Networkers,
Gerry McCarthy - the Member for Barkly in the Northern Territory Parliament - has been in touch on the
Muckaty issue. You can follow
Gerry on Facebook here. I am so taken with Gerry's Facebook photo that I am reproducing it here.
Now - onto the real story which is Gerry's latest info to me on Muckaty.
 |
Hi Brigid
Thanks for the information post and I hope you are well with good health and happiness.
Essentially the Muckaty campaign has peaked with a Federal Court case, Traditional Owners v's the NLC to answer a good question, 'can a small family group of TO's make a decision to use Aboriginal land that affects the wider Clan, Moiety and Tribal groups including surrounding Tribal groups?'
We hope for the hearing in Tennant Creek, maybe this year if our luck holds out!
Apparently the 'silks' of Australia are very interested in this case and it is a good case to set the 'road map' for Aboriginal Land Use. If it is a caravan park then consultation is needed, a safari camp, sure consultation is neded. What about Australia's first nuclear waste dump?
Its OK to develop Aboriginal land in consultation with Traditional Owners but the first Oz nuclear waste dump, 'stop the bus' we had better have a serious consultation about the location of this!
In relation to the NT in general, I am in Darwin participating in the 2013 Estimates Hearing as an Opposition member so you can imagine its 'heavy going' with the CLP showing their true colours!
In my opinion the Territory is on the crest of a very good economic wave however CLP policies of economic rationalism are hurting the best resource, Territory families who are being 'priced out of the Territory.'
Anyhow, we will hold the Government to account, present innovative policies to the electorate and stand as an alternative Government in 2016! Wish us luck to make these 'jokers' a one term Government!
Good hunting & God Bless.
|
|
 |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
This blog does not take Anonymous comments. Experience shows that comments cluttered with "Anonymous" are boring and people don't know whether "Anonymous" is one person or many. This is not a decision about freedom of speech. It is a decision about boring or unwillingness to be known by even a pseudonym.