An Enormous Decision for Indigenous Australians. | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

An Enormous Decision for Indigenous Australians.

pahoffm

No one player is bigger than the club.
Mar 24, 2004
21,145
1
Aborigines given ownership of Perth by judge
By Kathy Marks in Sydney
Published: 21 September 2006
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/australasia/article1655632.ece

Aborigines have been declared the traditional owners of Perth and given the right to hunt and fish in the area, in the first successful claim by indigenous people to an Australian state capital.

The landmark ruling by the Federal Court astonished Aboriginal groups, with one community leader, Noel Pearson, welcoming the "absolutely extraordinary" decision. The judgment opens the way for similar claims over cities such as Sydney and Melbourne.

However, the state government of Western Australia said it would appeal, and it may be joined by the federal government. The Prime Minister, John Howard, said his initial reaction was "one of considerable concern".

The judge, Justice Murray Wilcox, granted the Nyoongar people "native title" over more than 6,000 sq km of land, including Perth and its surrounds. That means they can use it for traditional activities such as hunting, camping and fishing, as well as looking after sacred sites and generally caring for the land.

The judgment will not affect homes or businesses, as the Australian courts have ruled that native title does not apply to land owned on a freehold or long-lease basis. Mr Justice Wilcox cautioned that it was "neither the pot of gold for the indigenous claimants nor the disaster for the remainder of the community that is sometimes painted".

Native title claims in the past have prompted scare campaigns by mining and agricultural companies. But the judge said that his decision would have no impact on "people's backyards".

For native title, Aborigines must prove a continuing and unbroken link with the land that they owned until British colonists arrived. That was thought to be an almost impossible task in densely settled metropolitan areas.

In 2002 the High Court, which is superior to the federal courts, rejected a claim by the Yorta Yorta people over a heavily populated swath of south-eastern Australia. Mr Pearson said the latest ruling restored indigenous rights in relation to cities and southern regions.

Fred Chaney, the deputy chairman of the National Native Title Tribunal, said the Nyoongar people had been "subjected to pretty incredible interference and dislocation ... they've been shifted around, shunted around, their families have been broken up".

He added: "The extraordinary thing is that they've been able to demonstrate to the judge that there is still continuing Nyoongar law and culture, which is understood, which still binds them to the country, and which regulates their relationships. So it's an amazing example of cultural survival under extremely adverse circumstances."

One conservative politician in Western Australia warned of dire consequences, claiming that the public could be charged a fee to use parks and waterways. Alan Eggleston, a state Liberal senator, said: "This really could have quite profound and significant implications, and change our way of life."

Aboriginal Australian groups dismissed his claims as baseless "scaremongering". Glen Kelly, head of the South West Aboriginal Land Council, told ABC radio that the Nyoongar would seek a say in the management of parkland and state forests, but that "in general life will go on as it currently is".

Mr Justice Wilcox ruled that the Nyoongar are the traditional owners of the entire area to which they claim native title: 200,000 sq km of south-western Australia. But he has yet to decide whether to grant native title to land outside the Perth metropolitan district.

The state government said it would appeal as the judgment contradicted the High Court's Yorta Yorta ruling, which decided that native title had been "washed away by the tide of history".

Mr Howard said: "Many people will regard it as somewhat incongruous - there could still be some residual native title claim in a major settled metropolitan area."

Aborigines have been declared the traditional owners of Perth and given the right to hunt and fish in the area, in the first successful claim by indigenous people to an Australian state capital.

The landmark ruling by the Federal Court astonished Aboriginal groups, with one community leader, Noel Pearson, welcoming the "absolutely extraordinary" decision. The judgment opens the way for similar claims over cities such as Sydney and Melbourne.

However, the state government of Western Australia said it would appeal, and it may be joined by the federal government. The Prime Minister, John Howard, said his initial reaction was "one of considerable concern".

