❓ A parliamentary question regarding native title negotiations, specifically concerning James Price Point and allegations of deliberate delays. The Attorney General refutes the allegations, defends the government's progress, and highlights complexities in native title claims.
AnsweredQoN 762Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
JAMES PRICE POINT — NATIVE TITLE NEGOTIATIONS
I refer to comments made by members opposite on the progress of native title matters and the suggestion that progress may have been deliberately delayed. Can the Attorney General please update the house on the actual current situation of native title negotiations in Western Australia? Mr C.C. PORTER
I refer to comments made by members opposite on the progress of native title matters and the suggestion that progress may have been deliberately delayed. Can the Attorney General please update the house on the actual current situation of native title negotiations in Western Australia? Mr C.C. PORTER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. I am very glad that this question has been asked, because some serious allegations about native title were made by the member for Rockingham some time last week. To paraphrase those allegations, they were that somehow matters had been deliberately delayed or were, as I think the phrase was, “sitting on my desk” in an effort to somehow influence the proceedings that are going on with James Price Point. I want to make four points about that allegation. I must say that I think the allegation is quite wrong, very unfair and terribly unhelpful in the context of trying to negotiate very complicated matters. First, if we look back to 2005 for the number of determinations of native title that occur in a given year, it was usually about two or three. It is a modest number every year, and that is about the right target. We have had one determination so far this year, and two are past the stage of substantive negotiation. They are the Nyikina Mangala matter and the Uungguu and Dambimangari matter. Both are complicated matters and I expect both to go before cabinet shortly. If those proceed as we envisage they will, that will be three determinations for the year. These things come through the pipeline often collectively and also often towards the end of the year. The idea that somehow there will be fewer determinations this year than there have been in other years is quite wrong. Although the member for Rockingham read a list of matters that he said were sitting on my desk, only those two matters that I have just mentioned, about which I expect a decision to be forthcoming very shortly, are on my desk. The other matters that the member for Rockingham listed are, at the moment, in substantive negotiation. They are not matters that are on my desk at the moment. Making those statements makes the negotiations so much harder to bring to fruition and to get the matters on my desk. The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER replied: I thank the member for the question. I am very glad that this question has been asked, because some serious allegations about native title were made by the member for Rockingham some time last week. To paraphrase those allegations, they were that somehow matters had been deliberately delayed or were, as I think the phrase was, “sitting on my desk” in an effort to somehow influence the proceedings that are going on with James Price Point. I want to make four points about that allegation. I must say that I think the allegation is quite wrong, very unfair and terribly unhelpful in the context of trying to negotiate very complicated matters. First, if we look back to 2005 for the number of determinations of native title that occur in a given year, it was usually about two or three. It is a modest number every year, and that is about the right target. We have had one determination so far this year, and two are past the stage of substantive negotiation. They are the Nyikina Mangala matter and the Uungguu and Dambimangari matter. Both are complicated matters and I expect both to go before cabinet shortly. If those proceed as we envisage they will, that will be three determinations for the year. These things come through the pipeline often collectively and also often towards the end of the year. The idea that somehow there will be fewer determinations this year than there have been in other years is quite wrong. Although the member for Rockingham read a list of matters that he said were sitting on my desk, only those two matters that I have just mentioned, about which I expect a decision to be forthcoming very shortly, are on my desk. The other matters that the member for Rockingham listed are, at the moment, in substantive negotiation. They are not matters that are on my desk at the moment. Making those statements makes the negotiations so much harder to bring to fruition and to get the matters on my desk. The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
I thank the member for the question. I am very glad that this question has been asked, because some serious allegations about native title were made by the member for Rockingham some time last week. To paraphrase those allegations, they were that somehow matters had been deliberately delayed or were, as I think the phrase was, “sitting on my desk” in an effort to somehow influence the proceedings that are going on with James Price Point. I want to make four points about that allegation. I must say that I think the allegation is quite wrong, very unfair and terribly unhelpful in the context of trying to negotiate very complicated matters. First, if we look back to 2005 for the number of determinations of native title that occur in a given year, it was usually about two or three. It is a modest number every year, and that is about the right target. We have had one determination so far this year, and two are past the stage of substantive negotiation. They are the Nyikina Mangala matter and the Uungguu and Dambimangari matter. Both are complicated matters and I expect both to go before cabinet shortly. If those proceed as we envisage they will, that will be three determinations for the year. These things come through the pipeline often collectively and also often towards the end of the year. The idea that somehow there will be fewer determinations this year than there have been in other years is quite wrong. Although the member for Rockingham read a list of matters that he said were sitting on my desk, only those two matters that I have just mentioned, about which I expect a decision to be forthcoming very shortly, are on my desk. The other matters that the member for Rockingham listed are, at the moment, in substantive negotiation. They are not matters that are on my desk at the moment. Making those statements makes the negotiations so much harder to bring to fruition and to get the matters on my desk. The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
First, if we look back to 2005 for the number of determinations of native title that occur in a given year, it was usually about two or three. It is a modest number every year, and that is about the right target. We have had one determination so far this year, and two are past the stage of substantive negotiation. They are the Nyikina Mangala matter and the Uungguu and Dambimangari matter. Both are complicated matters and I expect both to go before cabinet shortly. If those proceed as we envisage they will, that will be three determinations for the year. These things come through the pipeline often collectively and also often towards the end of the year. The idea that somehow there will be fewer determinations this year than there have been in other years is quite wrong. Although the member for Rockingham read a list of matters that he said were sitting on my desk, only those two matters that I have just mentioned, about which I expect a decision to be forthcoming very shortly, are on my desk. The other matters that the member for Rockingham listed are, at the moment, in substantive negotiation. They are not matters that are on my desk at the moment. Making those statements makes the negotiations so much harder to bring to fruition and to get the matters on my desk. The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER replied: I thank the member for the question. I am very glad that this question has been asked, because some serious allegations about native title were made by the member for Rockingham some time last week. To paraphrase those allegations, they were that somehow matters had been deliberately delayed or were, as I think the phrase was, “sitting on my desk” in an effort to somehow influence the proceedings that are going on with James Price Point. I want to make four points about that allegation. I must say that I think the allegation is quite wrong, very unfair and terribly unhelpful in the context of trying to negotiate very complicated matters. First, if we look back to 2005 for the number of determinations of native title that occur in a given year, it was usually about two or three. It is a modest number every year, and that is about the right target. We have had one determination so far this year, and two are past the stage of substantive negotiation. They are the Nyikina Mangala matter and the Uungguu and Dambimangari matter. Both are complicated matters and I expect both to go before cabinet shortly. If those proceed as we envisage they will, that will be three determinations for the year. These things come through the pipeline often collectively and also often towards the end of the year. The idea that somehow there will be fewer determinations this year than there have been in other years is quite wrong. Although the member for Rockingham read a list of matters that he said were sitting on my desk, only those two matters that I have just mentioned, about which I expect a decision to be forthcoming very shortly, are on my desk. The other matters that the member for Rockingham listed are, at the moment, in substantive negotiation. They are not matters that are on my desk at the moment. Making those statements makes the negotiations so much harder to bring to fruition and to get the matters on my desk. The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
I thank the member for the question. I am very glad that this question has been asked, because some serious allegations about native title were made by the member for Rockingham some time last week. To paraphrase those allegations, they were that somehow matters had been deliberately delayed or were, as I think the phrase was, “sitting on my desk” in an effort to somehow influence the proceedings that are going on with James Price Point. I want to make four points about that allegation. I must say that I think the allegation is quite wrong, very unfair and terribly unhelpful in the context of trying to negotiate very complicated matters. First, if we look back to 2005 for the number of determinations of native title that occur in a given year, it was usually about two or three. It is a modest number every year, and that is about the right target. We have had one determination so far this year, and two are past the stage of substantive negotiation. They are the Nyikina Mangala matter and the Uungguu and Dambimangari matter. Both are complicated matters and I expect both to go before cabinet shortly. If those proceed as we envisage they will, that will be three determinations for the year. These things come through the pipeline often collectively and also often towards the end of the year. The idea that somehow there will be fewer determinations this year than there have been in other years is quite wrong. Although the member for Rockingham read a list of matters that he said were sitting on my desk, only those two matters that I have just mentioned, about which I expect a decision to be forthcoming very shortly, are on my desk. The other matters that the member for Rockingham listed are, at the moment, in substantive negotiation. They are not matters that are on my desk at the moment. Making those statements makes the negotiations so much harder to bring to fruition and to get the matters on my desk. The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
