Page 3122 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 22 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
drafts there. But there will be no more accountability indicators reported on in the future. The government wants to stop reporting on the completion and publication of master plans, despite the fact that, as at the start of this financial year, some had not been completed.
Finally, on heritage, in the past few months as shadow minister for heritage I have learned a lot about heritage sites in our city, from Indigenous sites to Federation homesteads, and more recently about heritage trains. The other thing I have noticed over the past few months is the lack of concern the government seems to demonstrate for Canberra’s heritage and for the people who work in this space.
The government has made considerable changes to the Heritage Act without consultation. I know that because I consulted with many organisations in the space about proposed changes, and they said they had not been consulted. Remember the example that it has taken 15 years to finally make a heritage assessment on Oaks Estate and that the government has never communicated the reasons for such a lengthy delay.
So when I looked at the budget I was not surprised to see that the budget lacks any real accountability indicators in heritage areas—no indicators that provide any real clarity about the number of nominations received or assessed, or the time taken to assess them. I hope the government will listen to estimates committee recommendation number 95 to implement such indicators. Recommendation 95 said:
The committee recommends that the ACT government include more accountability indicators for heritage matters in future budgets, so as to provide a greater level of clarity about the number of nominations received, assessed, and the length of time taken to assess them.
I have enjoyed meeting many people who work in the heritage area over the past few months, from the National Trust to academics at our universities. We are fortunate to have so much talent in this area. It is a shame that one of the complaints I hear the most is that the government does not engage with them and give consideration to their views. The government feels that it has the knowledge and expertise in heritage, not those who work in the field and deal with heritage issues on the ground.
Hopefully this coming year is the opportunity for the government to turn this around. I hope the government will take on board estimates committee recommendation number 96, to engage with heritage stakeholders. (Second speaking period taken.) That recommendation says:
The committee recommends that the ACT government engage more with the ACT heritage stakeholders and give consideration to their input into heritage decisions.
To conclude, this is a budget that takes away certainty and ignores the wishes of the community. The budget will have a negative effect on many in our community: first homebuyers, downsizers, mountain bike riders, anglers, those who live near developments, those who are developing, those living near CFZ land, communities
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video