3.1
This chapter will discuss the work and performance of Government entities involved in collaboration with and facilitation of Indigenous businesses and assess the evidence about their effectiveness. It will also consider the extent to which these entities provide opportunities to traditional owners in northern Australia with native title or land rights.
3.2
The chapter will examine the main national Indigenous economic development agencies under the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act 2005 (Cth), namely Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) and the Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation (ILSC). In addition, Supply Nation, although not a government agency, will be examined as a key organisation with a role in the facilitation of Indigenous economic self determination.
Indigenous Business Australia
3.3
Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) is a statutory authority of the Commonwealth Government and is accountable to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs. IBA’s principle legislative basis is set out in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act 2005 (ATSI Act 2005), which defines the bodies’ purpose, powers, functions, administrative and operation arrangements.
3.4
The Act states that the IBA is established to:
assist and enhance Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander self‑management and economic self‑sufficiency
to advance the commercial and economic interests of Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders by accumulating and using a substantial capital asset for the benefit of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
3.5
IBA’s vision for the nation is for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to be economically independent, and for them to be integral parts of the economy. IBA pursues three main activities to achieve this aim:
Investment and Wealth: IBA works in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and businesses to identify and access impactful investment opportunities and source and link investments to wealth growth.
Home Ownership: IBA supports Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to achieve their aspirations for home ownership.
Business and Entrepreneurs: IBA provides financial and business support to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander entrepreneurs.
Funding Capacity and Constraints
3.6
The Committee received evidence that IBA has successfully managed its available resources, but that these resources are quite limited in relation to the potential for investment. A notable constraint is the fact that IBA works in an area where financial returns are not guaranteed.
3.7
IBA is largely a self funded organisation with revenue from its home and business lending activity and investment portfolio returns. This funding enables IBA to provide financial and business services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples around Australia, including northern Australia. The Commonwealth Government provides some funding to IBA through the Indigenous Advancement Strategy from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, but these contributions are not a substantial part of IBA expenditure.
3.8
The following table depicts IBA’s deployed capital in relation to government capital injections between 2008 and 2018.
3.9
These figures indicate IBA’s investment achievements, but IBA noted that its ‘capital and resources are finite and IBA is heavily reliant on the returns from our investments, business loan and home loan portfolio to meet current and new demand’. It also observed that its resources could easily be consumed by a single or small number of infrastructure projects. Nevertheless, IBA submitted that it had:
…committed substantial resources to Northern Australia over time relative to other regions and we have successfully invested in Northern Australia in ventures where very few, if any, mainstream investors or lenders would have risked capital.
3.10
Elaborating, IBA highlighted the need for long term investment in infrastructure and other areas to facilitate a more conducive environment for investment in the Indigenous estate:
One of the key challenges to attracting private loan finance and investment capital to projects on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land holdings is that most projects do not achieve acceptable returns based on the level of risk. IBA plays an important role in mitigating these challenges, by partnering and co-investing with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups.
Generally, high risk projects will need to achieve higher returns to meet the risk/return parameters of banks and other financiers, or investors. However, creating the market conditions that rebalance the risk/return profile of projects on the Indigenous Estate will require long-term investment, including in potentially expensive enabling infrastructure such as transport as well as other measures that might stimulate revenue and create incentives for a broader range of industries to invest so that markets are strengthened over time.
IBA’s performance
3.11
IBA highlighted its efforts to maintain a presence in northern Australia, including amongst traditional owners. The organisation operates five offices in the region and supports Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people across major cities, inner regional, outer regional and remote locations.
Despite our national remit, we have committed substantial resources to Northern Australia over time relative to other regions, and over the past
30 years of our history we have successfully invested in Northern Australia in ventures where very few, if any, mainstream investors or lenders would have risked capital.
3.12
IBA noted that it supports PBCs ‘through our existing products, services and activities and recognises that there is a growing need to support PBCs to access PBC development funding for capacity building’. It added that its engagement was not restricted to traditional owners but extended to:
…those seeking economic development opportunities within their communities, to entities seeking “off country” investment opportunities to maximise economic activity and returns that are not available in their immediate region.
