❓ Hon George Cash asks whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. Minister Stephens acknowledges the question, clarifies the relevant bodies, and states his belief that they should pay rates, but the department is unsure if they do.
AnsweredQoN 1338Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
INDIGENOUS LAND CORPORATION, LOCAL GOVERNMENT RATES
(1) Does the Indigenous Land Council pay local government rates on pastoral leases held by it; and if not, why not? (2) Do any particular exemptions apply to the Indigenous Land Council in respect of local government rates? Hon TOM STEPHENS
(1) Does the Indigenous Land Council pay local government rates on pastoral leases held by it; and if not, why not? (2) Do any particular exemptions apply to the Indigenous Land Council in respect of local government rates? Hon TOM STEPHENS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
(2) Do any particular exemptions apply to the Indigenous Land Council in respect of local government rates? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
(1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
(2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
(2) Do any particular exemptions apply to the Indigenous Land Council in respect of local government rates? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
(1) I am not aware of any organisation titled “Indigenous Land Council”. The Indigenous Land Corporation is the federal government organisation that owns properties, including pastoral leases, as I understand it. There are also representative bodies called land councils for various regions, including the Kimberley Land Council and the like. Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
Hon George Cash interjected. Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
Hon TOM STEPHENS: As far as I am aware, none of the representative bodies holds any land. With reference to the federal funded Indigenous Land Corporation, the department has provided the following response: it is unaware of whether the Indigenous Land Corporation pays local government rates on pastoral leases. The department has answered on the basis of a body called the Indigenous Land Council. I am not happy with the answer. My understanding is that any organisation with a pastoral lease is obliged to pay rates. However, those issues will inevitably be determined by individual local governments and will include those local governments’ consideration of the use to which the land is put. To the extent that it is a pastoral lease, it is rateable. It would be entirely within the rights of a local government body to both rate the property and expect rates to be paid. As the Minister for Local Government, with some considerable interest in the interests of Aboriginal landholders, I am of the view that they should and must pay rates to local councils that require them to pay rates. (2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
(2) With regard to exemptions for the federal body of the Indigenous Land Corporation, there are no specific exemptions from local government rates under the Local Government Act 1995 but crown land that is used or held for a public purpose or land that is used exclusively for charitable purposes is not rateable under the Act. If the Indigenous Land Corporation were to argue that the land it holds for a pastoral purpose somehow complied with that section of the Act, it could be arguing that it was exempt. If it were arguing that, it would be incorrectly holding a pastoral lease. That would make it no orphan, because it seems that a considerable number of organisations these days hold pastoral leases and are not involved in pastoral activity in any shape or form. Some hold them for conservation purposes or for protecting mining interests, and have purchased them as pastoral leases but do not operate them as such.
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.