NSW Government Has Undermined Aboriginal Land Rights to Secure Coveted Crown Land

The Minns government quietly introduced a bill described as “minor administrative amendments” in March 2026, which the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council soon exposed involved a stealth attack on NSW Aboriginal land rights. And while vocal campaigning on the part of the network of 121 land councils saw the bill temporary shelved, it was brought on again just a fortnight ago and passed.

Prior to the enactment of these laws, the NSW Aboriginal land rights regime, governed by the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW), was considered the most robust land restitution framework on this continent, as this land rights regime had allowed Aboriginal land councils to broadly claim “unused and unneeded” Crown land. Yet, the ability to claim such land has now been stifled.

Introduced in March, and first debated on 15 September 2026, the Crown Land Management Amendment (Statutory Review) Bill 2026 has served to amend the Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW), as well as its related 2018 regulations and the Commons Management Act 1989 (NSW). And some amendments within the bill have served to stymie the Aboriginal Land Rights Act regime.

NSWALC chair Dr Raymond Kelly, who led the campaign against the shadowy reforms, asserted, after the progression of the bill on 16 September, that the NSW government has long been neglecting the land rights system, which has created a backlog of over 44,000 unprocessed claims, and then it attacked the manner in which unused Crown land parcels were being distributed to land councils.

The land reforms were hidden within the bill containing various Crown land law changes because undermining Aboriginal land rights is a bad look for NSW Labor. And when it’s considered that the state has sought this reform due to prime Sydney property ending up in the hands of land councils, it’s apparent that government is only comfortable in handing over land the market doesn’t value.

Choice land retained

“Misinformation fuelled fear and resentment towards Aboriginal people for exercising rights provided under NSW law,” explained Kelly, in the wake of the amendments passing parliament a fortnight ago. “Labor used racial division for political gain and now needs to explain how it plans to rebuild trust with Aboriginal communities.”

“Labor once understood why land rights were needed,” the Dunghutti and Gumbaynggirr chair of the NSWALC continued, as he hinted at the Wran Labor government having passed the original law in the early 1980s. “Now a Labor government has weakened the very rights its own legislation was created to protect.”

After the appearance of the legislation caused a stir, a spokesperson for NSW land and property minister Steve Kamper confirmed with The Australian that the laws would amend Aboriginal land rights, because, as they put it, “vital and frequently used community infrastructure is at risk of being taken from the community due to a bureaucratic or clerical error.”

The coveted locations being raised as having been problematically distributed include the site of Paddington Bowls Club, the Talus Street Reserve, the Cronulla Marina and Matraville Fire Station. And these parcels of land were not in use when distributed.

Indeed, the High Court ruled in September 2025 that then NSW planning minister Rob Stokes had been correct in determining that the Paddington Bowls Club site was open to the claim of La Perouse Aboriginal Land Council. Known as the Quarry Street decision, the court found that unused Crown land does not qualify as “lawfully used or occupied” simply because it is under an active lease.

The key measure that has bearing upon the NSW Aboriginal land rights regime that was progressed in the Crown Land Amendment comprises the minister being empowered to retrospectively convert an invalid or inactive lease in respect of unused Crown land so that it is considered the parcel is in use and hence, unclaimable. This law change has served to undermine the Quarry Street decision.

Modernisng laws to the detriment of First Nations

“The bill includes provisions that provide for the validation or variation of a holding, such as a lease or licence, that may be subject to technical or procedural errors,” explained Kamper, during his 16 September 2026 second reading speech on the Crown Land Amendment, in respect of its provisions that served to water down Aboriginal land rights.

“These powers provide the discretion to reinstate certainty for tenure holders and the community by declaring the holding to be valid or varying the tenure to correct an error, and for this validation or variation to take effect from the time the error or issue occurred,” the minister continued, in respect of his new power to determine that choice unused Crown land is actually in use and unclaimable.

Kamper further addressed the concerns that the network of 121 local Aboriginal land councils had raised in respect of this reform bill, following its release and over its time of having been temporarily shelved, and he revealed that fresh amendments had been made to the Crown Land Amendment due to the concerns that had been raised.

A key change that has been progressed, the minister explained, is that a controversial change that would have provided the government with the power to grant a lease over coveted Crown land under the terms of the Crown Land Management Act had been removed. This law would have allowed the minister to park unused Crown land under a lease simply to make it unclaimable.

“Politics over principle”

The NSWALC points out that NSW Labor had attempted to secretly progress the bill and then after being caught out, publicly demonised the Aboriginal land rights regime, as it suggested that it threatened Sydney property interests. And this is despite the 43-year-old land rights regime having only resulted in 0.2 percent of Crown land in NSW being transferred over to Aboriginal ownership.

So, for the sake of securing coveted Sydney Crown land, the Minns government has not only undermined the most robust land rights regime on the continent, but it’s also trashed the relationship between the state and the Aboriginal land council network, and further, the broader First Nations community.

This sudden development has also led the NSWALC to lodge a racial discrimination complaint against the NSW state with the Australian Human Rights Council and further, to pause the land council network’s participation in Closing the Gap.

“The government cannot claim to support Aboriginal communities while passing laws that weaken our rights,” Kelly further made clear two weeks back. “Aboriginal land rights are human rights. They must never be traded for political advantage.” And the chair of the NSWALC further added that his organisation is now focused upon uplifting its communities.

On the same day that the Crown Land Amendment passed NSW parliament, NSW Aboriginal affairs minister David Harris introduced the Aboriginal Land Rights Amendment Bill 2026. This new legislation is based on the recommendations of a 2021 NSW review of Aboriginal land rights law, and it marks the second stage of reforms, after initial changes were progressed in 2022.

The reforms in the bill relate to the restrictions the enactment of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) placed on certain land under Aboriginal land council control, when it is not accompanied by a native title determination. These restrictions were reflected in NSW law in 1994, and have resulted in an inability to sell, lease, mortgage, subdivide or apply for development approval over such land.

The NSWALC outlined on 15 September 2026 that it considers these laws “a significant and positive win” for it and the network of 121 local Aboriginal land councils, as it allows for the opening up of and use of such land where native title might still exist, so it can be used “for housing, community, cultural and economic purposes, while maintaining appropriate protections for native title”.

In terms of the Crown Land Amendment, Kelly added on 16 September that “without the strength of the Land Rights Network and our supporters, this legislation would have been worse”, while the central issue underlying this entire process has been left unchanged, and that is that “Labor chose legislation over negotiation and politics over principle”.

“Aboriginal people and land council members are voters. Our network will know who defended our rights, who stayed silent and who voted to weaken them,” the chair of the NSWALC said in conclusion.

“We will not forget. NSWALC and the Land Rights Network will keep defending the rights our Elders and land rights warriors fought to secure.”

Image: Chris Minns by NSW state is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Image of land council protest and Dr Raymond Kelly supplied by NSW Aboriginal Land Council