This report proposes to enter four sites on the Heritage Places Register.

The sites are in Kingston, Griffith and Ainslie.

The committee did its usual thing with this inquiry .... and invited public comment. And, as a result of the submissions we received, we held one public hearing.

Our conclusion is that the draft variation should be endorsed - and that's what we say in the report.

But we also comment on two other things that arose during our inquiry ....

The first is a process issue

We were concerned that a witness came before the committee to give evidence and based her remarks on the original draft variation that was released by PALM.

She was unaware that the variation had been revised by PALM in light of the submissions it received from the public when the original variation was released.

In this case, the changes were considerable.

My Committee questioned PALM officials about the process used to inform people about the fact that a variation may have been revised.

As a consequence, we learnt that PALM states this in its advertisement in the local media ... informing people that the revised variation has been forwarded to the Minister, and then to this committee.

I also understand that this information is placed on PALM's website.

But the committee feels that more is required in these instances.