The judge, Justice Murray Wilcox, granted the Nyoongar people "native title" over more than 6,000 sq km of land, including Perth and its surrounds. That means they can use it for traditional activities such as hunting, camping and fishing, as well as looking after sacred sites and generally caring for the land.

The judgment will not affect homes or businesses, as the Australian courts have ruled that native title does not apply to land owned on a freehold or long-lease basis. Mr Justice Wilcox cautioned that it was "neither the pot of gold for the indigenous claimants nor the disaster for the remainder of the community that is sometimes painted".

Native title claims in the past have prompted scare campaigns by mining and agricultural companies. But the judge said that his decision would have no impact on "people's backyards".

For native title, Aborigines must prove a continuing and unbroken link with the land that they owned until British colonists arrived. That was thought to be an almost impossible task in densely settled metropolitan areas.

In 2002 the High Court, which is superior to the federal courts, rejected a claim by the Yorta Yorta people over a heavily populated swath of south-eastern Australia. Mr Pearson said the latest ruling restored indigenous rights in relation to cities and southern regions.
Fred Chaney, the deputy chairman of the National Native Title Tribunal, said the Nyoongar people had been "subjected to pretty incredible interference and dislocation ... they've been shifted around, shunted around, their families have been broken up".

He added: "The extraordinary thing is that they've been able to demonstrate to the judge that there is still continuing Nyoongar law and culture, which is understood, which still binds them to the country, and which regulates their relationships. So it's an amazing example of cultural survival under extremely adverse circumstances."

One conservative politician in Western Australia warned of dire consequences, claiming that the public could be charged a fee to use parks and waterways. Alan Eggleston, a state Liberal senator, said: "This really could have quite profound and significant implications, and change our way of life."

Aboriginal Australian groups dismissed his claims as baseless "scaremongering". Glen Kelly, head of the South West Aboriginal Land Council, told ABC radio that the Nyoongar would seek a say in the management of parkland and state forests, but that "in general life will go on as it currently is".

Mr Justice Wilcox ruled that the Nyoongar are the traditional owners of the entire area to which they claim native title: 200,000 sq km of south-western Australia. But he has yet to decide whether to grant native title to land outside the Perth metropolitan district.

The state government said it would appeal as the judgment contradicted the High Court's Yorta Yorta ruling, which decided that native title had been "washed away by the tide of history".

Mr Howard said: "Many people will regard it as somewhat incongruous - there could still be some residual native title claim in a major settled metropolitan area."

Me thinks that the camp that was made in the Fitzroy gardens a few months ago might indeed be very valuable evidence of a continuing link with the land when the case for the city of Melbourne is presented sometime in the future.
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,720
12,205
So all the decision say is: 'we admit you fellas used to own the land and have never actually left, but nothing can happen that affects any existing whita land interests'

So in other words the decision in practical terms is symbolic recognition.

Yet our enlightened PM and the Labor state government have 'grave concerns' and will appeal.  Talk about a bunch of tight arses.  I hate this prick.
 

Legends of 2017

Finally!!!!!!!!!!!
Mar 24, 2005
6,736
6,269
Melbourne
Phantom said:
Me thinks that the camp that was made in the Fitzroy gardens a few months ago might indeed be very valuable evidence of a continuing link with the land when the case for the city of Melbourne is presented sometime in the future.

Can't see how. Weren't the protesters not the native tribe of Melbourne? I thought that the traditional owners of the area disowned that mob?
 

Tubytiger

Tiger Legend
Jul 14, 2004
6,805
0
Legends of 1980 said:
Phantom said:
Me thinks that the camp that was made in the Fitzroy gardens a few months ago might indeed be very valuable evidence of a continuing link with the land when the case for the city of Melbourne is presented sometime in the future.

Can't see how. Weren't the protesters not the native tribe of Melbourne? I thought that the traditional owners of the area disowned that mob?


Yes they did Legends and rightly so.
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,720
12,205
Chelsea said:
NO... don't say sorry Howard....unless you want our country sued for trillions.

grow a brain. It amazes me how the leftys always get accused of scaremongering, yet the right hold baseless, misinformed, plain mean views like this.

