|Print this page|
Jagera, Yuggera and Ugarapul People and Ipswich City Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA)
|Date:||19 September 2008|
|Sub Category:||Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) (Native Title Act)|
|Click this link to search this location with google maps|
|The extract of the ILUA from the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreements describes the area covered by the agreement as follows: "The area subject to this agreement covers about 1,200 square kilometres and is located west of Brisbane in the Ipswich City Council local government area."|
|Legal Status:||Registered with The National Native Title Tribunal on the Register of Indigenous Land Use Agreement on 19 September 2008. This is an Authorised Area Agreement under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).|
|Legal Reference:||National Native Title Tribunal File No. : QI2007/037|
|Subject Matter:||Consultation | Cultural Heritage | Land Planning | Local Government | Native Title | Native Title - Extinguishment | Recognition Agreement / Acknowledgement | Recognition of Traditional Rights and Interests|
|The Jagera, Yuggera and Ugarapul People and Ipswich City Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) was agreed between Ipswich City Council and Kenneth Henry Bonner, Clarence William Bonner, Caroline Joyce Bonner-Bray, James Bonner, Madonna William (Jagera People), Eddie Ruska, Michelle Thomson (Yuggera People), Ross Anderson and Eileen Oertel (Ugarapul People). |
The purpose of the ILUA is to provide a framwork for an ongoing relationship between the parties in the lead up to a native title determination. Ipswich City Council, through the agreement, recognises the special position of the Jagera, Yuggera and Ugarapul People as the Traditional Owners of the City of Ipswich.
The agreement provides a framework for the conduct of local government activities on the land of the traditional owners that varies according to the relative impact such activities will have.
|The Parties consent to the following:|
•Where an Activity only relates to Freehold Land no Native Title compliance measures for the Activity are required and it is agreed that native title has been extinguished over such areas.
Compliance measures for Activities in relation to Aboriginal Cultural Heritage are still required as set out in Part 4.
On non-freehold land:
•The undertaking of Low Impact Activity without a need for further consent of the Traditional Owners;
•Medium Impact Activity once the Local Government gives Notice to that effect; and
•High Impact Activity once the Local Government gives Notice to that effect and completes consultation in compliance with the agreement.
Clause 38 of the agreement relates to the validation of certain past acts and confirmation that such validation does not equate to extinguishment.
Activities proceed as Low Impact Activities where they are done for the purpose of implementing an Approved Management Plan, which requires notice, and must comply with the requirements set out in Schedule 11.
The parties agree that the right to negotiate provisions of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) do not apply, as the alternative consultation provisions are to be followed instead. The non-extinguishment principle applies to the future acts covered by the agreement.
Without this agreement, the grant would have been invalid and the right to negotaite provisions of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) would apply. Under this Act any activity, such as a grant of land, that may affect native title rights is defined as a 'future act' and must comply with the future act provisions of the Act in order to be valid.
Was this useful? Click here to fill in the ATNS survey