Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Hansard source

I don't doubt for a moment the sincerity of the great majority of people in this parliament, both in the Senate and the House of Representatives—perhaps not unanimous but the great bulk of people—who are absolutely ready and excited about the opportunity to put into our Constitution a proper and thorough and decent recognition of Indigenous heritage. As Senator Stewart says, quite rightly, this isn't just the heritage of Indigenous people; this is now the heritage of every Australian. So that offer stands. And, if the referendum is unsuccessful, I will absolutely be committing myself to the idea of a form of constitutional recognition in our founding document that is not somewhere in the middle or somewhere at the end but is right at the very top. I have confidence that many, many Australians will embrace that and say yes to that—that that 1967 moment can happen in 2024 or 2025.

During question time a number of coalition senators took the opportunity to bring to the Senate a debate that is happening in the Western Australian community at the moment. That debate is about the preservation of cultural heritage. Senator Stewart asked a question: 'Does the coalition believe in cultural heritage?' The answer to that is: 'Absolutely, yes, it does.' In this debate, I can perhaps bring a perspective that others can't, because the inquiry that was conducted into the Juukan Gorge matter was conducted by the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia, of which I was a member. It's interesting, because concerns that are now in the Western Australian community about the cultural heritage laws that have been enacted by the WA parliament—concerns about that work, that consultation, the engagement with stakeholders—are not new. In fact, the dissenting report that was part of the Juukan Gorge inquiry has this to say, under the heading 'Replacement of Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA)':

The Committee indicates (paragraph 1.27) it is conscious that many stakeholders have reservations about the proposed legislation, detailing a number of specific concerns.

That proposed legislation talked about in the dissenting report is in fact the cultural heritage laws which are now enacted in Western Australia. It goes on to say:

Given the consultation for the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Bill 2020 included consultation with more than 550 participants, including 40 workshops and 130 submissions, followed by a second consultation phase with more than 500 participants attending workshops across the state and a further 70 submissions, the final legislation is unlikely to fully satisfy all stakeholders.

It is disappointing that the Committee—

I look forward to continuing my contribution later this afternoon.

Question agreed to.