Page 4313 - Week 12 - Thursday, 24 October 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
direction and refusal by the Heritage Council to give an extension of time to comply with a repair damage direction will become reviewable decisions in the ACAT.
The bill will also establish, in line with current defined offence provisions relating to damage of heritage places or objects, that the failure to comply with a repair damage direction can be grounds for a heritage order made by the Supreme Court. The bill will also give the Heritage Council authority to issue a section 62 direction where there is imminent threat to the heritage significance of a place or object.
The current threshold wording of “serious” will be removed so that heritage directions will be able to be issued for minor to moderate offences. The bill does not propose to change the offence for not complying with a section 62 heritage direction. Substantial penalties of 1,000 penalty units will remain for this offence. This equates to $160,000 for an individual and $810,000 for a corporation.
High penalty units are necessary in a heritage context to provide a genuine disincentive to protect these often rare and unique places and objects—once these places are lost, they are lost forever—and to send a strong message to the community that disregard for the law should not be seen as a mere cost of doing business. If penalty units are set too low, the cost of penalties to be paid may in some cases simply be viewed as the effective cost of redeveloping a site to its maximum potential to achieve a desired development outcome resulting in significant commercial advantage.
As such, penalty units for damage to heritage places and objects must be significant enough to deter such thinking to protect these important places and objects. A clear message must be sent that wilful and illegal destruction of our heritage will not be tolerated. The ACT government plays a critical and public role in safeguarding the ACT’s heritage assets for current and future generations. It is important that the government lead by example in the way that it cares for, and maintains and protects, these assets.
This includes robust, efficient and effective regulatory and compliance legislation. While not part of this bill, the government will also introduce an infringement notice scheme where compliance officers can issue an immediate $1,000 fine to an individual and $5,000 fine to a corporation for minor damage to a heritage place, regardless of whether it can be repaired.
The infringements are primarily aimed at conduct on the less serious side of the criminal spectrum. The maximum penalty is usually limited to a monetary penalty of a maximum of 50 penalty units. However, the Heritage Act establishes strict liability offences for damage to a heritage place or object as 100 penalty units, and this is not proposed for amendment.
On-the-spot fines will act as a deterrent to discourage people from causing damage deliberately or accidently. The amendments will enable immediate action when a heritage place or object is damaged. There are limitations in the use of heritage directions for the protection of heritage places and objects.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video