Page 5555 - Week 17 - Wednesday, 4 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Question put:
That the amendments (Mr Jensen's) be agreed to.
The Assembly voted -
AYES, 8 NOES, 7
Mr Collaery Mr Berry
Mr Humphries Mr Connolly
Mr Jensen Mr Duby
Mr Kaine Ms Follett
Dr Kinloch Mrs Grassby
Mr Moore Ms Maher
Mr Prowse Mr Wood
Mr Stefaniak
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 56 and 57, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.
Clause 58
MR JENSEN (4.14): This is my amendment No. 47.
MR SPEAKER: And No. 48?
MR JENSEN: No; I believe that they are different, Mr Speaker. I do not believe that they are related. I move:
Page 26, line 22, subclause 58(1), omit "lessee of land on which a place is located", substitute "person".
Mr Speaker, this amendment relates to the inclusion of a place in an interim register.
The legislation as it reads at the moment only allows for the lessee of a piece of land to seek to have a place included on the interim Heritage Places Register. My amendment will provide an opportunity for a person who is not just a lessee of the land to apply in writing to the Heritage Council for the inclusion of a place in an interim Heritage Places Register.
What you have to remember is that that does not necessarily mean that that particular application will be accepted. It has to go through the process of assessment by the Heritage Council, et cetera, and it goes through the process within the Assembly. It has to be accepted by the Heritage Council and subsequently the Minister and the Assembly before being included on the Heritage Places Register. The problem is that, as it is written at the moment, the legislation does not allow organisations or people with a particular knowledge and experience on an issue to nominate a place for inclusion on the register. We believe that it
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .