Mining giant owned by Twiggy Forrest to pay $150m native title compensation settlement over cultural loss

WARNING: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people should be aware that this story contains the image and name of a deceased Indigenous person.

An Indigenous Australian community has been awarded $150m in compensation by the Federal Court of Australia over a native title claim that billionaire Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest’s iron ore company destroyed hundreds of its cultural sites.

A Federal Court settled the long running native title dispute between the Pilbara-based Aboriginal group, mining giant FMG and the State of Western Australia.

The Yindjibarndi Ngurra Aboriginal Corporation had sought more than $1bn in compensation for cultural and economic losses it suffered after Mr Forrest’s company mined land it held Native Title rights over.

Yindjibarndi claimed more than 240 Aboriginal cultural sites and artefacts were destroyed at FMG’s Solomon iron ore hub in the Pilbara that were more than 42,500 years old.

Solomon is FMG’s flagship iron ore mine located about 60km north of Tom Price that can produce up to 72 million tonnes of the prosperous metal each year.

According to the group, about 75 per cent of the mine’s 400sq/km footprint extends across the Yindjibarndi native title area, which is an area about the same size as Darwin.

The corporation says its $1.8bn bid for compensation was a tiny fraction of the $80bn Fortescue has earnt from the mine since 2013 and the $10bn the State Government raked in from royalties.

The long running dispute was filed in the Federal Court in 2022, following another successful claim filed by the Yindjibarndi People against the State of Western Australia.

The Federal Court decided $150m was owed to the Aboriginal Corporation by FMG for cultural loss and $150,000 for economic loss.

Justice Stephen Burley agreed with the State and FMG that the amount of economic loss should not exceed the value of the freehold estate in the land.

But he said cultural loss had to be understood as compensation for loss or diminution of traditional attachment to the land or connection to country and for loss of rights to gain spiritual sustenance from the land.

“There is an evaluative quality to the determination of cultural loss that involves engagement with and understanding of the spiritual and cultural connection of the Yindjibarndi people with their land and any harm caused to it as a result of the future acts concerned,” he said.

“The scale of the operation of the Solomon Hub Project is relevant to both economic and cultural loss.

“Mining operations continue 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, generating tremendous revenue for both FMG and the State (by way of royalties collected in accordance with the State’s mining legislation).”

Mr Burley said evidence supported the conclusion that significant damage has been done to Yindjibarndi songlines and other areas of cultural heritage.

“FMG documents indicate that 240 sites that it designates as “heritage places” have had artefacts removed from them and stored remotely,” he said.

“The Yindjibarndi people have no access to those artefacts.

“The data indicates that 124 of those sites have been completely destroyed by the operation of the mine and many more substantially affected, being variously dug up, located under roads or other infrastructure or drowned by the tailings dam.

“All was duly approved under Government processes. However, none was done with the approval of Yindjibarndi Ngurra Aboriginal Corporation.”

Speaking to media outside of court, Yindjibarndi Ngurra Aboriginal Corporation chief executive Michael Woodley said they stood up for their rights to protect their water, heritage and belief that First Nations people should be entitled to compensation for mining activities happening on their land.

“That is what the Native Title was going to provide for the First Nations people of this country,” he said.

“We are obviously disappointed with the economic loss we will review that with our assessment for of the decision.

“The cultural and spiritual loss is something we can work with and we will review that as well, but I think it is a win for First Nations people on that front.

“Anything that recognises First Nations right to protect heritage, which in this case had a value put on it, and we will continue to assess further more on the decision.”