3.13
IBA mentioned that ‘despite our small size relative to other Government departments and agencies, and substantially reduced funding relative to 2016-17 and earlier years’ it had ‘achieved a record level of investment and lending in 2017-18’. By the end of 2018 IBA’s investment in northern Australia was valued at over $300 million, with the region capturing over
20 per cent of IBA’s investment activity, 40 per cent of IBA’s active business finance portfolio and 32 per cent of the external business support provided by IBA.
3.14
IBA contributed toward Indigenous home ownership levels in northern Australia, with its customers being ‘overwhelmingly first home buyers, often the first in their family and are in the three lowest income bands’. IBA added that:
over the last 20 years, 2,748 loans (or 26 per cent of all approvals) have occurred within northern Australia
as at 31 December 2018, in IBA’s portfolio of 5,146 loans, 1,078
(21 per cent) were in northern Australia, with a value of $242.5 million
in FY 2017-18, of the 913 loans approved by IBA, 155 (17 per cent) were located in northern Australia, with a value of $51.1 million.
3.15
IBA’s business support in northern Australia, from July 2017 to December 2018, amounted to:
105 loan approvals (to 91 customers) with a value of $15.2 million
external business support to 165 customers with (identification and funding of a consultant to work with the business), with a value of
$2.2 million
31 workshops (to 214 participants).
3.16
In 2018 IBA managed a business loan portfolio of $23.6 million in northern Australia, with 129 active accounts. This represented 42 per cent of IBA’s business portfolio. IBA Business Solutions’ activities included an asset leasing program which managed 44 equipment finance leases for 20 customers with a value of $5.1 million. Additionally, IBA Business solutions assisted 11 customers through the Indigenous Economic Trust, with 64 equipment finance and property leases with a total value of $4.02 million. The Business Solution division also committed $732,990 worth of Northern Territory start up grant loan/lease packages. The purpose of the product was to ‘provide a mixture of grant and loan funding tailored to remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander businesses which are located on land held by Aboriginal Land Trusts, on native title areas and on Community Living Areas in the Northern Territory’.
3.17
In relation to its investment and asset management in northern Australia, IBA reported:
Investment and Asset Management division focuses on investments of between $5 million and $25 million in commercially sound ventures across sectors and industries, using a range of investment structures – and typically in partnership with a local Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander group in assets that ideally provide financial returns, employment outcomes and social impact.
3.18
To more effectively collaborate with groups that wanted to co-invest with IBA, the Indigenous Prosperity Funds (IPF) and Indigenous Real Estate Investment Trust (I-REIT) were established:
The IPF was launched in 2015 to provide eligible Aboriginal and Torres Strait peoples with the opportunity to invest in a diversified portfolio of investments, including exposure to Australian and international shares, bonds, property and cash. The IPF comprise the Growth, Income and Cash funds. The I-REIT was launched in 2013 to give Indigenous investors the opportunity to invest in an actively managed commercial property fund alongside IBA and other Indigenous organisations.
3.19
Of the 41 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups co-investing with IBA in the IPF and I-REIT, 27 are in northern Australia, with investments worth $102.9 million (at 31 January 2019).
3.20
The IBA submission showcased a number of case studies, such as the one below.
Box 3.1: Case Study: Infrastructure – Moonamang Joint Venture
In 2010, IBA formed a joint venture with Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd as part of the Ord-East Kimberley Development Project in Kununurra,WA. The $44 million infrastructure contract consisted of 19km of irrigation channel, a 13km road extension and irrigation control structures. The venture was a result of IBA’s goal of sustainable economic development for Indigenous people from construction activity and in particular public investment in remote and regional infrastructure development. IBA used a direct approach, embedding IBA in project delivery where it could influence project design. The delivery structure featured:
a project linked to a native title settlement
a procurement process weighted towards achieving sustainable Indigenous development outcomes. The Indigenous development components of the tender were worth 50 per cent of the overall assessment, compared to a 25 per cent weighting for price
a demonstrated commitment from the WA State Government that Indigenous economic outcomes were a priority
a project structure that resourced the achievement of these outcomes
the opportunity to develop the capacity of an Indigenous organisation (Miriuwung Gajerrong Aboriginal Corporation), community and individuals through project works.
