❓ Question addresses the WA government's stance on a successful native title claim in the Perth metropolitan region and whether they will appeal the decision, given its potential impact on land development and future negotiations.
AnsweredQoN 667Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
NATIVE TITLE CLAIM - PERTH METROPOLITAN REGION
I refer to the Deputy Premier’s earlier response that the successful claim makes no real difference in practice. Does that mean that the government will not appeal the decision? Mr E.S. RIPPER
I refer to the Deputy Premier’s earlier response that the successful claim makes no real difference in practice. Does that mean that the government will not appeal the decision? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
I did not say that the successful claim makes no real difference in practice. I said that with regard to land development, there are already procedural rights in place and they will continue following this decision. If the claim is ultimately dismissed, those procedural rights will disappear. If we are talking about what the situation was last week and what it is this week, there is no difference, because the procedural rights of a claimant are the same as the procedural rights of someone whose claim has been upheld. It is not the case that the decision makes no practical difference. It is not just a concern to people in the metropolitan area; this is a precedent for other native title claims right across the country. The difficulty that the state government faces is that if it now negotiates native title matters with other native title parties, there will be a degree of uncertainty and ambiguity about the legal position, which might make the negotiations impossible to conduct. One party might favour one type of Federal Court decision and another party might favour another type of Federal Court decision, and because of their different understandings of the law it will not be possible to conclude the negotiations. With regard to the direct question of an appeal, the state government does not accept the ruling in this case. Our legal experts are examining the issue as we speak. We have about three weeks to consider our options and we are awaiting legal advice from our advisers.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I did not say that the successful claim makes no real difference in practice. I said that with regard to land development, there are already procedural rights in place and they will continue following this decision. If the claim is ultimately dismissed, those procedural rights will disappear. If we are talking about what the situation was last week and what it is this week, there is no difference, because the procedural rights of a claimant are the same as the procedural rights of someone whose claim has been upheld. It is not the case that the decision makes no practical difference. It is not just a concern to people in the metropolitan area; this is a precedent for other native title claims right across the country. The difficulty that the state government faces is that if it now negotiates native title matters with other native title parties, there will be a degree of uncertainty and ambiguity about the legal position, which might make the negotiations impossible to conduct. One party might favour one type of Federal Court decision and another party might favour another type of Federal Court decision, and because of their different understandings of the law it will not be possible to conclude the negotiations. With regard to the direct question of an appeal, the state government does not accept the ruling in this case. Our legal experts are examining the issue as we speak. We have about three weeks to consider our options and we are awaiting legal advice from our advisers.
I did not say that the successful claim makes no real difference in practice. I said that with regard to land development, there are already procedural rights in place and they will continue following this decision. If the claim is ultimately dismissed, those procedural rights will disappear. If we are talking about what the situation was last week and what it is this week, there is no difference, because the procedural rights of a claimant are the same as the procedural rights of someone whose claim has been upheld. It is not the case that the decision makes no practical difference. It is not just a concern to people in the metropolitan area; this is a precedent for other native title claims right across the country. The difficulty that the state government faces is that if it now negotiates native title matters with other native title parties, there will be a degree of uncertainty and ambiguity about the legal position, which might make the negotiations impossible to conduct. One party might favour one type of Federal Court decision and another party might favour another type of Federal Court decision, and because of their different understandings of the law it will not be possible to conclude the negotiations. With regard to the direct question of an appeal, the state government does not accept the ruling in this case. Our legal experts are examining the issue as we speak. We have about three weeks to consider our options and we are awaiting legal advice from our advisers.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I did not say that the successful claim makes no real difference in practice. I said that with regard to land development, there are already procedural rights in place and they will continue following this decision. If the claim is ultimately dismissed, those procedural rights will disappear. If we are talking about what the situation was last week and what it is this week, there is no difference, because the procedural rights of a claimant are the same as the procedural rights of someone whose claim has been upheld. It is not the case that the decision makes no practical difference. It is not just a concern to people in the metropolitan area; this is a precedent for other native title claims right across the country. The difficulty that the state government faces is that if it now negotiates native title matters with other native title parties, there will be a degree of uncertainty and ambiguity about the legal position, which might make the negotiations impossible to conduct. One party might favour one type of Federal Court decision and another party might favour another type of Federal Court decision, and because of their different understandings of the law it will not be possible to conclude the negotiations. With regard to the direct question of an appeal, the state government does not accept the ruling in this case. Our legal experts are examining the issue as we speak. We have about three weeks to consider our options and we are awaiting legal advice from our advisers.
I did not say that the successful claim makes no real difference in practice. I said that with regard to land development, there are already procedural rights in place and they will continue following this decision. If the claim is ultimately dismissed, those procedural rights will disappear. If we are talking about what the situation was last week and what it is this week, there is no difference, because the procedural rights of a claimant are the same as the procedural rights of someone whose claim has been upheld. It is not the case that the decision makes no practical difference. It is not just a concern to people in the metropolitan area; this is a precedent for other native title claims right across the country. The difficulty that the state government faces is that if it now negotiates native title matters with other native title parties, there will be a degree of uncertainty and ambiguity about the legal position, which might make the negotiations impossible to conduct. One party might favour one type of Federal Court decision and another party might favour another type of Federal Court decision, and because of their different understandings of the law it will not be possible to conclude the negotiations. With regard to the direct question of an appeal, the state government does not accept the ruling in this case. Our legal experts are examining the issue as we speak. We have about three weeks to consider our options and we are awaiting legal advice from our advisers.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.