No. While the Indigenous people of Australia were subject to forced labor and experienced slavery like conditions, there was no slave trading. By the time that the British effectively subdued the indigenous Australian population in NSW slave trading was already illegal in the British Empire. Honestly, there was no need. While there was a manpower shortage in the early colonial settlements, the colonial government responded by making convict labour available to private individuals.

edit: Kociumbas, Jan. The Oxford History of Australia: 1770-1860, possessions. Vol. 2. Oxford University Press, USA, 1992.

There is reference in the Wikipedia article on Aboriginal Tasmanians to the slavery of women by Sealers.

Historian James Bonwick reported Aboriginal women who were clearly captives of sealers but he also reported women living with sealers who 'proved faithful and affectionate to their new husbands', women who appeared ‘content’ and others who were allowed to visit their ‘native tribe’, taking gifts, with the sealers being confident that they would return.[4]:pp 295–297 Bonwick also reports a number of claims of brutality by sealers towards Aboriginal women including some of those made by George Augustus Robinson.[4]:pp 295–301 An Aboriginal woman by the name of Bulrer related her experience to Robinson, that sealers had rushed her camp and stolen six women including herself "the white men tie them and then they flog them very much, plenty much blood, plenty cry." Sealing captain, James Kelly, wrote in 1816 that the custom of the sealers was to each have "two to five of these native women for their own use and benefit." A shortage of women available "in trade" resulted in abduction becoming common and in 1830 it was reported that at least fifty Aboriginal women were "kept in slavery" on the Bass Strait islands.[29]

"Harrington, a sealer, procured ten or fifteen native women, and placed them on different islands in Bass's Straits, where he left them to procure skins; if, however, when he returned, they had not obtained enough, he punished them by tying them up to trees for twenty-four to thirty-six hours together, flogging them at intervals, and he killed them not infrequently if they proved stubborn." (H.W.Parker The Rise, Progress, and Present State of V. D. Land 1833)[30]

The raids for, and trade in, Aboriginal women contributed to the rapid depletion of the numbers of Aboriginal women in the northern areas of Tasmania, “by 1830 only three women survived in northeast Tasmania among 72 men” [5]:pp 58–60 and thus contributed in a significant manner to the demise of the full-blooded Aboriginal population of Tasmania. However many modern day Aboriginal Tasmanians trace their descent from the 19th century sealer communities of Bass Strait.

The sources cited are:

PDF Warning! Kay Merry The Cross-Cultural Relationships Between the Sealers and the Tasmanian Aboriginal Women at Bass Strait and Kangaroo Island in the Early Nineteenth Century pdf, Flinders University Department of History 2003

H.W.Parker The Rise, Progress, and Present State of V. D. Land 1833

Bonwick, James: The Last of the Tasmanians, Sampson Low, Son & Marston, London, 1870

This is the first time I've submitted anything to Ask Historians so please let me know if I've made a mistake. I realise Wikipedia isn't the best source, but the article in question seems well researched and cited.

EDIT: I also think I should speak to some of the other discussions going on in this thread. I hope in doing so I'm not overstepping any boundaries.

The history of colonisation is contentious, for many reasons. There are very few primary sources from the early days of colonisation that come directly from Indigenous Australians. This is due to the fact that most could not read or write in English, and that their own languages had no written form. So the result of this is that when we look to find an Indigenous perspective, we often have to glean it from the writings of the settlers and historians of the day. This leads to modern historians having to try to filter innuendo and reference from a range of primary sources that are all filtered through the perspectives and beliefs of the colonisers of the time.

Indigenous Australians have a strong tradition of oral history, which is not given the same weight as other recording methods for various, and in many cases obvious reasons. How much weight do we give to these oral histories has been debated by Australian historians, and there are good reasons on both sides. The oral histories tend to mesh together mythology and folklore with quite accurate descriptions of past events. It can be difficult to determine where the truth ends and myth begins. Personally I think that all accounts, whether they be oral/Indigenous or written/Settler, should be viewed with a measure of scepticism. For further reading I would recommend looking into the writings of the historian Henry Reynolds, and perhaps even Keith Windschuttle for balance, (although I must say I personally loathe Windschuttle) and look at the way they pick, choose, and interpret their sources.