The project employed 62 Indigenous people (over 50 per cent Miriuwung Gajerrong) on project works and 14 in non project related employment. Local Indigenous businesses were contracted, one of which was a new business.
Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation
3.21
The Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation (ILSC) is an independent statutory authority accountable to the Minister for Indigenous Affairs. ILSC was established under the ATSI Act 2005, and is also subject to the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013. The Act states that the purpose of the ILSC is to assist Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders to acquire and manage land and water related rights to provide economic, environmental, social and cultural benefits.
3.22
The Act also sets out functions of the ILSC, including:
to grant interests in land and water related rights to Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander corporations
to acquire by agreement, interests in land and water related rights, for the purpose of making grants
to make grants of money to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander corporations for the acquisition of interests in land and water related rights
to guarantee loans made to Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander corporations for the acquisition of interests in land and water related rights.
3.23
ILSC three key operations include:
investment in Projects: provision of funding associated with buying, granting, managing and/or developing land/water related interests and/or foundation projects (such as infrastructure, plant and equipment, feasibility assessment planning activities)
provision of advice and capability support: supporting Indigenous landholders with access to information, training, knowledge and systems to support sustainable management of country and delivery of benefits
connecting Indigenous landowners: building and brokering relationships with markets, opportunities, partnerships through facilitation advocacy and negotiation.
3.24
ILSC’s primary policy document is the National Indigenous Land and Sea Strategy (NILSS), which outlines planned long term outcomes, how the organisation is aligning activities with those outcomes and its broad national (and regional) priority investment focus areas.
3.25
ILSC’s vision is that Indigenous people can enjoy opportunities and benefits that the return of country and its management brings, achieved through:
acquiring and divesting land and water interests to Indigenous corporations
supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people by strengthening culture through reconnection with country
building capacity and capability of Indigenous corporations for them to sustainably manage and protect country
partnering with Indigenous corporations to drive and influence opportunities for country.
Funding Constraints
3.26
ILSC’s primary source of funding is the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land and Sea Future Fund (ATSILSFF). The ATSILSFF was established in 2019 by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land and Sea Future Fund Act 2018, to support annual and discretionary additional payments to the ILSC.
3.27
ATSILSFF is managed by the Future Fund Management Agency and Board of Guardians. The balance of the fund as of 30 June 2021 was $2.163 billion, with ILSC receiving a minimum guaranteed annual payment of $45 million. The Fund also provides for additional payments to be made to the ILSC where the actual capital value of the ATSILFF exceeds its real capital value.
3.28
The primary challenge for ILSC is resourcing. Mr Joe Morrison, CEO of ILSC, told the Committee that the ‘primary challenge we face is the capital that we have… I think access to capital is probably our biggest constraint’. He explained that the corporation is limited by the arrangements of its Future Fund, which has an annual drawdown equivalent to 2010 values, with the 2021 value estimated at $56 million. This is a significant limitation as market prices on land have risen dramatically since ILSC was established. Mr Morrison submitted that ‘there is probably a need to reconsider that and our ability to purchase property for Indigenous people going forward’.
ILSC’s Performance
3.29
The ILSC reported the following achievements in the 2020-21 period:
expansion of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Estate, with 6 properties acquired (149,218 hectares) and 7 properties returned to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (3,869 hectares)
8 new enterprises developed, focussing on tourism, land management, carbon, pastoral, bush food and medicine, tree farm and horticulture, with 5 enterprises given improved efficiency
policy and opportunity development with 9 projects networking to increase Indigenous representation in the SA tuna fishing industry; expansion of service networks in regional and remote locations; strategy protecting Indigenous traditional knowledge; joint venture assessment framework; carbon abatement projects; and Indigenous led training program for registered savanna burning
development and leveraging of partnerships with 16 projects supported by 22 external partners contributing $31 million funding, 2 projects with in kind capability assistance provided and $1.2 million contributed by project proponents
1902 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people given improved access to country and/or cultural sites
improved access to culturally appropriate services, with 16 projects, involving 6388 people, in health, recreation, wellbeing, legal services, elders social gathering, exercise and education.
