The trauma of native title is there every day. Due to historical policy, native title is no doubt a traumatic process. Cultural heritage work has been the biggest hurdle in creating conflict closely followed by connection reports. The native title system needs an overhaul, to be rebuilt alongside First Nations people who have a right to land, and a right to have their governance systems recognized by a western legal system. It should rebuild itself only after gender is appropriately considered, because a patriarchal process means men are usually at the negotiating table, and women lose out. My PBC does not represent the interests of the native title holders. They continually breach their rights and responsibilities, yet ORIC turn a blind eye whenever it is bought to their attention. When we got native title here they made us put up those rules. In the book. Had to say how we make decisions. But they couldn’t understand how we make decisions. We told them, but they just said 'no – that’s not how you can do it'. It worked for us for thousands and thousands of years. But just like that – white man says 'no. That doesn’t make sense to us so you can’t have that.' The only reason conflict arises is when Traditional Owners don’t know their connection to country and lore. And want to dominate process. Native title creates division. It creates haves and have nots. Native title is seen as somehow legitimising the role that Aboriginal people have in looking after country and making decisions about our own culture. I am a Traditional Owner for land over which I have no decision-making capacity because of native title. Australian Human Rights Commission 47