❓ A WA parliamentary question addresses the protection of Burrup Peninsula rock art amidst industrial development, questioning the government's measures and the potential removal of art from its original sites. The Minister acknowledges the issue and outlines measures taken.
AnsweredQoN 1285Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
ROCK ART
The rock art on the Burrup Peninsula has been guaranteed protection in many forms by the Western Australian Government, including the declaration of protected areas and temporary reserves. (1) What specific and tangible measures has the Government taken in the decades since the Burrup was occupied by the developers in 1964 to protect the rock art and to monitor its condition in the industrial environment the Government encouraged to develop? (2) Does the minister agree that as a result of industrial development on the Burrup Peninsula, some further removal of rock art from original sites may be required? (3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD
The rock art on the Burrup Peninsula has been guaranteed protection in many forms by the Western Australian Government, including the declaration of protected areas and temporary reserves. (1) What specific and tangible measures has the Government taken in the decades since the Burrup was occupied by the developers in 1964 to protect the rock art and to monitor its condition in the industrial environment the Government encouraged to develop? (2) Does the minister agree that as a result of industrial development on the Burrup Peninsula, some further removal of rock art from original sites may be required? (3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(1) What specific and tangible measures has the Government taken in the decades since the Burrup was occupied by the developers in 1964 to protect the rock art and to monitor its condition in the industrial environment the Government encouraged to develop? (2) Does the minister agree that as a result of industrial development on the Burrup Peninsula, some further removal of rock art from original sites may be required? (3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(2) Does the minister agree that as a result of industrial development on the Burrup Peninsula, some further removal of rock art from original sites may be required? (3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(1) What specific and tangible measures has the Government taken in the decades since the Burrup was occupied by the developers in 1964 to protect the rock art and to monitor its condition in the industrial environment the Government encouraged to develop? (2) Does the minister agree that as a result of industrial development on the Burrup Peninsula, some further removal of rock art from original sites may be required? (3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(2) Does the minister agree that as a result of industrial development on the Burrup Peninsula, some further removal of rock art from original sites may be required? (3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(3) Bearing in mind that rock art becomes culturally disembodied by being removed from its site context, how does the minister reconcile his advice that further rock art will be carted away with his obligation to preserve the integrity of the rock art sites as required by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(1) Comprehensive surveys, site recording, salvage and consultation with indigenous people in compliance with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. (2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(2) Removal of rock art may be an option when infrastructure cannot be designed to avoid damage. (3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
(3) Salvage of rock art is regarded as a last resort and is preferable to its destruction.
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.