Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to speak again on an issue that I have raised in this chamber on many occasions and that is the beautiful, culturally and environmentally sensitive area of James Price Point in the Kimberley. When I spoke last time on this issue I spoke about the flawed decision-making process of the development proposal, the gas hub for James Price Point. When I spoke in August on this issue I asked Minister Burke to look into and take note of the flawed scientific processes around the strategic assessment that was at that stage being carried out and to take steps to ensure that the federal government processes around environmental approvals were significantly better than those of the state government. But, let us face it, they would not have to be much better to be significantly better than the extremely flawed state process.

At that time the federal governmentindicated that they would not make any decisions until the state process was concluded. The process has now concluded. It reached the inevitable outcome that all of us who live in Western Australia knew would occur—that is, the state government would of course kowtow to Woodside, with a 'development at all cost' approach to the Kimberley. They have given it the tick.

As I said, it was hardly a surprise to any of us. The outcome is, of course, absolutely woeful—if you care about Aboriginal cultural heritage; if you care about our archaeological history, which is of course the magnificent dinosaur footprints that are there; and if you care about the extremely important environment of that area and the community values of Broome, which many people in Broome are extremely concerned about will be threatened by this development. Since I last spoke on the development procedures at James Price Point—which was late last year—there have been more developments that highlight yet again how important it is that the federal government pay very close attention to this development and make sure that they use all their powers under the heritage act and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to ensure a rigorous process and stop this area being destroyed.

The new issues that I wish to draw to the attention of the Senate that have come up since I last addressed this issue in the last sitting of parliament are the sacred burial sites that the state government has now granted access to for drilling purposes; the state government planning employee who has stepped down from their position so that they can bid for the contract to set up the workers camp; and the compulsory acquisition process. First I would like to talk about the sacred burial sites.

The Western Australia government—to no-one's surprise—has yet again allowed the Woodside company to disturb Aboriginal heritage sites. The state government granted Woodside's section 18 application under the state's Aboriginal Heritage Act for permission to conduct work in sand dunes at Walmadany, which is right on the coast and is a particularly important area at James Price Point. This is considered by local elders as a sacred site. Woodside said all along that they would work closely with traditional owners to identify and carefully manage Aboriginal culture and heritage at the site—but, of course, they are not in terms of respecting the cultural values of this site.

On four occasions similar applications for this area, most recently in 2008, have been turned down because of the immense cultural values that are at risk in this area. I have been shown the sites that were appropriate to be shown to me. I have in fact been in this area numerous times and have a deep appreciation for the cultural values of this area. I would suggest to people that, if they want to know about this area, they should visit the area and be shown the important sites and the connectedness to these particular sites.

Under intense pressure and, of course, because of the Premier of Western Australia's 'development at any cost' approach to the Kimberley, the Department of State Development, the Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee and the Minister for Indigenous Affairs have all ended up agreeing to this particular proposal going ahead. What is deeply concerning here is the fact that there is also a national Australian Aboriginal Protection Act, and I must ask what involvement the federal government has had in looking at this issue. As I understand, the local community has written to the minister under section 9 of the act, and I suspect that, similar to a number of other applications which I have spoken on in the past, including Yindjibarndi, there has been little action. Again, this is why we need to be looking at amendments and the need to improve the federal Aboriginal Protection Act.

This is another example of Aboriginal people's culture and heritage being disturbed in my home state of Western Australia. Late last year I spoke about the disturbance of the Yindjibarndi sites in the Pilbara. As a result of these decisions, the community are continuing to take action and following up this issue, particularly with the United Nations. KRED Enterprises, a charitable trust set up by the Kimberley Land Council and representing three native title groups in the area—one of which I am known to have had a disagreement with on some of their support for the development in this area—are extremely concerned about this issue. It is reported that last week they requested a UN visit to ensure the rights of native title holders are protected under resource development agreements.

On Wednesday, the Goolarabooloo people said they had sent an urgent appeal to the United Nation's Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, talking about their rights under 15 articles of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and their concern that these rights are being violated by the state government and resource companies. The Goolarabooloo people are staunchly opposed—as I have articulated in this place—to the Browse project and say that it disrespects their law, culture and song cycle, which identify with and are a key part of these heritage sites. Mr Phillip Roe, a Goolarabooloo elder who is much respected up there, said:

We are supposed to have the right for free and prior informed consent; instead we get the compulsory acquisition of our land.

We're supposed to have the right to protect our law, culture and sites, but when we ask for our sites to be protected, the state government approves their destruction.

When we try to stop this destruction, we're given move on notices from the police and told we'll be arrested.

This of course is adding to local tensions in the area. The community are, quite naturally, deeply upset about the latest round of drilling which will go ahead irrespective of whether or not the project is approved. In other words, while Woodside still have not made a decision on whether they are going to invest to go ahead with this development, this drilling will occur and it will have a detrimental impact on these important heritage sites. This will be another area of concern for the local protestors, and I know that they are extremely concerned about this development going ahead.

Once again I ask: where is Minister Burke's intervention on this issue? Where is he stepping in to have a look at the value of these sites and under section 9 of the act buying time in order for him to have a look at these issues? The approach that this government seems to be taking is: 'We'll wait until all the evidence is there about the value of this place before we make a decision.' The point here is that these areas will be destroyed by the time a decision is made. This is not effective heritage protection. These sites are extremely important. Hopefully the proponents of this development will see sense and move the development elsewhere—either onto a floating platform or further south. These sites will be destroyed for no good reason. The federal government needs to step up to the plate and needs to be protecting this extremely important area.