❓ Opposition questions the government's preparedness for the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act implementation, citing community concerns. The Premier defends the legislation as modern, necessary, and supported by industry, dismissing opposition as fear-mongering.
AnsweredQoN 356Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ABORIGINAL CULTURAL
HERITAGE ACT — IMPLEMENTATION
356. Mr R.S. LOVE to the Premier:
I refer to the impending
commencement of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act and its implementation
process that is causing widespread concern across the state due to a lack of
awareness in the community and the lack of preparedness of the government for 1
July. Will the Premier postpone the implementation of the act to ensure that
the community is adequately informed and that the government is properly
prepared to oversee the new system?
The SPEAKER : Just before I give
the Premier the call, increasingly, there are large preambles to questions, and
increasingly they contain argument as well as, perhaps, a reference to a quote.
I ask opposition members to make the preamble briefer and to not contain
argument within the question. Quoting from something or referring to something is
in order, but making a comment on that before asking the question is not.
HERITAGE ACT — IMPLEMENTATION
356. Mr R.S. LOVE to the Premier:
I refer to the impending
commencement of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act and its implementation
process that is causing widespread concern across the state due to a lack of
awareness in the community and the lack of preparedness of the government for 1
July. Will the Premier postpone the implementation of the act to ensure that
the community is adequately informed and that the government is properly
prepared to oversee the new system?
The SPEAKER : Just before I give
the Premier the call, increasingly, there are large preambles to questions, and
increasingly they contain argument as well as, perhaps, a reference to a quote.
I ask opposition members to make the preamble briefer and to not contain
argument within the question. Quoting from something or referring to something is
in order, but making a comment on that before asking the question is not.
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the
question. As the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs observed earlier in question
time, we have had laws to protect Aboriginal heritage for over 50 years. In
1972, the Tonkin Labor government brought in laws to protect Aboriginal
heritage, and they were world leading at the time, but they are at the end of
their time and other laws under more modern
legal frameworks have now overtaken them. It is appropriate that the government takes the time and energy to craft new laws
to make sure that we are now in a position to put together a more modern legal framework that meets the needs of the community. That is what we have
been doing through three successive ministers over 18 months. A thousand people
have been consulted in 90 workshops to continue to make sure we put together a better
legal framework that meets the needs of modern industry. Industry has said that
it wants to be able to engage directly with Aboriginal landowners. In addition,
traditional owners have said that they want more control of and active
participation in the framework, consistent with Aboriginal heritage protection
regimes right around the world. As the
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs said, nothing has changed; we continue to
protect Aboriginal heritage. Farmers can continue to farm their land,
mend their fences and graze their sheep or other livestock. This important
legislation must be put in place as a matter of urgency. This legislation was
passed over 18 months ago; we are ready to go. It is legislation that the other
side of politics actually voted for. The legislation is ready to go.
Several members interjected.
Mr
R.H. COOK : Members, listen for a second.
Do you hear that? That is the same dog whistle that has been blown in
this Parliament by that side of politics for decades, whether in the mid-1980s
when the then Burke government was interested in introducing Aboriginal land
rights legislation; the early 1990s when the federal government was
implementing native title legislation, which was vigorously opposed and
legislated against by the Court Liberal government; or now, as we make these
modest modern changes to the Aboriginal Heritage Act. Every time, like a dog
returning to its vomit, these guys trot out their straw man arguments to simply
distract members of the community and raise these issues in people's
minds. They are undermining harmonious reforms that are about the respectful observance of Aboriginal heritage.
These laws are not radical. These laws are ready to go. These laws will do what we have done since 1972—that is, try to protect Aboriginal
heritage in this state. These laws are necessary to bring our laws up to date and ensure that we do this in a modern way.
The arguments made by the farming industry are noted, but they are not
accurate. If anything, that is one of the industries that will be least
affected by these new laws. I note the observations made by the CEO of Rio
Tinto in a press conference with me today: he fully supports these laws and is
looking forward to them being implemented. These laws will be implemented from
1 July.
question. As the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs observed earlier in question
time, we have had laws to protect Aboriginal heritage for over 50 years. In
1972, the Tonkin Labor government brought in laws to protect Aboriginal
heritage, and they were world leading at the time, but they are at the end of
their time and other laws under more modern
legal frameworks have now overtaken them. It is appropriate that the government takes the time and energy to craft new laws
to make sure that we are now in a position to put together a more modern legal framework that meets the needs of the community. That is what we have
been doing through three successive ministers over 18 months. A thousand people
have been consulted in 90 workshops to continue to make sure we put together a better
legal framework that meets the needs of modern industry. Industry has said that
it wants to be able to engage directly with Aboriginal landowners. In addition,
traditional owners have said that they want more control of and active
participation in the framework, consistent with Aboriginal heritage protection
regimes right around the world. As the
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs said, nothing has changed; we continue to
protect Aboriginal heritage. Farmers can continue to farm their land,
mend their fences and graze their sheep or other livestock. This important
legislation must be put in place as a matter of urgency. This legislation was
passed over 18 months ago; we are ready to go. It is legislation that the other
side of politics actually voted for. The legislation is ready to go.
Several members interjected.
Mr
R.H. COOK : Members, listen for a second.
Do you hear that? That is the same dog whistle that has been blown in
this Parliament by that side of politics for decades, whether in the mid-1980s
when the then Burke government was interested in introducing Aboriginal land
rights legislation; the early 1990s when the federal government was
implementing native title legislation, which was vigorously opposed and
legislated against by the Court Liberal government; or now, as we make these
modest modern changes to the Aboriginal Heritage Act. Every time, like a dog
returning to its vomit, these guys trot out their straw man arguments to simply
distract members of the community and raise these issues in people's
minds. They are undermining harmonious reforms that are about the respectful observance of Aboriginal heritage.
These laws are not radical. These laws are ready to go. These laws will do what we have done since 1972—that is, try to protect Aboriginal
heritage in this state. These laws are necessary to bring our laws up to date and ensure that we do this in a modern way.
The arguments made by the farming industry are noted, but they are not
accurate. If anything, that is one of the industries that will be least
affected by these new laws. I note the observations made by the CEO of Rio
Tinto in a press conference with me today: he fully supports these laws and is
looking forward to them being implemented. These laws will be implemented from
1 July.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.