Search results

Climate change has been regarded as a diabolical policy problem globally. The potential threat to the very existence of Indigenous peoples is compounded by legal and institutional barriers raise distinct challenges for our cultures, our lands and our resources.[1] More seriously, it poses a threat to the health, cultures and livelihoods of Indigenous peoples both here in Australia and around the world.

The landscape of the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) is under severe ecological stress. Issues such as salinity, poor water quality, stressed forests, dried wetlands, threatened native species, feral animals and noxious weeds are commonplace within the MDB. The reasons for this dramatic decline in river health are caused by water mismanagement including reversal of natural flow cycles and over allocation of water licences. Generations of bad farm practices such as deforestation have also played a major role in the ecological disaster that is the MDB.[1]

A century ago, the Australian people engaged in a debate about creating a nation. They held meetings...They wrote articles and letters in newspapers. Many views were canvassed and voices were heard. The separate colonies, having divided up the land between them, discussed ways of sharing powers in order to achieve a vision of a united Australia. The result was the Australian Constitution, establishing the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901.

In 2006 the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet made a revealing statement about Indigenous affairs. He argued that his own government’s policy performance in the Indigenous portfolio had been a failure. He went further to say that while well intentioned, the policies and approaches of the past 30 years had contributed to poor outcomes for Indigenous people.

This report contains a summary of observations made by the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) during its 2010 visit to the immigration detention facilities on Christmas Island.

In my Native Title Report 2007, I reported on the changes that were made to the native title system during that year. The changes, which were made through two pieces of legislation which amended the Native Title Act, primarily affected:

It is a story of colonisation; the threat of losing our cultural authority to manage our societies; and the despair that has come from that disempowerment. It is a story of grief and trauma and the continued pain of living with grog, drug and violence.

Native title is now well established in Australian law. The native title system was set up in 1994 under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (the Native Title Act). It is for gaining recognition and protection of native title, and for resolving native title matters. It has been successfully used in many parts of the country.

This is the third successive Social Justice Report to report on the implementation of the new arrangements for Indigenous affairs at the federal government level. The past two Social Justice Reports have emphasised the importance of governments ensuring the effective participation of Indigenous peoples in decision making that affects our lives. This includes the development of policy, program delivery and monitoring by governments at the national, as well as state, regional and local levels.

Human rights principles require that Indigenous people's relationships to land, based on traditional laws and customs, be given legal recognition and protection. International legal principles also recognise that Indigenous peoples have economic, social and cultural human rights. Native title, as it is constructed through the Australian legal system, has a limited capacity to meet these human rights standards.

Last year I set out my priorities for my term as Social Justice Commissioner.[1] My priorities revolve around the central idea that to address the disadvantage faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and build a more reconciled nation, we need to develop stronger and deeper relationships:

In my previous two Native Title Reports, I have strongly argued the need to reform the native title system. Stakeholders from all sectors engaged in the native title system have also stressed the need for the Government to take significant steps to ensure that the system meets the original objectives set out in the preamble to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (Native Title Act).