Either you are a simpleton, or don't have much compassion, or both, take your pick.
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,720
12,205
rosy23 said:
lefty said:
Say 'sorry.' Howard,

What for?

quite a bit actually.  First, Howard is constantly crapping on about how bad things, if they happened at all, (the black actually welcomed the white settler you know according to JH), all happened in ancient histury and there's nothing he, so by implication any of us, could have done about it.  This is plain wrong.  The referendum to give blacks citizenship was passed in 1967, Howard and many others in parliament had been politically active for years before that.  If you check the public record, the vast majority of coalition politicians could not have given a rats arse about the referendum.  Harold Holt did a great job at the time to give it a run.

second, and even more damning, the Bjelke-Petersen government in QLD had a heap of racially descriminatory policies in place until the mid eighties.  Blacks could not hold pastoral leases for example. JH had by this time held the second highest post in the land and been opposition leader.  Did he do anything about it?  Nuh.  Nothing.

Even holding to his own argument, that he couldn't have done anything to help the blacks because it all happened before his time is plain wrong.

Look personally I'm over the apology debate, but I can't let false views go un corrected.

Regarding the issue at hand, all native title is about is any bits of land left over, not just freehold, literally hundreds of lease types are exempt. Every Court case on Native title makes that clear, its only about any bits left over, usually the crap bits worth not much, MIGHT be able to be claimed by the original owners.

Thats all native title is, a few crumbs.  Yet our government just can't see any way clears to allow a few crumbs to go to the blacks.  They have to engage in the old scare tactics to shore up their votes from small minded people like Chelsea, suggesting that blacks are gunna put a fence around the beaches and parks and charge our nice white kiddies to play on them.
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,720
12,205
Tubytiger said:
Legends of 1980 said:
Phantom said:
Me thinks that the camp that was made in the Fitzroy gardens a few months ago might indeed be very valuable evidence of a continuing link with the land when the case for the city of Melbourne is presented sometime in the future.

Can't see how. Weren't the protesters not the native tribe of Melbourne? I thought that the traditional owners of the area disowned that mob?


Yes they did Legends and rightly so.

What the f**ck do you know about it? This is the oldest trick in the book. Since Europeans have arrived we've held up any blacks who haven't been pesky, angry, violent whatever as the 'real' blacks, the nice blacks.
 

pahoffm

No one player is bigger than the club.
Mar 24, 2004
21,145
1
Brisbane native title pending
Lachlan Heywood
September 20, 2006 12:00am
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,20445950-3102,00.html

A NATIVE title claim over Brisbane will be tested next month after a landmark victory by Aborigines in Perth.

A claim lodged by the Turrbal people over 65.9 sq km of land in and around the Queensland capital will be part heard by the Federal Court on October 27.

A ruling by Federal Court judge Murray Wilcox, pictured, on Tuesday found the Noongar people's native title rights over the Perth area had not been extinguished by white settlement.

The decision was the first to find that native title exists over the metropolitan area of an Australian capital city.

Turrbal Association adviser Ade Kukoyi said the finding had buoyed the group's hopes of success in Brisbane.

"A number of senior counsel had told us we were silly, that you can't expect to claim native title," he said.
 

pahoffm

No one player is bigger than the club.
Mar 24, 2004
21,145
1
Aboriginals want native title over 185,000sq km of State
20th September 2006, 14:00 WST
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=7320

Aboriginal groups have set their sights on winning native title over 185,000sq km of WA’s South-West after victory yesterday in a court battle which recognised their traditional ownership of the Perth metropolitan area.

The South-West Land and Sea Council said the Federal Court ruling had boosted their chances of winning wider native title rights, but the State Government indicated it would appeal against the decision.

In a landmark ruling in a case spanning more than a decade, Justice Murray Wilcox said the Nyoongar claimants had proved an on-going link to the land through traditional practices, language and traditions dating back to the time of European settlement in 1829. He granted them the right to hunt, fish and gather food on land where native title has not been extinguished from Wanneroo in the north, to Rockingham in the south and Northam to the east.

