Carolyn Briggs PO Box 619 Carlton South 3053

Mr Holland Secretary

RE: Adverse Comments made against myself at the Senate Committee Inquiry into the provisions of the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Amendment Bill.

I have today received by email a copy of a letter forwarded by a Mr Neal Adams to the above committee. This letter argues the case for a group calling themselves “Bunurong ” and makes adverse comments against:

• Myself, claiming that I have no “Bunurong Blood line”; and • Against the Victorian Government.

It is sad, but not surprising, that Mr Neal Adams chooses to use the privilege of a Senate Committee to make offensive and defamatory comments about me.

Mr Neal Adams is not an Indigenous Australian and to my knowledge has no authority to speak on behalf of Indigenous Victorians or Victorian traditional owners.

Mr Adams’ has mislead the Senate in making such an offensive claim that I “no connection to Bunurong blood line”, his claim has no basis in fact or law and the nature of the comment is in itself offensive.

Mr Adams is well aware of previous decisions of the National Native Title Tribunal, The Federal Court and the Full Bench of the Federal Court that repudiate the claims he makes. In the decisions of the NNTT, The Federal Court and the Full bench of the Federal Court, my capacity to authorise agreements on behalf of the Boonerwrung people has been upheld.

In addition to the legal precedents, my status and authority as an elder of the Boonwurrung people, is earned and inherited according to traditional law and custom and recognised by other Boonwurrung descendants and other Indigenous Victorians.

In order to address these offensive remarks, I wish to provide the following information.

The Boon wurrung People

The Boon wurrung or Boonerwrung people are the traditional owners of the country that commences at and spreads around the coastal part of then East as far as Wilson’s Promontory. [See Maps by Ian Clarke] The word Boon means “to speak or with the lips” and wurrung means language of the people. The Boon wurrung are part of the larger . Some other spellings such as those used by Mr Adams include Bunurong or Boonorong.

Mr Adams’ Contentions and his relationship with the Bunurong Land Council

Mr Adams is an advocate for a group of Tasmanian people calling themselves “The Bunurong Land Council”. This group, The BLC, is represented by a Mr Stephen Crompton from Western and his partner Sonia Murray from Tasmania.

It is common knowledge that Mr Adams and the BLC derive their income from Developers in the region. They have also been subject to numerous complaints about their inappropriate abusive behaviour and actions. Proposed changes to the Legislation may affect their capacity to make such unsubstantiated and unreasonable demands.

This group came to several years ago from Tasmania and have been making unsubstantiated claims that they have some traditional connections with Victoria. This small group have no authority to act by either of the Tasmanian Land Councils, nor are they recognised Tasmanian leaders such as Mr Michael Mansell and Mr Rodney Dillion.

Their claims against my authority as Boonwurrung Elder and spokesperson have been consistently rejected, including dismissals of their appeals to the National Native Title Tribunal, The Federal Court and the Full Bench of the Federal Court. The decisions in these matters are outlined below.

Mr Adams is well aware that in these three matters, their claims have been dismissed as having no basis. The following summary of these matters will indicate that Mr Adams’ comments have no basis other than to promote his own self interest.

1. The Decision of the National Native Title Tribunal 2001

In 2001 an Indigenous Land Use Agreement [ILUA] between the Blairgowrie Safe Boat Harbour and the Boonerwrung People was registered by the National Native Title Tribunal in Melbourne. Carolyn Briggs [myself] was the authorised Boonerwrung signatory to the ILUA. In making the decision to register the ILUA, the Delegate of the NNTT Ms Walsh, rejected objections from Ms Murray [and her group the BLC] to me authorising this agreement. The Delegate in her lengthy decision, which rejected Ms Murray’s objections stated:

“I am satisfied that Carolyn Briggs is a person claiming to hold native title in relation to the area covered by the agreement, and therefore the requirements relating to mandatory native title parties in s24CD are therefore met."

