Page 5557 - Week 17 - Wednesday, 4 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
really talking more about a representative sample. For example, it could be argued that the mostly steel Beaufort House in Canberra - the only one of its kind left, as I understand it - is in fact, part of the heritage of this city, and it is appropriate, I would think, for that to be retained.
Because of this, an organisation such as the Institute of Architects, for example, may seek to have that particular location identified and retained on the register. This Bill does not allow for that to happen, and I think it is important, if we are to maintain and retain any aspect of our heritage, that we widen, beyond just the lessee of the land, the range of people who can apply for the inclusion of a place on the interim register.
It is not even clear to me whether, in fact, the Government, under this legislation - and Mr Wood and his departmental officials may care to correct me on this - has the ability to raise with the Heritage Council whether such a site could be identified. In fact, clause 56 does not refer to clause 58. It says that the Minister can issue directions, but only under clauses 68 and 72.
It appears to me that the Minister cannot, in fact, direct the Heritage Council to at least take under its wing a nomination for a place's inclusion on a heritage register. That is why the Rally has proposed this amendment to subclause 58(1) - to ensure that we widen the opportunities there for the protection of our heritage, bearing in mind that we still have to go through a process before the final decision is made.
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (4.21): I am not going to argue about this, Mr Speaker. I am not sure that that was the intention of this clause, but you would know that the procedure allows for any person to make a recommendation or to advise the Heritage Council and for the Heritage Council to take the matter on board. I can live with this amendment. I do not think it does anything to change the situation that currently exists or that is envisaged in this legislation. So, it can go ahead.
MR JENSEN (4.22): Can I just raise a point of clarification, please, Mr Speaker, in relation to the ability of the Government. I presume that "person" can be taken to apply to the Government.
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (4.22): Yes.
Amendment agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .