Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources) Share this | Hansard source

In summing up the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Amendment Bill 2005, I say that it reflects the Australian government’s commitment to protecting heritage and ensuring that Australians benefit from appropriate international cultural exchanges. The amendments to the act will ensure that Australians continue to have opportunities to see in Australia significant Indigenous cultural heritage objects that are owned by institutions overseas. The amendments will encourage international cultural exchanges. They will remove an uncertainty that would discourage overseas institutions from ever allowing items from their collection to be exhibited in Australia. The amendments to the act will also provide for the repeal of the Victoria-specific provisions of the act, including the scheme for Victoria alone that is set out in part IIA of the act.

In 1987 the act was extended to include provisions that that would apply only in Victoria, at the request of the Victorian government of the day. These provisions now prevent new Victorian legislation for Aboriginal heritage protection from coming into effect. The Victorian government wrote to the Australian government in 2005 to explore how this obstacle could be removed. All other states and territories have legislation to protect this heritage. The amendments remove the obstacle to Victorian legislation and allow a sensible sharing of roles and responsibilities for the protection of cultural heritage in Victoria. The proposal is sensible for the Australian government and for Victoria and for more comprehensive and coordinated administration of Aboriginal cultural heritage in Australia. Following repeal of the Victoria-specific provisions, the Australian government legislation will provide the same level of protection in Victoria that it provides for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage in other parts of Australia.

We do commend the bill to the House, but having noted the proposed amendments provided by the opposition I have to say that the government cannot support those amendments. There are various reasons. One is that the Australian government stands by its commitment, as stated by Senator Hill in 2003, to reform the legislation. The Minister for the Environment and Heritage has written to his state and territory colleagues commencing a consultative process to reform the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984. This act will be reformed.

Following former Senator Hill’s 2003 commitment on behalf of the government to comprehensive reform of this legislation, the government has not been idle in pursuing reform, as is evidenced by the fact that, firstly, in January 2004 the government transferred responsibility for the reform from ATSIC to the Department of the Environment and Heritage; secondly, in March 2004 the department consulted Indigenous representatives on the reforms, but it postponed consultations during the implementation of the government’s new arrangements in Indigenous affairs; and, thirdly, in October 2005 the government introduced the current amendments to the Senate.

The Australian government’s heritage reforms under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 provide protection for places on the National Heritage List, the Commonwealth Heritage List and the World Heritage List, including places of Indigenous heritage value. This protection is on top of protection under the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 and can apply to a broad range of Indigenous heritage. Both acts acknowledge the importance of a national approach that recognises the responsibilities of states and territories in protecting Indigenous heritage places and other heritage.

Not all of the recommendations of the Evatt report will be applicable in 2006. The government will consult Indigenous people and other stakeholders to hear their views on issues, including issues identified in the Evatt report. The government concurs with the member for Fraser, Mr McMullan, on this point. A further public review will delay reforms and is not needed to identify the issues. The Evatt report remains valuable as a source of information and proposals for reform. Additionally, in 1998 there was a report from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund on the reform of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984. The Department of the Environment and Heritage has already sought an exemption to the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, the effect of which would be that declarations made under sections 10 and 12 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 would not be subject to the sunset provisions of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. We urge all members to support the bill, but we cannot accept the second reading amendment moved by the opposition.

Question put:

That the words proposed to be omitted (Mr Albanese’s amendment) stand part of the question.

See this speech in context