Mr SNOWDON (5:18 PM) —On behalf of the Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund, I present the eighteenth report of the committee entitled Examination of annual reports for 1999-2000 in fulfilment of the committee's duties pursuant to section 206(c) of the Native Title Act 1993.

Ordered that the report be printed.

Mr SNOWDON —by leave—The Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund reviews the annual reports of the National Native Title Tribunal, the Indigenous Land Corporation and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund. The committee is entitled to take a broad approach to its powers and duties in this regard under the Native Title Act 1993. In its examination of annual reports since March 1995, the committee has conducted what might be regarded as performance audits. This inquiry into three annual reports required four public hearings and over 20 submissions were received.

Firstly, I will speak about the National Native Title Tribunal. In the 1999-2000 year, the National Native Title Tribunal maintained 215 employees and had an operating expenses budget for the year in excess of $23 million. At the close of the reporting period, 241 claimant applications had been discontinued or combined with others and 539 claimant applications requiring resolution remained. The tribunal has indicated that more resources will now be available for the mediation of these claimant applications.

The use of consultants by the tribunal concerns the committee. In 1999-2000, the tribunal engaged 49 consultants, with a total expenditure approaching $2 million. This represented an increase of 12 consultants and almost $900,000 in expenditure over the year 1998-99. It is the committee's view that the tribunal members should be engaged to do the work of members. Where there is a shortage, the tribunal president should advise the Commonwealth government so that an adequate number of members can be appointed.

The committee records its impression that the tribunal is a most professional authority, performing its functions extremely well. For example, the tribunal takes a leading role in the dissemination of public information about native title and performs a very important educative function in that regard. The tribunal has performed an important service in assisting with the introduction of the new Indigenous Land Use Agreements, ILUAs, regime included in the Native Title Amendment Act 1998, which commenced in September 1998. The tribunal's functions now include assisting parties to negotiate ILUAs and the registration of those agreements. The tribunal is commended for the manner in which it has devised strategies to deal with the unique challenges created by ILUAs. The committee has recently concluded its inquiry into ILUAs and a report will be tabled shortly. The tribunal has presented an excellent report and is to be commended for it.

I will now discuss the land fund. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund is intended to assist indigenous people to acquire land and to manage it. In 2004, the Commonwealth's allocations to the land fund will cease. Should the target balance not be met by that date, a top-up payment will be made to bring the account to $1.106 billion, indexed from 1994. The value of the land fund at 30 June 2000 was over $784 million. In the reporting period, an amount of over $50 million was drawn down to the Indigenous Land Corporation, the ILC. Amounts are to be drawn down to the ILC from the land fund immediately.

With regard to the Indigenous Land Corporation, during 1999-2000, the ILC board approved the purchase of only 18 properties, a significant decline on the 69 proposals approved during the previous year. The ILC has attributed this decline to the land needs planning process. Two inquiries were commissioned during 1999-2000 affecting the ILC. First, the then minister, Senator the Hon. John Herron, commissioned an inquiry by Mr Stephen Skehill into the behaviour of the ILC directors. Secondly, the ILC board initiated an inquiry, completed by Mr Andrew Rogers QC, into the purchase of two cattle stations in Western Australia.

The Skehill inquiry arose from a request by four ILC directors for the minister to terminate the appointment of the then ILC chairperson, Ms Sharon Firebrace. Ms Firebrace also made a variety of allegations concerning other directors. Mr Skehill's report was delivered to the minister on 1 December 2000. The report's findings have not been announced. The committee has not been able to examine it. Ms Firebrace has admitted that the minister suggested on three separate occasions that she should stand down. The committee is unable to accept Ms Firebrace's claims about the cause of dysfunction within the ILC during her two-year term of office which expired in August 2001.

The report of the Rogers' inquiry has not yet been published. Mr Rogers has released a statement in which he confirms that he found no evidence to support the allegations of criminality and serious misconduct in regard to the purchase of several cattle stations. An SBS Insight program on the matter stated that Ms Firebrace could not provide any evidence about her claim of secret commissions and international conspiracies. The committee was also unable to find anything to substantiate Ms Firebrace's claims regarding an alleged Australian Federal Police investigation of this matter.

The committee has concluded that, in the course of its inquiry, it may have been misled by Ms Firebrace about two separate matters. This is a matter which the committee has taken extremely seriously. As a result, these conclusions will be referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Privileges. The committee has also been very concerned about the performance of the ILC over the last two years. There is reason to believe that the ILC's performance has affected the delivery of benefits to indigenous people by way of land ownership. The committee hopes that the newly appointed chairperson and the general manager will direct the ILC into more competent performance.

In conclusion, in its deliberations the committee sought to go through a morass of detail in particular about the ILC and its leadership, and the ILC board. It was quite difficult and I want to thank the committee and its chair, Senator Ferris, and its other members, Senator Crossin, Senator Lees who is a new member on the committee, Senator Mason, Senator McLucas, the Hon. Ian Causley, Mr Haase, Mr McMullan and Mr Secker. I pay particular tribute to Peter Grundy, the secretary, and to his staff for the excellent work they did in drafting this very comprehensive and quite difficult report.