Sections 5.34 - 5.36 of the April 2021 Committee’s Interim Report state (pp.102-103):

5.34 Dr Oleksii Konashevych provided information on his research on the application of blockchain technology to land titles. He found that, using blockchain, 'public bodies can retain the traditional amount of power' but also citizens are given 'direct access to manage their records by performing peer-to-peer transactions'. [49] Dr Konashevych detailed that such a system would allow the public direct access to their property records, rather than needing to go through the registrar as intermediary. He further explained:

...blockchain is fundamentally different because it's open by default, and so the proprietors, the owners of any property—title rights are just an example; it can be any property rights—can directly interact with their property rights and manage these records that represent their property. Why the registrar is inefficient is that, when there is a centralised database closed by default and it's mediated through other people, it's a bottleneck. [50]

5.35 Existing closed database systems don't allow smart contracts or 'automation and interaction by many interested parties, like banks, insurance companies, landowners and developers'. By contrast, with an open infrastructure like blockchain it is 'possible to introduce these sorts of things, with digital rights operating with smart contracts.’ [51] Dr Konashevych estimated that the use of blockchain in land registries would reduce the work of registrars by 90 per cent. [52]

5.36 Dr Konashevych told the committee that there would be 'lots of advantages, including attracting investments from all over the world' for early adopters of these technologies. [53] He advocated for Australia adopting blockchain in the land registry as a pilot, which would not require amending or adopting new legislation. He did however consider that the 'full power of the technology' could be achieved only by changes in regulations. [54]