Where does all the money go?

[Skids]

Notice of Appeal by Fortescue Metals Group Ltd in the matter of Fortescue Metals Group v
Warrie (on behalf of the Yindjibarndi People)

Fortescue Metals Group Ltd (ASX:FMG) has today lodged an application for special leave to appeal
the decision of the Full Federal Court in the above matter given on 18 October 2019.
Fortescue reconfirms its earlier advice that the decision of the Full Federal Court has no impact on
its current or future operations or mining tenure at the Solomon Hub, and the Company does not
anticipate any material financial impact to the business as a result of the decision of the Full Federal
Court.

This is the decision FMG are appealing....

There are press reports of Morgan Stanley having calculated that:

based on a 0.5% royalty, FMG could be forced to pay $US84 million in back-payments and $US15 million a year going forward; and
in its worst-case scenario of a possible, but unlikely, 5% royalty, FMG could be liable for back-payments of $US840 million and an ongoing annual royalty of $US150 million.

The question arises whether there is any basis in law for thinking that resource companies could be found liable to pay these sorts of amounts in compensation for the impairment of exclusive native title rights and interests caused by their resource projects.

In Timber Creek, Justice Mansfield had awarded the native title holders $3,300,261 in compensation, comprising:

$512,000 for the economic value of their extinguished native title rights (being 80% of the total freehold market value of the affected lots, with the discount being attributed to the fact that the grant in 1882 of Pastoral Lease 366 had partially extinguished native title in relation to Timber Creek, leaving only non-exclusive native title rights and interests in place);
$1,488,261 in simple interest on this sum (there being no basis on which to justify an award of compound interest); and
$1,300,000 for non-economic/intangible loss or solatium (being additional compensation awarded to the native title holders for the loss, they had sustained, and the "intangible disadvantages" they had experienced, because of the extinguishment and impairment of their native title).

https://www.claytonutz.com/knowledge/2017/august/exclusive-native-title-extinguishment-and-compensation-lessons-from-the-yindjibarndi-decision-and-the-timber-creek-appeal

There are thousands of these compensation payments made by mining companies and continual royalty payments.... where do these Billlions and billions of dollars go?
I know Sandfire Resources pay the local mob (a few 100 people) $12 million annually, as well as build houses in Meekatharra and supply vehicles, employment opportunities and financial assistance to remote communities.

It would be $10's of billions paid every year.... yet all we ever hear is how under resourced Aboriginals are

[David]

Does it matter? If they're legally entitled to it, then surely they don't need to justify what they're going to do with it (just as Fortescue wouldn't feel a need to justify to the public what they do with their profits, which is probably lucky for them because I doubt the answer is very reassuring). But all I can say is that many of these communities don't have a lot of resources to begin with, so I expect the money is much needed (and probably doesn't go as far as you may think).

[stui magpie]

^

I think the point is more how much of the money the Aboriginals are actually getting, not what they're doing with what they get

[Pies4shaw]

It’s just more cheap point-scoring. Let’s assume, for argument’s sake that it amounts to $100 billion a year. Then, divide that by the approximately 800,000 people who are indigenous.

By my calculation, that’s the princely sum of $12,500 per year, per person.

[stui magpie]

Your calculations demonstrate why you took up law, not accounting.

The money isn't spread over every Indigenous person in Australia, just those local to the mine, those whose lands the mine is on.

And you assume it's cheap points scoring. I read it differently.

[Pies4shaw]

By the way, Skids, much of your post is a garbled mush-mash of a note by Clayton Utz written a couple of years ago about the first instance decision in this case and some other decisions of the Federal Court. First, the source of your post should be identified (so we can ascertain who is regurgitating Clayton Utz’s article without attribution). Secondly, it is all overtaken by a unanimous decision of a Full Federal Court sitting as a bench of 5 judges. It will be interesting to see what comes of the special leave application and, in particular, whether FMG can find some lawyers who can think of some better points to run. At the moment, FMG is losing about 12:0 (the reason the Court was sitting as a bench of 5 was because FMG’s argument invited the Court to reconsider the correctness of certain prior Full (3 judge) Federal Court decisions), so I don’t like their odds. If you’re backing FMG, you’ll want about 275:1.

[Pies4shaw]

[stui magpie]

I disagree but I'm also assuming so I'll let him defend himself.

[Pies4shaw]

I think you give him too much credit.

[stui magpie]

I think you and David are suffering from the Halo effect based on other posts and topics, but as I said, I'll let him defend himself.

My view is based on someone who has Indigenous inlaws and has worked in remote Indigenous communities rather than read about them in the Guardian.

In my mind, the question is legitimate. If the mining companies are supposedly paying all this money to the traditional landholders in remote communities, where is it going? Why are they living in 3rd world conditions?

[think positive]

do they get a lump sum? or a weekly allowance? easy to piss it away if its an allowance. hubbies sister and BIL work in social security, amazing how fast people go through a dole cheque.

[Skids]

[Skids]

[Skids]

...

[Skids]