Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 11 Hansard (5 November) . . Page.. 3641 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I should go back one step. There was an earlier application. The earlier application had been rejected by, I think, the Land and Planning Appeals Board, on the basis, in part, that the building concerned ought to be preserved or protected in some way and that the demolition of that building was not appropriate as part of the scheme. That was not a decision by the Heritage Council; it was a decision by the Land and Planning Appeals Board, as I recall. Subsequently, the proposal was revised and put forward, again containing a proposal to demolish the building that was purported to have heritage value. It was at that point that this particular incident occurred.

To the best of my understanding, a tree person was sent to cut down the limbs of this tree. The limbs were directly above the roof of the house. Amazingly, the law of gravity cut in at that point and not only one but a number of very heavy boughs fell onto the roof, causing some considerable damage.

Mr Whitecross: You are the Attorney-General. You should amend the law of gravity.

MR HUMPHRIES: I would if I could, I assure you, for my own sake. I understand that it is alleged - although I do not have any evidence of it at this stage - that some pre-weakening of the internal structure of the building also took place. The building is still standing. The Executive of the ACT has issued orders for the building to be restored, as is our prerogative under the Land Act. That order has been served. I understand that the developer who was associated with this task on behalf of the owners has been sacked and the owners have indicated their willingness to cooperate with the orders that have been made.

I also understand that a police investigation has taken place. It has revealed that, since there was no official heritage status to the building at that point in time, it is not possible to lay any charges against a person at this stage. However, I understand that the matter is actually before the Director of Public Prosecutions at the moment. That indication that there may not be any charges capable of being laid might be premature, and I will await a decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions.

MS McRAE: Minister, what I would like to know is: Are you confident that such destructive activity will not happen again, or do we need to perhaps revise or change our heritage laws or our management of heritage in the ACT, and perhaps accelerate the placement of these houses on the register?

MR HUMPHRIES: I certainly have said, Mr Speaker, and I think it is true, that we need to come back and consider just what protection our Heritage Act offers in these circumstances. If what is alleged is true, clearly, somebody attempted to avoid the operation of the heritage legislation by deliberately damaging a house. My only concern about acting in this area is how we actually do so to ensure that somebody is not affected to their disadvantage in an unfair way.

Obviously, if I choose to climb up onto my roof and cut down the boughs of my overhanging tree and it smashes my roof, I suppose that that is my prerogative. It is a matter between me and my insurance company, I suppose.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .