to vote, that is those 18 years of age and above, would have been approximately 30,000. But there were less than 1,600 registered votes – in fact, 1,578. However, these were not unique voters. They were not 1,5,78 voters but rather 1,578 votes from six authorisation meetings. If someone could prove connection to Country to all six regions, they could in fact vote at all six authorisation meetings. I have confirmed with voters, that a significant proportion voted at two, three and four meetings.
There were 926 accepted ‘yes’ votes and 652 accepted ‘no’ votes. However it is more likely that only three, four or at most five hundred individuals voted to approve the extinguishment of the native title rights of Noongars.
If it is the case that less than 1,000 individuals, and more likely several hundred, determined whether Noongar native title rights should be extinguished then this means that less than 4 per cent of eligible voters determined the outcome.
“In whose book is this democratic?” asked Mervyn Eades, Director of Ngalla Maya.
“In whose book is this the will of the people?”
Ms Culbong said, “Our people did not vote. We object to this deal and the whole process.”
Mr Pell said that the low voter turnout would always serve the SWALSC and the State Government.
“In the end it was about who could mobilise voters best.”
“In the end because many of our people were distrustful of the process, many of our people had given up on it, many were even unaware, they didn’t vote. I said long ago, that I expected 80 per cent of our people would not vote.”
In the end it appears that at least 96 per cent did not vote.
Ultimately, the National Native Title Tribunal (NNTT) has to register the South West Settlement. However this will not be done till June as the NNTT has to allow a period for objections to be received and then make the determination – there are still a few procedural hoops to jump.
The NNTT can do something right here according to the dissenting Noongars. They can respect the intentions of the Native Title Act – which were to ensure a compensatory mechanism through Native Title rights in perpetuity. If the NNTT upholds the Government’s package then the perpetuity bit will be done with. The Government’s package comes with the condition that native title rights must be surrendered by Noongars. This is not a native title deal, but a settlement by which native title rights are extinguished.
According to the Elders, if the NNTT supports the extinguishment then the NNTT might as well extinguish itself out of existence. They believe it would be anathema for the NNTT to support the extinguishing of native title – “of denying our compensatory rights forever more.”
The Elders will lodge their objections to the NNTT. In the meantime though they are asking SWALSC to state how many Noongars actually did vote. We would all like to know.
Previous articles:
Premier Barnett congratulates SWALSC for the surrender of lands
Premier Barnett congratulates SWALSC for the surrender of lands | The Stringer
Government deal on its way to extinguish Native Title
Marianne Mackay backs Toogarr Morrison – “We’re Bibullmun, not Noongar”
Toogarr Morrison says its Bibbullmun and not Noongar
Vote on Noongar Native Title deal must be all Noongars in accordance with lore
South west Native Title deal near done despite dissent
$1.3 billion Native Title deal divides Noongar peoples
Deal to extinguish Native Title land rights in one hit
Native Title offer will go to the vote
No certainties in Native Title offer
Dissenting voices rise against single largest native title offer
Native Title offer missing sea rights
Culbong families take to SWALSC to Federal Court on Noongar Title proposal
Brown verse Western Australian Native Title not extinguished
I know my partner did not vote, & for that matter didn’t even know about it, & nor did her sisters or mother!.
What can they do about it now?.
Lodge an objection with the National Native Title Tribunal. Contact Elder Margaret Culbong and Ngalla Maya’s Mervyn Eades.
Unfortunately, the Native Title Act dictates that an authorisation meeting must be held to make this type of decision. While it would have been more convenient for Noongars wanting to cast a vote to have postal voting or local polling places, it’s simply not possible; due to limitations of the Native Title Act, the decision must made by the people attending the meeting on the day.
While the elders in this article have the right to object to the process, their objections will not stand because being dissatisfied with the Native Title Act is not grounds for a successful objection. I would encourage anyone who is dissatisfied with any aspect of the Native Title Act to contact their local federal member of parliment.
These authorisation meetings were not overseen by the National Native Title Tribunal on this occasion. Despite this being an agreement between the State Government and the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council acting on behalf of the Noongar peoples to actually extinguish native title rights forever more, you’d think that the authorisation meetings should have been coordinated by the NNTT. Gerry.
Hi Gerry,
In my opinion, there would be a huge conflic of interest if the NNTT were responsible for both conducting the meetings and registering the ILUAs. As you know, part of the NNTT’s role is to assess the whole authorisation process and make sure it has been conducted correctly. If the NNTT had run the meetings there would have been a conflict of interest when it comes time for them to assess their own work. In that regard, it’s better that SWALSC conduct the meeting than the NNTT, that way the NNTT can review the process without potential for a conflict of interest.
Fear not, the NNTT will review the applications to register the ILUAs (as required by the Native Title Act) and they will make sure SWALSC has conducted the authorisation process appropriately.
I preregistered with SWALSC and was advised of (two) Authorisation meetings I could attend to exercise my rights and interests as a traditional owner as accorded under the Native Title Act (1992). This was wrong advice from SWALSC, since I knew I had rights in other claim areas (mostly because the SWLASC claim boundaries are all wrong). It turns out I could have attended 5 Authorisation meetings. Many people similar to me had the same problem. There issues around how people got to vote and how others didn’t, whether people were coerced or not, the conduct at meetings, system of voting, fairness of resources put into getting people there on the day, discrepancy in information provided and whether people thought that they surrendered rights and interests under the Native Title Act or exchanged rights and interests under the Native Title Act.
People appear to be dissatisfied with SWALSC management at meetings not the Native Title Act and it is SWALSC telling people that the problem is the Native Title Act.
SWALSC has spent 5 years negotiating this alternative settlement, “Five years of hard negotiations and dedicated work from SWALSC and the Noongar Negotiation team have gone into this Agreement and the ILUA documents.” so who really has potential for conflict of interest?
WGAR News: Stop Adani Destroying Our Land and Culture: Wangan & Jagalingou People, YouTube video
https://indymedia.org.au/2015/04/01/wgar-news-stop-adani-destroying-our-land-and-culture-wangan-jagalingou-people-youtube
Contents:
* Homepage: Wangan & Jagalingou People – Celebrating Our Shared Connections: http://wanganjagalingou.com.au/
* Video: Wangan & Jagalingou People, YouTube: Stop Adani Destroying Our Land and Culture
* Petition: Community Run: Stop Adani Destroying Our Land and Culture
* Announcement: Representatives of the Wangan and Jagalingou people: Traditional owners reject Adani’s huge Carmichael coalmine in Queensland’s Galilee Basin
* Analysis / Opinion: Thom Mitchell, New Matilda: A Coal Load Of Problems: Community Group Drags Mining Giant Into Court
* Audio: Jordan Curtis, The Wire: Indigenous Australians take on mining company [Featuring Adrian Burragubba & Ellen Roberts]
* News Analysis: Oliver Milman, The Guardian: Aboriginal group fights to stop $16bn Carmichael coalmine, Australia’s largest
* Analysis / Opinion: Gerry Georgatos, The Stringer: How many Noongars actually voted for the extinguishing of their rights?
* Analysis / Opinion: Gerry Georgatos, The Stringer: Premier Barnett congratulates SWALSC for the surrender of lands
* Analysis / Opinion: Gerry Georgatos, The Stringer: Faithless deal to extinguish Native Title exposes the betrayal of Native Title compensation
SWALSC mmm what a load of ( Crap ), One of the big time workers for them told me and my Brothers and Nephews, don’t worry about Voting because it not nessaccry to vote for our own town and and we lost the voting by ( 04-07 ) votes, So if myself and my Brothers and Nephew would of voted we would of won, and my Family there were ( 15 ) men to vote so there you go, All the old Ancestors will be turning over in there Graves? The SWALSC is a load of ( Crap ) all they think about is them self, Hope they all have Bad Luck for they are doing to our Families and our Land.
Wangan & Jagalingou People
WGAR News: Adani’s Carmichael woes escalate: Traditional owners file Federal Court challenge, mount World Banks Tour to block finance: Wangan & Jagalingou People
https://indymedia.org.au/2015/05/30/wgar-news-adanis-carmichael-woes-escalate-traditional-owners-file-federal-court-challenge
Newsletter date: 31 May 2015
Contents:
* Media Release: Wangan & Jagalingou People: Adani’s Carmichael woes escalate: Traditional owners file Federal Court challenge, mount World Banks Tour to block finance
* News Analysis: Lisa Cox, SMH: Adani coal mine: Indigenous groups mount fresh legal challenge
* News Analysis: John Taylor, ABC News: Indigenous protest held in Brisbane against $16 billion Adani coal mine in the Galilee Basin
* Our Fight: Wangan & Jagalingou People: Stop Adani destroying our land and culture
* About: Who We Are – Wangan & Jagalingou People: http://wanganjagalingou.com.au/who-we-are/
* Background:
WGAR News: Fight to save traditional lands from a mine: Adrian Burragubba, Wangan & Jagalingou elder interviewed by Let’s Talk’s Tiga Bayles (11 Apr 15)
WGAR News: Stop Adani Destroying Our Land and Culture: Wangan & Jagalingou People, YouTube video (2 Apr 15)