"I do not think that s24CG(3), in requiring that all reasonable efforts be made to ensure that all persons who may hold native title are identified, can be said to impose an obligation on a group of people to accept other people, just because these people claim to be the holders of native title. I am of the view that the terminology "all persons who may hold native title" refers to persons who at least are able to make out a prima facie case that they hold native title, within the meaning of s223."

2. The Federal Court Decision: Murray v The Registrar of the National Native Title Tribunal; The Blairgowrie Safe Boat Harbour; Carolyn Briggs [2002] FCA 1598

In 2002, Ms Murray [on behalf of this group called the Bunurong Land Council] challenged the decision of the NNTT to register this ILUA in the Federal Court on a number of grounds including their claim that Ms Murray and her group had not been involved in the authorisation of the ILUA. They disputed my capacity to act as the Authorised person to sign such an agreement.

In 2002 Mr Justice Marshall dismissed Ms Murray’s application. In his decision he made the following comments:

14. I am content to adopt the expression "Tasmanian group" when referring to the people for whom Mirimbiak act, which includes Ms Murray.

72. I agree with counsel for Ms Briggs that Ms Walsh's decision showed that she reached a considered view that Ms Briggs had made all reasonable efforts to ensure that all persons who may hold native title in relation to the relevant area covered by the ILUA, had been identified. Ms Walsh dealt with this issue comprehensively at paragraphs 65 to 75 of her decision. Ultimately she found that (at paragraph 71):

" I am of the view that the opinion formed by the Boonerwrung, prior to entering into the agreement in September 2000, that the Tasmanian people were not Boonerwrung was reasonable, having regard to:

* the lack of production of credible evidence between November 1999 and the making of the agreement some 10 months later, that showed that the Tasmanian group were genealogically connected to a Boonerwrung ancestor and currently connected to Boonerwrung country, including the agreement area,

* the fact that their own inquiries revealed that the group were from Tasmania and associated with and connected to Tasmanian Aboriginal groups."

75 In the written submissions filed on behalf of Ms Briggs, it is submitted that the approach of Ms Walsh involved no error of law. In particular, it is contended that the delegate did not mis-state the test under s 24CG(3)(b), but rather observed that a person should not necessarily be regarded as someone who may hold native title simply because they say they do so hold native title. I accept that submission. I see no error in the approach taken by Ms Walsh as to the proper meaning of s 24CG(3)(b).

3. Appeal to the Full Bench: Murray v Registrar of the National Native Title Tribunal [2003] FCAFC 220 (24 September 2003)

In 2003 Ms Murray appealed against the decision of the decision of Justice Marshall to the Full Bench of the Federal Court. The Full Bench dismissed her application as having no merit and awarded costs against her.

In conclusion

I have worked with my community and at State and National level for many years.

I have devoted much of my life to working to preserve my heritage and support young people in work, the arts and sport. I am proud of my Boonwurrung heritage as it has been passed down to me from my mother.

I request that the Senate Committee ignore these unsubstantiated and offensive claims by Mr Adams and counsel him on the future misuse of such privileges in order to defame individuals.

Concerns raised about the Victorian Government

As an authorised Elder spokesperson for the Boonwurrung people I have worked with both the Federal Government and State Government to protect, preserve and promote our history and heritage. This has included being appointed by the Commonwealth Gov’t to the Board of the Pt Nepean Community Trust.

Under the current cultural heritage legislation I have been working with both Developers and the Government to identify cultural heritage sites and work towards preserving archaeological sites.

I trust that the changes to the cultural heritage legislation proposed by the Victorian Government will improve the capacity of Traditional owners to work directly with both Government and developers to protect and preserve their heritage while allowing for properly planned and co-ordinated development.

In relation to any proposed changes to heritage legislation, I believe that it will require a working partnership between traditional owners, all levels of government, and community.

I trust that the Senate Committee may also support a constructive and positive approach to protecting our rich cultural heritage so that it can be shared and appreciated by all our community.

Yours Sincerely

Carolyn Briggs