Page 380 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 18 February 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
district plan to protect the site—and be made to reimburse the territory if it has repaired the damage on their behalf. Additionally, the bill introduces an infringement notice scheme—effectively on-the-spot fines—for minor damage to heritage.
The Canberra Liberals would like to note the context in which this bill arises; that is, the destruction of two heritage-listed trees in 2017 by ACT government contractors. These trees were sacred Indigenous scar trees, and their mulching—at least of one—represented a tragic loss of 25,000 years of culture for the Ngunnawal people. This failure on behalf of the government was devastating, and it must not be allowed to happen again. The incident has served as a reminder of the sociocultural significance of heritage sites and objects in the lives of those who enjoy them. It is a reminder that Canberra’s heritage sites shape the identity and character of Canberrans today.
This incident was a reminder of the utmost necessity of conserving these sites to the best of our ability. The Heritage Amendment Bill makes the preservation of heritage sites more efficient. The existing Heritage Act was simply not meeting the standards of the day. It had no proper mechanism to deter or respond to less intentional and severe damage of heritage sites.
The new bill provides options to adequately respond to these incidents. It empowers the Heritage Council to issue repair damage directions, which means an individual can be made to repair the damage they created. If the individual does not repair the damage they have created, they can be charged with an offence or receive a heritage order from the Supreme Court. It also introduces an on-the-spot fine system for damage to heritage.
Knowing that you will be fined a large sum on the spot is a great deterrent to the reckless damage of important heritage sites. This also ensures that those dealing with heritage sites, such as a contractor, take extra care in their actions. Finally, the heritage repair directions absolve all other people, apart from the person directly responsible, from having to repair or fix heritage sites. This means that heritage is repaired in a time and resource-efficient way.
There are limitations with this bill, however, and I would like to outline those limitations. It works to deter people from destroying heritage, but the relatively small fines or repair damage orders cannot fix major mistakes retrospectively. Referring once more to the destruction of the Aboriginal scar trees, finding the contractor responsible would not be enough to take away the pain that the Ngunnawal community is facing. I also note that a repair damage direction would not be helpful in this scenario, as at least one of the trees has been mulched and therefore cannot be repaired by the contractor.
With this in mind the Canberra Liberals are pleased to support the Heritage Amendment Bill. It is part of our determined commitment to the preservation of the heritage of the ACT, but we do have some concerns, as I have outlined. Having said that, we are pleased to support the bill today.
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Minister for Advanced Technology and Space Industries, Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Minister for Planning and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video