Supply Nation
3.30
Supply Nation is not a government entity, but it is a key organisation in the field of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander economic development. Since its inception in 2009, the organisation has worked with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander businesses in collaboration with the government and corporate Australia to help develop the Indigenous business sector.
3.31
Supply Nation is a national certifying body for Indigenous businesses. It has the largest verified Indigenous Business Directory (IBD) with two distinct categories of Indigenous businesses: verified (at least 50 per cent Indigenous owned), and certified (51 per cent or more Indigenous owned). In order to ensure that they are Indigenous owned, businesses are required to undertake a 5 step verification process. Supply Nation also conducts regular audits for changes in company structure and ownership.
3.32
Supply Nation has a paid membership of government, corporate and not for profit organisations, and develops procurement policies that modify and redirect spending to the traditionally under-utilised Indigenous business sector.
3.33
Supply Nation’s IBD works in conjunction with the Commonwealth’s Indigenous Procurement Policy (IPP) (discussed below), by providing a database for government agencies to check and certify the bona fides of Indigenous businesses and connecting those businesses with procurement opportunities.
3.34
According to NNTC, the IBD is a:
…foundation of the IPP and the basis upon which many other public and private sector corporations … can with confidence ensure the increasing role of Indigenous businesses in their supply chain.
3.35
Supply Nation’s vision is for a prosperous, vibrant and sustainable Indigenous business sector:
by driving understanding that the purchasing power of businesses can be used to deliver positive social outcomes
by facilitating connections between Indigenous businesses and members’ procurement departments
through the world leading 5 step verification process (registration, certification and audit).
Funding constraints
3.36
Twenty five per cent of Supply Nation’s revenue comes from the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) for IBD verification, registration and audit. The remainder is sourced from membership fees, events and government funding to run capability building of Indigenous businesses.
3.37
Supply Nation told the Committee that its core constraint is lack of resources to pursue certification as the ‘gold standard’ that minimises the risk of ‘black cladding’, that is businesses with limited or cosmetic commitment to Indigenous employment and other involvement. Mr Costa Demos, acting CEO of Supply Nation, said that the organisation has ‘well over a thousand businesses that we could certify tomorrow but we don't have the resources to do that’, adding that its members are increasingly seeking to deal only with certified businesses.
Supply Nation’s Performance
3.38
Supply Nation has just under 3,400 suppliers, with 835 certified and
68 registered joint ventures. Of the suppliers not certified, approximately
70 per cent are majority owned and there is an ongoing campaign to have them certified. The total number of registered Indigenous businesses in northern Australia is 770, a significant increase from 115 in 2015.
3.39
Supply Nation registered/certified businesses have an estimated annual revenue of over $3.9 billion, with over 30,000 employees. While the Indigenous business sector is broader than those represented by Supply Nation, the organisation represents more than half of employment in the sector.
3.40
Procurement spending to Supply Nation businesses increased from
$31 million in 2015 to $952 million in 2019. Supply Nation suppliers have also achieved ‘like for like’ growth of 13 per cent, far outpacing growth in the broader economy. Supply Nation told the Committee that the last five years had seen a rapid growth in the spend with its registered business, reaching $1.6 billion in 2020, with expectations of a further increase in the current financial year.
3.41
Supply Nation’s internal research capacity aims to ensure the delivery of evidence based programs, to provide ‘a stronger platform to advocate for the needs and benefits of Indigenous business and Indigenous procurement’. Supply Nation collaborates with a range of university centres, government, and independent agencies.
3.42
Notably, northern Australia does not represent a significant proportion of Supply Nation’s work area, with the bulk of its clients in the south and east of Australia. The biggest representation of suppliers is in NSW, followed by Queensland and southern WA. The organisation has no physical offices in northern Australia.
3.43
Supply Nation told the Committee that it had no data on whether its registered businesses in northern Australia were working on land held under native title or land rights.