In the first finding of native title in a capital city, Justice Wilcox said the Nyoongar community could use the land for social, cultural, religious, spiritual, customary and educational purposes. A spokeswoman for the WA Office of Native Title said native title was extinguished by privately owned land and crown land set aside for most parks and reserves.

But the same protection does not apply over all parts of WA’s State forests, vacant crown land or pastoral leases where native title still exists.

Even if native title is found to exist, it can still be overridden by council bylaws and State and Federal laws that prohibit activities such as camping, fishing and trespassing.

But if Aboriginals are granted exclusive rights over land they may be able to control access, which could include charging entry fees.

Native title over most land in the metropolitan claim has already been extinguished.

The status of unallocated crown land in the remaining claim, from Jurien to Moora and south-east to Esperance, is likely to be resolved case by case.

Justice Wilcox urged the claimants and the Government to save time and money by resolving the rest of the claim out of court.

“A determination of native title is neither the pot of gold for the indigenous claimants or the disaster for the remainder of the community that is sometimes painted,” he said.

“A native title determination does not affect freehold land or most leasehold land; it cannot take away people’s backyards. The vast majority of private landholders in the Perth region will be unaffected by this case.” He did not explain how some private landholders could be affected.

SWLASC chairman Ted Hart did not rule out seeking compensation from the Government.

Deputy Premier Eric Ripper said the Government believed there had been too much disruption to Nyoongar society for it to have maintained a continuous connection to the metropolitan area.

Anne Calverley
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,720
12,205
Geez they're claiming Brisbane, they're gunna get my house. Its not fair, they already get too much. they are so ungrateful, why can't they just pull their heads in and take what they're given. Bloody deleted
 

Rosy

Tiger Legend
Mar 27, 2003
54,348
31
tigersnake said:
quite a bit actually. 

The aboriginals have a tragic history ts and I feel for them deeply but I don't think Little Johnny Bonsai should say sorry on demand.  I don't see how it would make any difference, he's no more responsible for their early treatment than I am.

Bridges need to be built on both sides and working together towards genuine and practical solutions would be far more beneficial than giving a false apology because it was demanded.

He's not likely to give it so time to move on and plan for the future imo.

tigersnake said:
What the do you know about it?  This is the oldest trick in the book.  Since Europeans have arrived we've held up any blacks who haven't been pesky, angry, violent whatever as the 'real' blacks, the nice blacks.

I don't understand your point there ts.  Isn't what Legends said correct?
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,720
12,205
rosy23 said:
tigersnake said:
quite a bit actually. 

The aboriginals have a tragic history ts and I feel for them deeply but I don't think Little Johnny Bonsai should say sorry on demand.  I don't see how it would make any difference, he's no more responsible for their early treatment than I am.

Bridges need to be built on both sides and working together towards genuine and practical solutions would be far more beneficial than giving a false apology because it was demanded.

He's not likely to give it so time to move on and plan for the future imo.

tigersnake said:
What the do you know about it?  This is the oldest trick in the book.  Since Europeans have arrived we've held up any blacks who haven't been pesky, angry, violent whatever as the 'real' blacks, the nice blacks.

I don't understand your point there ts.  Isn't what Legends said correct?

as I said in my post rosy, I'm over it and so are most indigenous people. I was trying to make the point that Howards argument against apologising, which most people believe, doesn't have legs if you look at the evidence.

On the second point, do you believe everything you read in the papers? Or just the stuff that sounds right?

I don't know the real story, what I would be sure of though is that the real story would be much more comlex than legends take. The Today Tonight take.

For argument's sake, who really cares if they weren't the original owners of that particular piece of dirt? I don't. To me that really doesn't have much to do with their protest, which was to draw attention to the plight of Australian aborigines during a national and international sporting event. The key point is that because this particular protest was one that many people didn't agree with, or felt uncomfortable about, we question and undermine the legitimacy of it. For a country that is supposed to be tough and brave, its weak as *smile*.

