Bungaree.org

In the northern suburbs of Sydney, a quietly devastating crisis has taken root within the workings of Hornsby Shire Council. At its core is the sustained institutional recognition and funding of a group of non-Aboriginal individuals falsely claiming to represent the so-called “GuriNgai” people. This group, which first emerged in the early 2000s through the efforts of Warren Whitfield, has increasingly embedded itself into local governance structures, consultancy roles, and ceremonial activities under the guise of cultural authority. This fraudulent assertion of Aboriginality has not only harmed the cultural and political interests of genuine Aboriginal communities, but has also implicated Hornsby Shire Council in what can now be viewed as a systemic act of misrepresentation, cultural appropriation, and potential maladministration.

The origins of the “GuriNgai” identity are not based in longstanding cultural continuity or historical authenticity. The term was popularised by Warren Whitfield, a non-Aboriginal man, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, following a misreading of 19th-century ethnolinguistic literature (Aboriginal Heritage Office, 2015). Whitfield, later joined by his niece Tracey Howie, co-founded Guringai Tribal Link Aboriginal Corporation, effectively creating a platform through which a fabricated cultural identity could be commercialised. Over time, a cluster of individuals including Laurie Bimson, Neil Evers, and Paul Craig began to align themselves with the invented GuriNgai identity, adopting Aboriginal honorifics such as “Uncle” and “Auntie,” and participating in ceremonial roles that implied cultural legitimacy.

While federal and state governments have increasingly distanced themselves from this group, Hornsby Shire Council has gone in the opposite direction, elevating the GuriNgai to positions of influence and authority. This has been achieved primarily through the Hornsby Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Consultative Committee (HATSICC), a body formed in 2006, which now serves as a vehicle for GuriNgai-aligned individuals to entrench themselves in council affairs. HATSICC’s original mandate was to represent and address the interests and needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the local government area. However, from 2020 onward, meeting minutes and public documents reveal a pattern of captured consultation, with Howie and Bimson routinely representing themselves as Aboriginal knowledge holders without community validation or genealogical evidence.

The most egregious example of this institutional capture is found in the Council’s 2023 Aboriginal Heritage Study. The study, intended as a comprehensive review of Aboriginal heritage across the Hornsby LGA, was produced under the guidance of archaeologist Dr Michael Bennett. Bennett had a long-standing, undeclared relationship with Howie and Bimson, dating back to a 2008 report in which he relied entirely on Howie’s oral testimony to claim her descent from Bungaree and Matora, two prominent historical Aboriginal figures (Bennett, 2008). No documentary or genealogical evidence was supplied. Despite this, Bennett was contracted by Council to produce the definitive Aboriginal history of the Hornsby region in the 2023 study. His firm, Coast History and Heritage, worked in direct consultation with Howie and Bimson, both of whom were members of HATSICC and had not disclosed their prior business and personal ties to him. This failure to declare a conflict of interest constitutes a serious breach of public trust and ethical standards in both heritage consultancy and local government governance.

The Aboriginal Heritage Study itself is deeply flawed. It accepts at face value the legitimacy of the GuriNgai identity and, in several instances, reproduces the narrative constructed by Whitfield and his descendants. Language materials of questionable origin were endorsed and included in council documents, and the GuriNgai were presented as Traditional Owners despite lacking any legal, genealogical, or community validation. The result is a document that will inform planning and heritage decisions in the LGA for decades to come, all while misrepresenting the very communities it purports to honour. Worse still, the study has been presented as a basis for long-term planning, with one recommendation being that a suitably qualified Aboriginal heritage consultant be engaged to review the outcomes of the study in three to five years. Given that the original study was compromised by unqualified and fraudulent actors, this recommendation offers little reassurance.

The extent of the Council’s entanglement with the GuriNgai is further evidenced by the Westleigh Park Development. This major redevelopment project, which has recently come under scrutiny following the return of $36 million in state funding, relied heavily on cultural advice and assessment work awarded to individuals and entities associated with the GuriNgai group. There is no evidence of an open tender process for the cultural consultation services provided. In fact, companies linked to Tracey Howie and Laurie Bimson appear to have received multiple contracts since at least 2019. Internal council documents and probity statements related to Westleigh Park have been difficult to access, raising questions about transparency and accountability.

