Abbott Rocks Land Title Boat

Sydney Morning Herald

Tuesday March 18, 2003

Tony Abbott makes an important step in his observation of the failure to raise the living standards of many Aborigines. The federal Employment Minister attempts to articulate at least the beginning of a solution. Its merits and shortcomings will be debated vigorously. Already the Abbott suggestions, after a Cape York visit, appear underpinned by a prerequisite for dragging the Aboriginal struggle for economic independence from its bog of despair and hopelessness. Progress demands acknowledgement of the foolishness of persisting with past ways. Their failure is obvious to all. Innovation, imagination, radicalism, masterful negotiations, much money and even more political will are needed.

Mr Abbott says a starting point is to change the economic value of land granted to Aboriginal communities. Native title, first recognised by the High Court in the 1992 Mabo ruling, was meant to raise Aboriginal self-esteem and self-sufficiency but its application has disappointed many Aborigines who complain it is too hard to obtain and, once granted, bestows too little economic benefit. That's because title to granted land cannot be sold. Communities, therefore, cannot borrow against it. Even land use is restricted by conditions attached to so many native titles. All this may make Aborigines' spiritual attachment to the land more pristine, but it won't create jobs or set educational goals for Aboriginal children.

The Abbott suggestion is to convert native title to freehold title. While native title was ``indivisible, inalienable, collective" and ``economically useless", he said, economic usefulness demanded land be alienable. Capitalism required capital. Mr Abbott is entitled to a B-plus for his boldness at weighing in on a debate where faint hearts for too long feared to tread. Wary of the racist brand, white leaders avoided the scandal of inititiative-draining Aboriginal welfare dependency until the Aboriginal leader, Noel Pearson, bit the bullet three years ago. There are parallels with the land debate. If land became tradeable, it is argued, Aboriginal communities would be more self-reliant and responsible. But would they?

Native title was identified by the High Court and brushing it aside by executive edict does not erase its legal existence. NSW has lived with Aboriginal freehold land titles for years. They, too, were meant to induce self-sufficiency but mismanagement, cronyism and questionable legality characterise too many dealings.

This overdue debate should flourish. At the same time, potential economic benefit must not be squandered for the benefit of a few.

© 2003 Sydney Morning Herald

Back to News Index | Back to Home