I don't like the way our country is going. In spite of all the hype about how tough and stoic us Aussies are, we seem to be becoming scared, precious, intolerant sooks. Thats not the Australia I knew or want.
 

Legends of 2017

Finally!!!!!!!!!!!
Mar 24, 2005
6,736
6,269
Melbourne
tigersnake said:
rosy23 said:
tigersnake said:
quite a bit actually.

The aboriginals have a tragic history ts and I feel for them deeply but I don't think Little Johnny Bonsai should say sorry on demand. I don't see how it would make any difference, he's no more responsible for their early treatment than I am.

Bridges need to be built on both sides and working together towards genuine and practical solutions would be far more beneficial than giving a false apology because it was demanded.

He's not likely to give it so time to move on and plan for the future imo.

tigersnake said:
What the do you know about it? This is the oldest trick in the book. Since Europeans have arrived we've held up any blacks who haven't been pesky, angry, violent whatever as the 'real' blacks, the nice blacks.

I don't understand your point there ts. Isn't what Legends said correct?

as I said in my post rosy, I'm over it and so are most indigenous people. I was trying to make the point that Howards argument against apologising, which most people believe, doesn't have legs if you look at the evidence.

On the second point, do you believe everything you read in the papers? Or just the stuff that sounds right?

I don't know the real story, what I would be sure of though is that the real story would be much more comlex than legends take. The Today Tonight take.


For argument's sake, who really cares if they weren't the original owners of that particular piece of dirt? I don't. To me that really doesn't have much to do with their protest, which was to draw attention to the plight of Australian aborigines during a national and international sporting event. The key point is that because this particular protest was one that many people didn't agree with, or felt uncomfortable about, we question and undermine the legitimacy of it. For a country that is supposed to be tough and brave, its weak as *smile*.

I don't like the way our country is going. In spite of all the hype about how tough and stoic us Aussies are, we seem to be becoming scared, precious, intolerant sooks. Thats not the Australia I knew or want.

Well then, correct any mistake I may have made, instead of whinging and moaning and not backing it up :mad:. As far as I know, the local tribe are the Wurundgeri( not sure of the spelling). The protestors were from another tribe (as well as non-aboriginals etc), from around Gippsland. The local elder publicly called them a disgrace. That's right, another indigineous person said that, not any of us know nothing 'whitey's'. Please feel free to correct any points that aren't factual. I'm happy to be educated. Can't stand those who say it's all wrong then do nothing to back it up.
And you're not wrong about your last paragraph either ;)
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,720
12,205
That's my point legends, I couldn't care less where their country was.  Who cares if some old fella called them a disgrace?  Anyone who takes a political stand on anything will always be called a disgrace by someone.  You'll always be able to dig up someone to bag someone else.

In South Africa, the Incarta Freedom party, the Zulus, disagreed with ending aparthied.  Does that make the ANC and Mandelas cause illigitimate?

Those blacks who made that protest wanted to draw attention to the fact that blackfellas still dont get listened to.  Mission accomplished.

I wasn't wingeing and moaning by the way, I was simply arguing a point.
 

Chelsea

Tiger Rookie
Mar 28, 2005
260
2
tigersnake said:
Chelsea said:
NO... don't say sorry Howard....unless you want our country sued for trillions.

grow a brain.  It amazes me how the leftys always get accused of scaremongering, yet the right hold baseless, misinformed, plain mean views like this.

Either you are a simpleton, or don't have much compassion, or both, take your pick.

Well Rattlesnake,it's the unprovoked insult that makes one wonder about the size of your brain too. Compassion has nothing to do with it. As far as I'm concerned, I don't owe anyone, anything. I pay my taxes, from which I'm sure the Aborigines get a nice cut. I hope our P.M. NEVER says sorry. What's there to be sorry for? The Canadians fell into the 'Sorry' trap, and it cost them heaps.