Despite repeated warnings from Aboriginal families and cultural authorities, Hornsby Shire Council has refused to disassociate from the GuriNgai narrative. Numerous submissions, public statements, and independent research projects have debunked the group’s genealogical claims (Guringaygupa Djuyal Barray, 2024; Cooke, 2024). The Council’s persistence in referring to these individuals as cultural authorities, and enshrining them into public heritage and planning frameworks, represents not only poor governance but a form of institutional racism. The use of fabricated Aboriginal identities to meet cultural consultation obligations while excluding genuine Aboriginal people is a continuation of the colonial logic that dispossessed Aboriginal peoples in the first place.

The GuriNgai narrative thrives on repetition and institutional endorsement. Through the illusory truth effect, non-Aboriginal community members and local officials become convinced of the GuriNgai’s authenticity simply by encountering the claims often enough. Yet this illusion collapses under even minimal scrutiny. Tracey Howie, for instance, has no confirmed Aboriginal ancestry and admitted in her 2009 National Library interview to growing up as “white on paper”. Laurie Bimson discovered he might have distant Aboriginal heritage at age 57 and immediately began marketing himself as a cultural custodian. Their constructed identities serve primarily to secure government contracts, perform ceremonies for profit, and access opportunities created by legislation designed to empower Aboriginal communities.

The damage extends far beyond symbolic misrepresentation. By embedding the GuriNgai into planning decisions, cultural heritage registers, and public acknowledgment protocols, Hornsby Council has diverted resources away from legitimate Aboriginal people and undermined the integrity of local heritage processes. This has tangible effects on the development, protection, and management of Country. In one notable incident, a scarred tree was destroyed during the Westleigh Park development under the advice of GuriNgai-aligned consultants. Such actions not only violate Aboriginal cultural protocols but expose Council to legal and ethical risk.

It is also apparent that Hornsby Shire Council has been aware of many of these issues for years. Complaints about the GuriNgai identity fraud were lodged as early as 2020. By 2023, ICAC referrals had been submitted. The continued endorsement of Howie, Bimson, and Bennett despite these red flags suggests that Council is either complicit or captured. The scale and duration of the fraud, the closed procurement processes, and the failure to declare conflicts of interest all point toward a serious governance failure that demands urgent investigation.

Hornsby Shire Council must take immediate steps to restore integrity and respect to its dealings with Aboriginal culture and heritage. This begins with the formal withdrawal of recognition for the so-called GuriNgai group, the commissioning of an independent audit of all contracts and reports involving these individuals, and the redrafting of the Aboriginal Heritage Study in consultation with genuine, recognised Aboriginal families and cultural authorities. Only by acknowledging the extent of the harm done—and taking decisive steps to correct it—can Council hope to rebuild trust with Aboriginal communities and the public at large.

This is not a parochial issue. It is emblematic of a broader pattern of Indigenous identity fraud across Australia, where non-Aboriginal individuals manipulate public ignorance, exploit legal grey areas, and capitalise on the cultural void left by colonisation to position themselves as authorities on Aboriginal matters. The case of the GuriNgai at Hornsby is simply among the most well-documented and egregious. But it is far from unique. It demands a coordinated response grounded in law, ethics, and respect for Aboriginal sovereignty.

JD Cooke

References

Aboriginal Heritage Office. (2015). Filling a void: A review of the historical context for the use of the word “Guringai”. Retrieved from https://www.aboriginalheritage.org

Bennett, M. (2008). Guringai Tribal Link Genealogical Report for Tracey Howie. 

Cooke, J. D. (2024). The False Mirror: Indigenous Identity Fraud and Its Cultural, Psychological, and Policy Implications in Contemporary Australia. GuriNgai.org. Retrieved from https://guringai.org

Guringaygupa Djuyal Barray. (2024). Language and Country Report: Guringay and Southern Gathang. Compiled by Lissarrague & Syron. Retrieved from https://guringai.org

National Library of Australia. (2009). Interview with Tracey-Lee Howie. Oral History Collection. Catalogue Reference: nla.obj-249653584