3 March Amendments to Native Title Act give industry stability March 3, 2021 By Sally Parker General, Industry, Mining NativeTitleAct, Mining, Exploration, Industry 0 Recent amendments to both the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (Cth) (CATSI Act) are intended to better resolve Native Title claims and provide stability for industry. The Native Title Legislation Amendment Act 2020 addresses the problems caused by the McGlade decision as they relate to ‘right to negotiate’ agreements or section 31 agreements. Ramifications of the McGlade decision In McGlade v Native Title Registrar  FCAFC10, the Federal Court held that an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) cannot be registered if a single member of the registered native title claim (RTNC) withholds their consent to execute it. This is true even if all persons who hold native title within the ILUA area authorise the agreement. The decision meant that: ILUAs which were registered without the signatures of all RNTC members no longer met the requirements for ILUAs as defined under the Act. In some cases, the person who had not signed the ILUA was deceased. ILUAs which were lodged for registration without the signatures of all RNTC members could no longer be registered. This has meant significant uncertainty for industry. An unregistered ILUA: Does not bind the persons who hold or claim to hold native title Does not limit any claim to compensation to that agreed in the ILUA, potentially opening the door for native title groups to bring a future claim. Means that a company seeking mining and/or exploration rights may not be able to rely on the consent of the claim group to do any acts that affect native title rights (‘future acts’). Industry stakeholders have been concerned that McGlade also affects section 31 agreements. A section 31 agreement is an agreement concerning the grant of mining and/or exploration rights over land that may be subject to native title. If McGlade applies, existing section 31 agreements that are missing signatures may not be valid. It also raises doubt on the ability of parties to negotiate in good faith if one of the registered native title claimants has died. Limitations of the 2017 amendments The Native Title Amendment (Indigenous Land Use Agreements) Act 2017 (Cth) went some way to fixing the problem. It: Reversed the impact of McGlade by retrospectively validating registered ILUAs Allowed for the registration of some pending ILUAs. Allows the native title claim group to determine who must be a party to future ILUAs, either by nominating specific persons or by requiring a majority of applicants. However, it did not address the impact of the McGlade decision on section 31 agreements. Native Title Legislation Amendment Act 2020 The new legislation: Validates the mining and exploration agreements that the 2017 amendments didn’t cover. This gives industry certainty around the validity of section 31 agreements so it can move forward. Establishes a new public list of future section 31 agreements to support meaningful transparency. Provides Native Title claimants with greater flexibility in claim management and improved dispute resolution by allowing native title claimant groups to establish their own internal processes for how their claim is managed. Establishes improved pathways for dispute resolution once a determination of native title is made. Under the amendments, mining and exploration companies can move ahead with greater certainty and develop stronger partnerships with native title claim groups. Related Articles ARELJ - Case Note - Financial Consequences of the Dismissal of a Native Title Claim Energy industry and government response to COVID-19 In response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis, government and industry have come together to ensure the community, economy and industry are supported. The Council of Australian Governments Energy Council (COAG Energy Council) has formed the Energy Coordination Mechanism (ECM) which is expected to have a complete plan by the end of April. The immediate focus of these efforts has been on four areas Climate change action is being driven by business and industry While everyone’s focus in recent months has been on the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change was top of everyone’s mind when the year began with bushfires ravaging Australia. The pandemic has seen individuals and organisations assess their ideologies and perspectives on a range of topics, climate change being one of them. It now seems that climate change is back on everyone’s agenda and none more so than business and industry. New developments in the hydrogen industry We can expect significant legislative reform for the hydrogen industry in the near future. This follows a review of all Australian laws (both Federal and State) in 2019 that found there were approximately 730 pieces of legislation and 119 standards related to the industry and recent developments that are seeking to develop the industry further. What is concerning mining and metals industry executives today? Recent surveys conducted in the mining and metals industry sector indicate that climate change, price volatility and the risk of a global depression are the top concerns for executives. The KMPG Mining Risk Forecast 2020/21 Report nominates climate change and price risks as top-of-mind for executives while a mid-year survey by White & Case found that the fear of a global recession was the most common concern amongst those surveyed. It’s worth noting that the KMPG survey was conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the concerns raised have ongoing relevance both now and into the future. Key risks for the industry in 2021 As 2020 draws to a close, industry is looking to the year ahead. EY's 2021 report on the risks in mining and metals reflects the turbulent changes of the past year. Volatility is new to the list, while the COVID-19 pandemic continues to inform the way industry leaders are approaching established risks around climate and license to operate. Showing 0 Comment Comments are closed.