"It contains very little language about protecting or celebrating or commemorating heritage. "That bill waters down what is already a weakened heritage region, it looks like it basically facilitates development," he told Hack. "We need more control over our land, we need to protect our sacred sites." Getting the bill rightĪrcheologist Dr Joe Dortch, who researches heritage management, doesn't think the bill goes far enough either in its current form. we need a seat at the table, why won't the minister come speak to us?" Respected Njamal, Pitjakarli and Nyangumarta elder Doris Eatson said. Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation (YMAC) in the Pilbara have echoed Anthony's worries. "Heritage is not just a status or building, heritage is in our heart."Īnthony's concerned that Traditional Owners will remain at a distance from the decision-making process and that the draft bill will not stop the ongoing destruction of Aboriginal cultural heritage. this bill will favor the industry and government, it doesn't favour us."
"Right now if you do support this legislation, you're supporting the government having the final say. we need to make sure the legislation is done right, that we're at the forefront with our heritage and culture," Anthony Watson, chairperson of the Kimberley Land Council (KLC) said. Traditional Owners are calling for the government to scrap their draft bill over concerns they didn't engage in proper consultation and it doesn't go far enough to protect cultural heritage sites. Traditional Owners don't support new laws The new draft laws known as the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Draft Bill 2020, give Aboriginal stakeholders the right to appeal but the minister still gets the final say.Ī federal inquiry into the destruction of Juukan Gorge called on the WA government to stop approving the destruction of heritage sites until the new laws are passed. Labor promised to rewrite the bill as a priority before their election win in 2017, which was delayed because of the pandemic and was promised in the second half of this year. The Aboriginal Heritage Act has been up for review since 2012, but no new version of it has passed parliament.Īt the moment, the Aboriginal Affairs Minister has the final call on whether or not a project can go ahead - even if Traditional Owners oppose it.Īboriginal stakeholders have no rights to appeal the minister's decision.
"I think there is a lot of soul searching going on, we'll make sure we bring forward new Aboriginal heritage laws," he said. Premier Mark McGowan acknowledged at the time of Juukan destruction that the legislation was outdated. The legislation includes what's known as the Section 18 provision, which lets landowners apply to alter, move or destroy a cultural site to make way for a development. Mining companies can be given ministerial consent to destroy or damage sacred sites under WA's Aboriginal heritage laws, which were drafted in 1972. Since Juukan Gorge was destroyed by Rio Tinto last May, 22 requests have been granted and 1 declined. The mining industry made 144 requests to the WA Government to "impact" heritage sites between 2017-2021.
Rio Tinto faced international condemnation for its move to permanently destroy the ancient site and expand its iron ore mine, despite Traditional Owners and experts expressing their concerns.īut the mining company didn't break the law, and it wasn't a one-off event.Ī few days after the destruction at Juukan, then WA Aboriginal Affairs Minister Ben Wyatt gave BHP permission to destroy up to 40 Aboriginal heritage sites to make way for its new $4.5 billion South Flank iron ore mine. The humans who sheltered there are genetically linked to the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura people. The gorge in the Pilbara region was known for a cave that was the only inland site in Australia to show signs of continual human occupation through the last ice age. The destruction of a 46,000-year-old sacred site at Juukan Gorge by Rio Tinto last year was widely regarded as a catastrophic mistake.
0 kommentar(er)
