❓ Dr. Buti asks the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs about reforms to the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972, including the need for reform and stakeholder engagement. The Minister outlines the age of the Act, the consultation process, and proposed changes including native title acknowledgement and equal appeal rights.
AnsweredQoN 133Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ABORIGINAL HERITAGE ACT —
REFORMS
133. Dr A.D. BUTI to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs:
I refer to the proposed reforms to
the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.
(1) Can the
minister outline to the house why reform is needed and what steps he has taken
to ensure that there is proper engagement between stakeholders?
(2) Can the minister advise whether
he has received feedback from the industry on the process so far?
REFORMS
133. Dr A.D. BUTI to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs:
I refer to the proposed reforms to
the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972.
(1) Can the
minister outline to the house why reform is needed and what steps he has taken
to ensure that there is proper engagement between stakeholders?
(2) Can the minister advise whether
he has received feedback from the industry on the process so far?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) I
thank the member for Armadale for the question about the Aboriginal Heritage
Act, an act he knows well. As members know—some more than most—this
is a very old act, some 47 years old. Indeed, the Aboriginal Heritage Act went
through Parliament well before the Mabo decision and the passage of the Native
Title Act through the commonwealth Parliament in 1993. I certainly hope to
either amend or replace the Aboriginal Heritage Act, a position we took to the
state election. I make the point that I will not be the first Aboriginal
affairs minister who has wanted to reform this act to have it cruelled by
opposition to and suspicion of the proposition.
We
started the consultation process a year ago. That led to the release of a discussion
paper last week, with a series of specific proposals about a potential
new act. To be honest, an amendment is no longer required; we are looking at
replacement legislation around the heritage act. Looking around, there are no
former Ministers for Aboriginal Affairs in this place. When it comes to section
18, it does not matter whether that is something that is already agreed with
the relevant Aboriginal group and there is no impact on a heritage site versus
a section 18 process over a heavily contentious site where there is great
disruption—the process is the same. There has been a desire to perhaps
have different processes streamline those that do not have an impact, for
example, on Aboriginal heritage sites. That is something that has been broadly
supported at this point by Aboriginal groups and industry groups. Importantly,
it also reflects the fact that we now have—I think this is an
opportunity—a very thorough understanding of traditional owners in some
parts of Western Australia, as we discovered through the native title process.
I think that a future Aboriginal Heritage Act should acknowledge native title.
To be fair, when Hon Peter Collier tried this in the term of the last
government, he did not seek to bring the native title processes into the
Aboriginal heritage process, which ultimately was a big problem.
One of the other issues that we are
also proposing is to give Aboriginal people equal appeal rights to non-Aboriginal
groups—miners usually. Again, that was something that Hon Peter Collier
thought was not appropriate—to give non-Aboriginal people the right to
appeal—but he did want to give that right to Aboriginal people. I think
we have now come up with a position that, by and large—so far I say
with some trepidation—has been broadly supported. I want to thank the
Association of Mining and Exploration Companies. It has made some very positive
contributions, as has the Chamber of Minerals and Energy and a range of
Aboriginal groups—the Kimberley Land Council and the Yamatji Marlpa
Aboriginal Corporation. At the moment we are slowly, slowly bringing groups
along on what I hope is broad support for a new Aboriginal Heritage Act. Anyone
who has been in this space, whether it is a local government authority, a miner
or any organisation that has had to bump into the heritage process, would know
that it is frustrating, tine-consuming and difficult to navigate. It does not
acknowledge the fact that organisations, including local governments, for
example, already have heritage arrangements with Aboriginal people that are not
acknowledged in the current legislation. I think we can come up with a new act
that can do all of that and, in the end, empower Aboriginal people to take more
control over their heritage because, after all, it is the Aboriginal people who
own it.
thank the member for Armadale for the question about the Aboriginal Heritage
Act, an act he knows well. As members know—some more than most—this
is a very old act, some 47 years old. Indeed, the Aboriginal Heritage Act went
through Parliament well before the Mabo decision and the passage of the Native
Title Act through the commonwealth Parliament in 1993. I certainly hope to
either amend or replace the Aboriginal Heritage Act, a position we took to the
state election. I make the point that I will not be the first Aboriginal
affairs minister who has wanted to reform this act to have it cruelled by
opposition to and suspicion of the proposition.
We
started the consultation process a year ago. That led to the release of a discussion
paper last week, with a series of specific proposals about a potential
new act. To be honest, an amendment is no longer required; we are looking at
replacement legislation around the heritage act. Looking around, there are no
former Ministers for Aboriginal Affairs in this place. When it comes to section
18, it does not matter whether that is something that is already agreed with
the relevant Aboriginal group and there is no impact on a heritage site versus
a section 18 process over a heavily contentious site where there is great
disruption—the process is the same. There has been a desire to perhaps
have different processes streamline those that do not have an impact, for
example, on Aboriginal heritage sites. That is something that has been broadly
supported at this point by Aboriginal groups and industry groups. Importantly,
it also reflects the fact that we now have—I think this is an
opportunity—a very thorough understanding of traditional owners in some
parts of Western Australia, as we discovered through the native title process.
I think that a future Aboriginal Heritage Act should acknowledge native title.
To be fair, when Hon Peter Collier tried this in the term of the last
government, he did not seek to bring the native title processes into the
Aboriginal heritage process, which ultimately was a big problem.
One of the other issues that we are
also proposing is to give Aboriginal people equal appeal rights to non-Aboriginal
groups—miners usually. Again, that was something that Hon Peter Collier
thought was not appropriate—to give non-Aboriginal people the right to
appeal—but he did want to give that right to Aboriginal people. I think
we have now come up with a position that, by and large—so far I say
with some trepidation—has been broadly supported. I want to thank the
Association of Mining and Exploration Companies. It has made some very positive
contributions, as has the Chamber of Minerals and Energy and a range of
Aboriginal groups—the Kimberley Land Council and the Yamatji Marlpa
Aboriginal Corporation. At the moment we are slowly, slowly bringing groups
along on what I hope is broad support for a new Aboriginal Heritage Act. Anyone
who has been in this space, whether it is a local government authority, a miner
or any organisation that has had to bump into the heritage process, would know
that it is frustrating, tine-consuming and difficult to navigate. It does not
acknowledge the fact that organisations, including local governments, for
example, already have heritage arrangements with Aboriginal people that are not
acknowledged in the current legislation. I think we can come up with a new act
that can do all of that and, in the end, empower Aboriginal people to take more
control over their heritage because, after all, it is the Aboriginal people who
own it.
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.