Local Aboriginal land councils in New South Wales say they remain deeply concerned about changes to laws governing crown land which could retrospectively affect land claims.
The state parliament passed the Crown Land Management Amendment bill on Wednesday, despite months of advocacy and opposition from traditional owners who say it will reduce the area available to claim under NSW’s land rights act.
The NSW Aboriginal Land Council suspended its participation in national closing the gap agreements in protest against the legislation.
That resulted in some amendments, they say, but the group’s central concern – that the lands minister will now have the power to retrospectively vary land tenures, including over areas where a land claim has already been lodged and is awaiting decision – remains.
Sign up for the Breaking News Australia emailIt comes after weeks of media reporting on the number of areas subject to an unresolved land claim in NSW, which includes the Bondi Icebergs.
Under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983, local Aboriginal land councils are able to apply for the return of eligible crown land as freehold title, in recognition of the widespread dispossession of Indigenous people in the state. Since its inception, 0.2% of crown land in NSW has been returned to Aboriginal ownership.
There are more than 44,000 unresolved land claims, some dating back decades.
The NSWALC chair, Dhangatti and Gumbaynggirr man Raymond Kelly, said his organisation had not been consulted before the bill was introduced in parliament and both NSWALC and all local Aboriginal land councils were strongly opposed to the changes.
The organisation has said that the characterisation of Aboriginal land claims as a threat to public assets or facilities is “offensive, irresponsible and misleading”. Land which is lawfully used or occupied or needed for an essential public purpose has never been eligible, they said.
Kelly said the changes will “reduce the amount of claimable for Aboriginal people”.
“It certainly wasn’t done what we would consider as good faith, in an open and transparent way,” he said.
“We’ve tried desperately to negotiate and work with the government and the opposition to ask them to be considerate. We’re not asking them to repeal the entirety of the bill; what we want to do is put in some safety measures.”
Speaking to 2GB Radio on Wednesday, the premier, Chris Minns, said he did not want to be “antagonistic” to the NSWALC but that the reforms were needed to protect crown lands.
“The structure as it’s currently constituted, in recent years, has meant that community land has been the subject of land claims,’ he said. “The reality for us is that if the community land is transferred out of government ownership and to other forms of ownership, its use can be changed for housing, for example. [It can change] from a tennis club to housing, or the rent can go up, or there can be a change in use that means you can’t operate there any more.
“As a result, we could lose an enormous amount of community land in our state. So we don’t want to be antagonistic to land councils [but] we believe it’s been an important reform for our state.”
A spokesperson for the lands minister, Stephen Kamper, did not respond to specific questions sent by Guardian Australia but said the state government had considered the feedback from the NSWALC, and that the bill was amended to “ensure established community and sport facilities on Crown land will remain in public hands” and would “continue to be used for their intended purpose”.
“Community and sporting facilities should remain available to the communities that rely on them,” the spokesperson said. “The proposed changes aim to address cases of technical non-compliance, such as an invalid sub-lease, on Crown land sites that are well utilised by the local community.”
They said the changes will modernise the crown lands management system and give certainty to tenure holders.
