Mining voices and Aboriginal corporations weigh in on cultural heritage

A range of prominent voices, from the Aboriginal corporation representing the traditional owners of Juukan Gorge to Gina Rinehart, are the latest to weigh in on the potential impacts of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage laws to be introduced from July 1. 

The PKKP Aboriginal Corporation, which represents the cultural interests of the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura people, says the time has come for the new laws to be introduced from July 1.

However, it has also heighted concerned landowners could downplay potential cultural heritage implications of activity on their land as a result of new fee structures relating to Aboriginal cultural heritage management plans (ACHMP).

“The guidelines set new fees and definitions of heritage management activities when establishing and maintaining an Aboriginal cultural heritage management plan,” PKKP Aboriginal Corporation Land and Heritage director Jordan Ralph said.

“Industry, particularly pastoralists, had expressed concerns about interpretation and the scale of the fees.

“As a corporation we worry that charging industry proponents including pastoralists significant amounts of money to apply for an ACHMP will drive them to define their activities as having less impact than they actually will because of cost, and as a result offer a lower level of protection for cultural heritage.”

The concerns of pastoralists were laid bare earlier this week when an e-petition set up by the Pastoralists & Graziers Association of WA calling for a delay to the implementation of laws amassed more than 29,000 signatories over two weeks.

The association’s president, Tony Seabrook, said the new laws would cost him and the people he represented significant amounts through ACHMP fees and called for the legislation to be rewritten.

Dr Ralph said PKKP was concerned fees would go to the state government, rather than to resourcing Local Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Services (LACHS); a key piece of processing infrastructure under the new laws that are required to be established by traditional owner groups.

At present there are no LACHS up and running, but more than 40 groups have applied to the state government for LACHS designation. The lack of LACHS has been a major point of concern for opponents of the July 1 rollout.

The PKKP views on pushing ahead echoed the sentiment of Association of Mining and Exploration Companies chief executive Warren Pearce, who told Business News the time to change the laws was now.

Mr Pearce said while not unanimous, the mining industry had largely accepted the need for change to outdated legislation and that no legislation would be perfect.

“There was never going to be a scenario where there was a perfect model,” he said.  

“The reality is it goes further than perhaps a lot of industry would like to see it go, for traditional owners it doesn’t go far enough.

“The best outcome really is one where we’re all a bit unhappy, but we think we can make it work.”

Among the mining voices issuing caution on the potential impacts of the new legislation was Gina Rinehart, who told an audience in Brisbane today that regulations made available at the end of May created uncertainty for groups including landowners with larger properties.

“Many are concerned that some elements of this Act have not been consulted on broadly enough, and there is risk of unintended consequences, even property developers are raising concerns, not just the mining industry,” she said.

“These unintended consequences could extend further too, with all West Australians who own a block larger than 1100sqm needing to be aware of their potential obligations under the Act, which could involve additional assessment, permitting, plans and or approvals for various activities, should they wish to disturb soil in excess of 20kg, for instance, maybe for a granny flat as their parents age, or extra accommodation unit as their teenagers age.”

Mrs Rinehart’s comments were made at Brisbane Mining Club lunch as part of a wider-ranging speech.

Dr Ralph said the PKKP Aboriginal Corporation felt all parties needed to work together to make the best of the new system.

“The Act is not perfect, but it gives greater scope and authority to Aboriginal people to identify, define and manage their heritage,” he said.

“What is needed is for all of us to work together to effectively put the laws into practice.”

The state government allocated $77 million to setting up the system in the 2023-24 state budget. Mr Pearce said the onus would now be on government to properly resource traditional owner groups and the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage to establish LACHS and get the system fully up and running. 

“We still need government to put some horsepower into getting the system set up,” he said.

“We can’t just hand this over to the traditional owner groups and say ‘well, we’ve handed you some money now to set up the LACHS, over to you’.

“Government really needs to back them in and help them with the capacity to do so, otherwise not all LACHS will get set up and that will be problematic.

“The LACHS provide some certainty for industry on who you deal with, some certainty around fees and some certainty around time.

“If they don’t get set up then we’re still in half of the old system; that’s a difficult scenario for us.”