Introduction:
A pub manager in Toobeah, Queensland, is expressing concerns about a potential land transfer that could result in 95% of the land in his town being given to an Aboriginal corporation. The Bigambul Native Title Aboriginal Corporation (BNTAC) has revealed its master plan to use a portion of the Toobeah Reserve for land management, eco-tourism, and land regeneration. However, the pub manager argues that members of the Bigambul people do not currently live in the town and questions why they are being granted “inalienable freehold” over the land.
The Lack of Historical Connection:
Toobeah business owner Michael Offerdahl points out that the Bigambul people have only been in the region since the 1920s and did not exist when the town was established. He believes that their lack of historical connection to the area undermines their claim to the land. Offerdahl highlights that the name Toobeah originates from the native Gamilaroi word, dhuba-y, meaning “to point,” which he believes demonstrates the absence of a deep historical presence of the Bigambul people in the area.
Potential Ramifications and Lack of Clarity:
Offerdahl expresses concerns that granting the Bigambul people control over the land could significantly alter the trajectory of the township and future commercial opportunities. He argues that more clarity is needed regarding the plans to avoid potential ramifications across Queensland. He warns that if this transfer is allowed, it could set a precedent for similar actions to occur in other towns across the state.
Questions Raised in Parliament:
Mirani MP Steven Andrew raises the issue in state parliament and questions the decision-making process and its impact on property rights and access to essential services for the Toobeah community. The Department of Resources responds by stating that while community consultation is not required under the Aboriginal Land Act (ALA), a community forum was held in Toobeah to address concerns. The department ensures that town water and bore facilities will remain accessible.
Number of Towns Under Consideration:
When asked about the number of towns under consideration for land transfer under the ALA, the Department of Resources confirms that there are 15 sites being evaluated. The Epoch Times reports that two of these sites are Eurong and Happy Valley on Fraser Island, where Indigenous groups have expressed interest in obtaining inalienable freehold handover.
Differences Between Aboriginal Land Acts and Native Title:
The article explains the differences between the Aboriginal Land Acts (ALA) and Native Title. Native Title recognizes the rights and interests of Indigenous people in land and waters based on traditional laws and customs. In contrast, the ALA is an actual grant of land that provides Indigenous people with inalienable freehold title. The ALA grants ownership, control, and management rights to Indigenous people, allowing them to engage in economic activities on the land.
BNTAC’s Plans for Eco-Tourism and Land Restoration:
The BNTAC addresses misconceptions about their land claim and states that only 0.18% of the Toobeah area is subject to their claim. They emphasize that locals will still have unrestricted access to amenities and attractions in the area. The BNTAC denies plans for social housing and instead outlines their intentions to focus on cultural, ecological, and economic development through regional eco-cultural tourism opportunities for Toobeah.
Council’s Response and Unlikelihood of Social Housing:
Goondiwindi Regional Council clarifies that the future of the Toobeah Reserve is a state issue beyond their control. They state that BNTAC is open to collaborating on shared use guidelines for the reserve but also highlight that social housing would be unlikely due to infrastructure limitations in Toobeah.
Importance of Transparency:
Research Chairman Gary Johns emphasizes the need for transparency in land transfers under the Aboriginal Land Act. He argues that the Queensland government should not hand over land exclusively to any group without proper consultation with stakeholders and the public. He calls for full awareness of the potential uses of the land and asserts that the same rights afforded to Aboriginal groups should be extended to all Queenslanders.
Conclusion:
The potential land transfer in Toobeah, Queensland, under the Aboriginal Land Act has raised concerns among the local community. The lack of a historical connection between the Bigambul people and the town, as well as the potential ramifications for future commercial opportunities, have sparked debate. The government is urged to ensure transparency in the decision-making process and consult with all stakeholders. It remains to be seen how this issue will progress and whether it will have wider implications for other towns in Queensland.
