Byron Shire Council would undertake a suite of measures to ensure that local Aboriginal people owned housing on Country, under a motion to be put to this week’s Council meeting.
The motion, from Labor councillor Asren Pugh, proposes embedding the delivery of Aboriginal-owned housing for Aboriginal people within the objectives and actions of all of Council’s residential strategies.
As part of this process the Shire’s Residential Lands Strategy, which is currently being reviewed, would be amended to include specific areas for housing that would be owned and occupied by Aboriginal people.
‘In meetings with Arakwal representatives… it has been expressed that the two most important issues facing Arakwal members are housing and jobs,’ Cr Pugh said in his written comments in support of the motion.
‘Without housing on Country, Arakwal members cannot effectively engage with the community or Council consultation processes, they cannot enjoy the public art they have created’.
‘Native title holders have an intrinsic right to live on Country, and we as a Council have a pivotal role to play in ensuring that happens.’
Cr Pugh said that while there were already some Aboriginal housing initiatives and processes being undertaken by Council staff, this needed to be made a priority, with tangible goals and outcomes being set and achieved.
‘Our Residential Strategy spends a lot of time talking about the importance of living on Country, but includes no targets or mechanisms to make it happen,’ Cr Pugh said.
‘Rather, it focuses on consultation with Aboriginal people when people want to develop on their land. It also needs to be made clear that this is about the rights of native title holders to live on Country, not just through programs designed for low-socioeconomic members of the community.’
Process in place: staff
But Council staff said a process is already in place to achieve the goal of housing Aboriginal people on Country, and that it was being undertaken in direct consultation with the different local Aboriginal stakeholder groups.
Council’s Director of Sustainable Environment and Economy, Shannon Burt, said it was these Aboriginal organisations that were best placed to advise on needs, priorities and goals, and to guide the design and delivery of programs to meet these goals.
‘However, they cannot do all the work, particularly in the housing space, and neither can Council,’ Ms Burt said.
Ms Burt also noted that the Residential Lands Strategy already contained principles and actions relevant to Aboriginal housing on Country, which would be able to be updated during the current review.
This was consistent with other state and regional plans that also contained measures to address Aboriginal housing, Ms Burt said.
Ms Burt also noted that local government had little ability to influence either Aboriginal housing on Country, or the broader overall housing crisis, compared to other levels of government.
“Native title holders have an intrinsic right to live on Country”…. says who ? In this democratic, capitalist country they have the right to buy a house. In order to buy a house it would require working and saving, neither of which are highly represented in ‘culture’ and as is pointed out ‘Work is the curse of the drinking man.’
You wouldn’t be indulging in some tropes here would you Ken? Like the ones about snide, self righteous old hippy Byron tossers.
Social housing needs are not based on race.
This is more racism, and won’t be acceptable to non-Aboriginal people that are homeless in Byron.
Why is our country turning it’s back on reconciliation in this way?
How can doing this stuff over and over not build resentment within the community?
Why did the Labor party turn it’s back on means/need testing as the process to determine how to spend tax/rate payers’ money to help people?
Australia used to be envied by other nations when we did social assistance fairly, based on means/need testing.
Why are we replacing this approach with the racial privilege approach?
Ha ha ha ha ha. Oh, please do. I’ll tell the boys in Meekatharra to crank up the old FJ. But I don’t think that is who you intend to house.
Will applicants undergo DNA testing?
DNA tests are racist. If you’re 2 % black, you’re Aboriginal, same as an African that is 2% white, is Swiss. I’m 2% wealthy, and thus a billionaire, but still no Ferrari, which is definitely a racism.
Those that control land and its resources create inter generational wealth. It was illegal under British Royal law, British Parliamentary law and International law to take over already occupied land. Under the illegal confiscation of Aboriginal land, the Burgers of Sydney got a map of Byron and made up a plan of sites and sold them. The local mobs settlement at Tallows Beach was demolished for the Sand Miners, and their moved to settlement at Irionbark Ave was then subsequently burnt down by white arsonists, and the mob forced to move to Cabbage Tree Island. They are back now, and just getting onto the housing ladder, but well behind the Australians of Immigrant backgrounds that moved in before the mob was even counted as residents in the 1996 Referendum. Even later in the occupation of their land, in the 1960’s, there were only 6 jobs for Aboriginals in Byron, at the meatworks, and if even further job vacancies came up with this only one Aboriginal employer in Byron, then the job went to a white person. Racist to look at housing the original residents after their land was stolen and they’ve been repeatedly moved on and kicked out. Have a look at the news on any day on how disputes on who owns land is alternatively addressed rather than making amends, if you have no empathy for your fellow residents that have been severely disadvantaged by you being prioritised by the British occupation
Well done for giving us perspective John. Well done Asren
So they are hoarding 65,000 years of inter generational wealth? Capital gains bill on that will be enormous. Or you may just have no clue about economics, and a Sovereign Citizen understanding of common law. It is absolutely racist them treat them differently based on claimed ethnicity.
The CGT was introduced in 1985. I believe assets held prior to this date are exempt? No idea of the law, economics?