3.44
Before COVID-19, Supply Nation staff regularly travelled in the north, but this was reduced as a result of pandemic restrictions. The organisation plans to resume travel in the north as soon as possible and has plans for specially targeted activities in the region.
3.45
Supply Nation provided examples of businesses on the Indigenous Business Director that have achieved success.
Box 3.2: Case Study: Sobah Beverages
Australia’s first First Nation owned non alcoholic beer company Sobah Beverages was founded by Clinton and Lozen Shultz. The company is based in Kombumerring country, also known as the Gold Coast, Queensland. It is listed on the Supply Nation Indigenous Business Director as a registered business. Sobah Beverages has been very successful, particularly after it sought crowd funding to raise $1 million. The crowd funding attracted interest from more than 600 investors and allowed company to grow, with distribution deals secured with Coles and Dan Murphy’s and the company poised to launch in Hong Kong and Singapore.
Box 3.3: Case Study: Biripi Capital and the Dreaming Food Group
The Dreaming Food Group (The Food Group), owned by Australia’s first Aboriginal owned private equity firm Biripi Capital, received an initial $20 million investment from Melbourne based Hudson Food Group, which is listed on Supply Nation Indigenous Business Directory.
The Food Group was cofounded by Aboriginal business leaders,
David Liddiard OAM and Michael Manikas. Its aim is to produce new food products and native ingredients, with a target revenue of $100 million within two years. The business plans to donate one third of its profits to the Dreaming Foundation, a charity established to fund Aboriginal led programs that contribute to the Closing the Gap initiative.
Indigenous Procurement Policy (IPP)
3.46
The Commonwealth’s Indigenous Procurement Policy (IPP) commenced in 2015 and was updated in 2020. Administered by the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA), the policy’s purpose is to stimulate Indigenous entrepreneurship, business and economic development, providing Indigenous Australians with more opportunities to participate in the economy. The policy applies to all non corporate Commonwealth entities subject to the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.
3.47
IPP has three key parts:
a target number of contracts that need to be awarded to Indigenous businesses
mandatory setting aside of contracts for Indigenous businesses to apply in certain situations
mandatory minimum requirements for Indigenous employment and Indigenous supplier use applying to certain Commonwealth contracts.
3.48
IPP leverages the Commonwealth’s procurement expenditure, increasing the number and value of Commonwealth contracts awarded to Indigenous businesses. As mentioned above, IPP requires that remote contracts must apply the Mandatory Set Aside rule which directs that officers procuring services delivered in remote Australia must attempt to source requirements from Indigenous businesses first, before looking to the wider market. Notably under the IPP, the majority of northern Australia is considered remote.
3.49
KLC noted that the IPP is ‘well-intentioned’ and has ‘increased the number of contracts awarded to Indigenous organisations’. But KLC also observed that the majority of contracts were still disproportionately being awarded to non-Indigenous entities. In 2017-18, ‘Indigenous contracts represented
6 per cent of the total volume of contracts but only 1 per cent of the total value of the contracts’.
3.50
KLC acknowledged that changes to IPP were introduced in 2019, requiring joint ventures including Indigenous entities to be at least 50 per cent Indigenous owned and demonstrate 50 per cent Indigenous involvement in management and control. But KLC submitted that to stamp out ‘black cladding’, joint ventures ‘should be majority controlled and managed by Indigenous organisations’ and that the IPP should be further amended to promote ‘businesses that are wholly Indigenous owned or at the very minimum that more than 50 per cent is controlled/managed by Indigenous organisations’.
3.51
CLC recognised the outcomes achieved under IPP, but called for the policy to give greater attention to the needs of northern Australia:
…procurement represents a significant untapped opportunity for supporting sustainable economic development outcomes for Aboriginal people in Northern Australia - more needs to be done to ensure that procurement supports outcomes in remote areas.
Limitations of government entities’ support for traditional owners
3.52
Evidence received by the Committee indicated that, generally speaking, the government entities that support Aboriginal and Torres Islander business enterprises worked effectively, within the constraints of their limited funding and financial resources. There was, however, less evidence to show that they were in a position to provide significant support to traditional owners living in lands subject to native title and land rights in northern Australia. The remit of the entities limited their ability to provide the specific kind of services required in the region, especially in remote areas.
