Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Northern inquiring into the destruction of 46,000-year-old caves at Juukan Gorge Personal submission

Dear Committee

I am writing to convey my deep concern at continuing destruction of Aboriginal cultural heritage such as we saw on Sorry Day this year when the 46000 year old caves at Juukan Gorge we destroyed by .

The very idea that such destruction is afforded by the laws of this land is incomprehensible. The fact that Aboriginal cultural heritage is not accorded the same respect, recognition and protections in perpetuity as more recent cultural achievements, noting the international outcry when Notre Dame was nearly lost to fire recently, is just more of the pernicious racism that has been meted out against Aboriginal peoples since their lands and waters were invaded in 1788.

How shameful that cultural heritage of such significance is considered less worthy than dividends paid to shareholders. It is beyond disgraceful. The destruction of sites of significance such a Juukan Gorge are, in my opinion, acts of state sanctioned violence towards the custodians, their ancestors and descendants.

I draw you attention to the submission by Kimberley Aboriginal Law and Cultural Centre, and their recommendations which I wholeheartedly support, for example:

"The recent destruction by Rio Tinto of Juukan Gorge in is evidence of the inadequacy of the Aboriginal Heritage Act, Western Australia (1972) to protect highly significant cultural sites and highlights the need for legislative change. Kimberley Aboriginal people are fearful of how the destruction of Juukun Gorge may impact upon their important cultural sites. Aboriginal people feel powerless to protect cultural sites, many of which are important national and global cultural treasures, against development. Current State heritage legislation does not require consultation with traditional owners and is ineffective to protect important places of cultural significance. New protections must be enacted to include legal standing for traditional owners to object to, review and/or challenge applicants and address issues relating to their cultural or significant heritage sites, including but not limited to interference with, or destruction of, those sites."

Indigenous free prior and informed consent is an internationally recognised right that Australia recognises (albeit belatedly); yet this right is not universally enshrined in Australian laws where such consent is of fundamental importance, such as in heritage protection. In fact laws such as the Native Title Act work against this right. This has to change and change immediately. All Australian laws need to align with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Meanwhile the political influence of vested interests, notably of the Minerals Council of Australia, must be curbed. All jurisdictions must implement checks and balances that ensure the rights of Aboriginal people past present and future are prioritised before greed, corruption and profit. I note the submission by Emeritus Professor Jon Altman, the recommendations from which I also wholeheartedly endorse:

Page 1 Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia inquiring into the destruction of 46,000-year-old caves at Juukan Gorge

“It is not just corporate interests that benefit and profit from mineral extraction and the inevitable destruction of the natural environment and Aboriginal sacred geography that this entails. As the owners of sub-surface minerals, governments benefit directly from the receipt of royalties and other payments to state coffers—in return, they issue the licences for corporations to operate almost carte blanche.

“In Western Australia, Australia’s most mineral-dependent state, the current minister for Aboriginal affairs, Ben Wyatt, is also the treasurer and the deputy premier. There is a clear structural tension between cultural heritage protection and state revenue raising. (I say structural intentionally to bypass the additional complication of Wyatt’s indigeneity and family links to the .) This tension is replicated everywhere in Australia except to a lesser extent in the Northern Territory. … Voluntarily improved corporate behaviour and reformed heritage laws will assist in the protection of Indigenous cultural heritage. But a fundamental restructuring of native title law to include a right of veto is far more important. So is the breaking of the direct nexus between mining and government revenues that invariably results in states operating as brokers for mining corporations rather than as impartial arbiters.”

Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission

Yours sincerely

Sally Fitzpatrick

Page 2