Talking Victoria, March 2006

• Gunditjmara People's application VID6004/98 (VC99/7)
• Gunai/Kurnai (VIC 6007/98) VC97/4 and Kurnai (VID398/2005) VC05/1
• Native Title Forum on 22 March 2006
• Who is who in the Victorian Registry?

Gunditjmara People's application VID6004/98 (VC99/7)

The Gunditjmara claimants and the State of Victoria are 'a quantum leap' from where they were in December 2005 in terms of the potential settlement of the claim, Tony Neal for the State of Victoria told Justice North at the latest directions hearing in the matter on 15 February .

Annie Keely from Native Title Services Victoria outlined for the court, on behalf of the claimants, the status of negotiations: 'There is agreement in principle between the State and the applicant on all matters that would be contained in a consent determination recognising native title rights and interests. There is agreement in principle on all related issues which would be contained in several other agreements with one exception. That is an issue in an agreement that only involves the State and the applicant and we are both working industriously to try and resolve that issue at the moment,' she said.

Both parties expressed confidence that the last hurdle can also be resolved with Tony Neal noting that the parties have 'overcome a lot to get to here and we will probably overcome that one as well.'

Native Title Services Victoria also informed the court that it will lodge a further claim over parcels of crown land within the external boundary of the amended Gunditjmara claim which, for technical reasons, are currently not under claim. It is anticipated that the claim will be lodged in late March or early April. The court will notify people with an interest in the land directly, in order to bring potential additional parties into the mediation process as early as possible. This will be in addition to the ordinary three-month notification period provided for by the Native Title Act .

Further mediation meetings with the secondary respondent parties, conducted by the Federal Court's Registrars, will be convened in early March and April, with respondent parties noting at the directions hearing that mediation conducted so far was 'both positive and encouraging.' The matter has been adjourned until 20 April 2006.

Gunai/Kurnai (VIC 6007/98) VC97/4 and Kurnai (VID398/2005) VC05/1

Following the latest directions hearing in these matters on 19 December last year, the court has appointed an expert anthropologist in relation to the Gunai/Kurnai and Kurnai intra-indigenous dispute.

The expert is required to provide a written report to the court by 31 May. Until further order of the court, the report is not to be distributed to any other party and only used for the Tribunal's mediation of the dispute. The court will bear the costs of the expert anthropologist. The matter is next listed for a directions hearing on 14 June.

The full text of the court's orders can be downloaded via the e-search facility on the Federal Court's website at www.fedcourt.gov.au .

Native Title Forum on 22 March 2006

The NZ experience: Graeme Aitken, Manager of the Victorian Department of Justice's Native Title Unit, launched the forum series in the Tribunal's Melbourne office with a talk about the New Zealand Treaty of Waitangi.

This year's forum series was kicked off on 22 March by Graeme Aitken, the Manager of the Department of Justice's Native Title Unit since April last year. Graeme draws on his experience in dealing with claims arising from the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand where 'anthropologists are completely unemployable' since claimants do not have to prove that they are the right people for country or that they have maintained their connection, as is the case with native title claims in Australia. Instead, 'historians are the kings or queens of the process' as the New Zealand claims process focuses on the history of dispossession of its Indigenous inhabitants based on breaches of the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi.

Contrasting the way claims are dealt with in both countries Graeme noted that the New Zealand process allows the claimants to tell their story of dispossession and loss and go through a grieving process which, in his view, is an essential step in the resolution of claims. Using the example of a hypothetical iwi (tribe) Graeme explained the many land dealings that took place and cultural misunderstandings that occurred since the arrival of white settlers in New Zealand and the role of the subsequently established Land Claims Commission, the Native Land Court and Waitangi Tribunal.

Comparing settlements in New Zealand with native title determinations in Australia Graeme noted that the native title system is based on preserving rights in land that have not been lost.   In NZ, the focus is on remedies for wrongful dispossession.  New Zealand settlements usually take the form of an agreement on a financial amount (the biggest are the $170 million packages agreed to in the Ngai Tahu and Waikato/Tainui settlements). Once the amount is agreed, a package is developed which might include cash, land, forests and other assets to the value of the agreed amount.  The package might also include return of specific sites of spiritual significance.  In concluding his presentation, Graeme said that he did not want to create the impression that NZ is a utopia for indigenous rights.

For our April forum, Tribunal member Doug Williamson will share his reflections on his time as a mediator with the organisation. The forum will be held on 20 April from 4 to 6 pm. To read more about Professor Williamson's career and role in the recent Wimmera consent determination see the latest edition of Talking Native Title .

Who is who in the Victorian Registry?

Tribunal Employees

Tribunal Members