3.53
This perspective was clearly presented by the Indigenous Reference Group to the Ministerial Forum on northern development:
Each of these organisations is resourced variably by appropriations from government and self-generated income through investments and/or fee for service. Each organisation has and continues to make a significant contribution to facilitating Indigenous economic self-determination across Australia. However, there are a number of structural constraints that limit the ability of these entities to adequately support Northern Australian Indigenous economic development.
3.54
With respect to IBA, the IRG noted that the nature of its ‘statutory remit’ tended to focus its activities on southeast Australia rather than the north. IRG stated that IBA:
…is able to provide business support services and financing to a wider range of Indigenous businesses and does so in Northern Australia. However, it currently faces a number of challenges with respect to delivering the
well-resourced, acutely tailored and more concessionary support that Northern Australian Indigenous business requires. Firstly, IBA’s main function in terms of capital and internal resources is its home lending function. Secondly, IBA is a national program, with the majority of its business support and investment activity concentrated on the east coast and southern Australia, where the majority of the Australian Indigenous population reside. Thirdly, its national remit and requirement to adhere to sound commercial principles, means it is limited with respect to providing a discriminatory program in Northern Australia that is acutely focused, or which provides the additional concessionary support that is required to overcome the unique market failure.
3.55
Several submitters observed that the particular circumstances of native title and land rights holders in northern Australia required specialised support services that government entities were generally ill equipped to provide.
3.56
Central Land Council stressed the special needs of remote areas:
Strengthening the Indigenous business sector is critical to ensuring economic benefits are accessible to Aboriginal people in Northern Australia. The Indigenous Business Sector Strategy, Indigenous Procurement Policy, Supply Nation, IBA, ILSC, and others, are key levers to achieve this aim, but are not designed to meet the needs of Aboriginal people in remote and very remote areas.
3.57
The National Native Title Council highlighted the fact that government entities were not well attuned to the timeframes within which traditional owners tend to work:
In relation to the ILSC and IBA two related issues are most commonly articulated by Traditional Owners and their organisations to the NNTC. The first of these is that both organisations lack the organisational capacity to respond in a timely fashion to funding applications that are often (usually) occurring within a commercial timeframe inconsistent with the ability of the agency to respond. The second issue most frequently reported is that both agencies lack sufficient resources to adequately undertake their respective functions.
Committee Comment
3.58
The Committee notes that the government entities tasked with supporting Aboriginal and Torres Islander business enterprises face constraints due to their limited funding and financial resources. Nevertheless, they appear to be achieving generally good results in the context of such limitations and within their statutory terms of reference, especially in the more developed regions of southeast and southwest Australia.
3.59
The Committee considers, however, that these entities have limited relevance to the special circumstances and needs of traditional owners living in lands subject to native title and land rights in northern Australia. As noted in Chapter 2, traditional owners and their representative bodies face challenges from statutory obligations, complex legislative and administrative arrangements and problems associated with land tenure, in addition to remoteness and a limited resource base. These circumstances require specialised and tailored assistance. The remit of the entities examined in this chapter make it very difficult for them to provide the specific kind of services required in the region, especially to traditional owner communities in remote and very remote areas.
3.60
Even without a broadened remit, increased funding would enable the entities to make a greater contribution to facilitating business investment by Aborigines and Torres Islander peoples across Australia as a whole. This would also enable to extend their reach more deeply into northern Australia and, in consultation with local organisations, give consideration to developing forms of specialist support for traditional owners attempting to leverage their rights in land, particularly in the area of environment protection initiatives, discussed in Chapter 4.
3.61
The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government increase capital and other allocations for Supply Nation, Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation (ILSC) and Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) to enable them to expand their presence in northern Australia.
With increased financial resources, these entities should consult with traditional owner representative bodies in northern Australia to investigate ways in which they could provide support which is more tailored to the needs of traditional owners in areas subject to native title and land rights, especially in remote and very remote areas.
ILSC and Supply Nation should consider the establishment of an office in northern Australia.