First, if we look back to 2005 for the number of determinations of native title that occur in a given year, it was usually about two or three. It is a modest number every year, and that is about the right target. We have had one determination so far this year, and two are past the stage of substantive negotiation. They are the Nyikina Mangala matter and the Uungguu and Dambimangari matter. Both are complicated matters and I expect both to go before cabinet shortly. If those proceed as we envisage they will, that will be three determinations for the year. These things come through the pipeline often collectively and also often towards the end of the year. The idea that somehow there will be fewer determinations this year than there have been in other years is quite wrong. Although the member for Rockingham read a list of matters that he said were sitting on my desk, only those two matters that I have just mentioned, about which I expect a decision to be forthcoming very shortly, are on my desk. The other matters that the member for Rockingham listed are, at the moment, in substantive negotiation. They are not matters that are on my desk at the moment. Making those statements makes the negotiations so much harder to bring to fruition and to get the matters on my desk. The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The other point I make is that the work of the Office of Native Title and my work as Attorney General is not just about determinations. The office, of course, has limited resources that it has to use well, as it did under the Labor government. Other than determinations, the big-ticket items are—this is where advancement occurs—settlements and the finalisation when native title has previously been determined. The record of this government shows that under the Yawuru agreement, 1 875 hectares of land are now available for development around Broome. It was a $200 million plus settlement—the biggest in Australia’s history. The Ord agreement was $57 million. The Murchison Radio-Astronomy Observatory agreement was $17 million. Not only are we progressing the determinations at about the speed that is traditional and historically acceptable, but also we are closing very big deals at the same time. The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The third thing I say to the member for Rockingham is that some of these matters are very complicated. I will raise one example. The Bardi Jawi claim was intriguing. The Federal Court determined that over the Alarm Shoals area, there was a right to protect. Unfortunately, the Federal Court did not tell us what that meant—whether that was an exclusive or non-exclusive native title right. A good deal of the energies of the Office of Native Title are devoted to trying to sort out these matters. The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The final point I make is that in matters of determination, whether they occur pursuant to litigation or by consent, they are part of a Federal Court process. For the member for Rockingham to get up and, in effect, accuse me of deliberately delaying these matters to achieve — Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : You said that two are sitting on your desk. Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : No, they are not sitting on my desk. They have now moved off my desk. Of course, matters are sometimes required to be considered by the minister. The member should not resile from his allegation, because his allegation was that I was deliberately going slowly in my consideration of these matters to try to effect an outcome somewhere else. The member accused me of an abuse of Federal Court processes as a lawyer, and it is not something that I would ever do. Yes, some of these matters require close consideration. We are on track. We have done more final settlements in two years than the Labor Party ever did. The member has made a very serious allegation with no factual basis whatsoever and which is quite wrong. Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : Are you including as part of your record all of your laws that you passed to try to abolish native title? Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : I see. Yes, I think I might have been at high school at that stage, member for Rockingham. I was not passing any laws in high school. Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : Daddy was around helping the then Premier with that stuff. Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : What I say to the member for Rockingham — Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr M. McGowan : Daddy and the then Premier were doing it. The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
The SPEAKER : Attorney General, you have taken an interjection across the floor from the member for Rockingham. I am now expecting you to conclude the answer to the question you have been asked. Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
Mr C.C. PORTER : What a pathetic interjection it was. It is a bitter pill for the member to have to swallow that I am terribly committed to native title, that we are moving things along at a very good pace, and that this government has settled matters beyond his wildest dreams. For him to imply by way of interjection that somehow my father or Richard Court were receiving my instructions from high school to try to pass laws to eradicate native title pits him as the fool he is.
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.