In My
Opinion
Prints
4 pages
Summary of the Public Submissions up to No. 193, the Draft Recommendation Submissions up to No. 418, and the public hearing transcripts from around the country. |
|---|
Australian Government Productivity Commission Conservation of Australia's Historic heritage Places Inquiry 2005Click link to index page - then individual Submission number for full details. http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiry/heritage/subs/sublist.html Submissions in response to Draft Recommendations (DR) 193 - 418 |
| DR204 The Australian Garden History Society In the discussion of tourism benefits of heritage, the report fails to recognise the important contribution made by historic places. The key issue in heritage-focussed tourism is that a reasonable percentage of profit should be returned to the maintenance, conservation, and improvement of the heritage place that generates the tourism in the first place (WHERE IS ALL THE BRAGGED ABOUT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FROM 'EVENTS' IN OUR PARK LANDS GOING?) |
| DR205 Iris Iwanicki - heritage consultant Adelaide - previously on State Heritage Council Draft Report released for comment has filled me with dismay. Listing should be regardless of whether the place is likely to be conserved or destroyed to make way for new development. The 3 Federal lists should be almalgamated, including NHL and the list of govt owned heritage and the iconic places and form one list until State govt's review earlier National Estate listings for the level of significance, - State, Local or National. (GOING ON WHAT HAS HAPPEND SINCE 1975 - THIS WOULD TAKE ANOTHER 30 YEARS) |
| DR220 North Adelaide Society Heritage value cannot and must not be measured solely in dollar value |
| DR233 Donovan D. Rypkema, Heritage Strategies International - 15p (* This submission says it all) The entire definition of "heritage" would be based, not on knowledgeable evaluation by specialist in the field, but rather on the negotiating ability of a local official and the short term revenues in a local govt treasury. ...Not a single argument that is used in the Draft Report could not be just modestly repackaged next year or the year after for a repeal of environmental laws, zoning acts, subdivision regulations, and anti-sprawl legislation. ...This is an international affront to the built heritage of all of us. ... The Draft Report is not a document one would expect from a highly respected govt research agency. This presents to me as an ideological document espousing a libertarian "property rights" philosophy far outside the mainstream of thought in Europe, Canada, or even in property rights obsessed America. ...The entire document is driven by the Idee Fixe of the government paying for conservation agreements. It seems to me that it's likely this solution was predetermined and every argument, citation, and critique appears to have been chosen for inclusion in the Draft Report to support what seem to me to be their already decided conclusions. |
| DR243 Heritage Protection Association - (Shirley McNamara) Recounts heritage battles all around South Australia fought by caring individuals. 'Claytons' consultation - developer deals made in secret - development is promoted & preserving heritage is seen as a cost, a nuisance. Pt. Adelaide redevelopment - NO PUBLIC SPACE. No alternative or adaptive re-use of the Treasury Building considered. |
| DR250 The Makris Group - SA - developers Supports negotiated conservation agreements |
| DR314 City of Adelaide 17/02/2006 8 RTF 0.2 MB (19 pages) (ACC seem to be confused over the term 'HISTORIC' - (City) Parklands (mis-spelled) and Plan of the City of Adelaide nonsense mainly about no funding for recommendations *" If a place is worthy of NHL, it should be legally protected regardless of whether an agreement is in place or not." (* DID I MISS SOMETHING HERE? - ACC has endorsed the public nomination of July 2004 for NHL!) (Ed--note name and spelling - The Adelaide Park Lands - two words, capital letters - 'city' could be anywhere - 'parklands' is generic - boundaries were defined in 1837 and gazetted in 1839) |
| DR325 Strathfield Council - NSW Reviews of heritage consultants report and implementation under Local Environment Plan (LEP) Heritage does not neatly divide into Local, State and Commonwealth juridictions or responsibilities as suggested by the Report. The principle of negotiated conservation agreements for Local Govt statutory heritage listings is not workable. |
| DR341 City of Perth (* Excellent) Original submission dealt with out of context. To recommend such a significant departure from the current process based on no actual quantifiable research is very disturbing. Reference to English Heritage surveys. The next debate to have once the above research has been conducted is to determine what is heritage - a public or private good. We need to understand the implications of listing of places of cultural heritage significance and the implications of cultural tourism on towns, cities and regions. * "One only needs to look at the way legislation has been introduced in WA to see that heritage has not had its proper debate within society. The legislation is very young and imposed, it is not marketed, the community are not engaged, the research has not been done, perceptions have not been identified, and if wrong, properly addressed. No wonder there is so much confusion around heritage. The Commission is adding to this confusion by not taking the logical steps of research and grounding its findings in solid data." |
| DR342 Whitehorse City Council - ACT Statement of significance required under Victorian Heritage Overlays. Strong opposition to the concept of voluntary negotiated agreements |
| DR343 Macedon Ranges Residents Assoc Inc (* GOOD) The Association's view is that the Commissions findings and recommendations are irresponsible, environmentally and socially unsustainable, . MRRA would say that the Commission knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing, ... The Association believes that the most productive and sustainable outcome for this Nation would be the immediately abolition of the Productivity Commission |
| DR344 Heather Berry NSW - heritage listed property owner My husband is a heritage architect. Heritage listed property 115 years old owned for last 20 years - disallusioned -lack of support - private owners ignored - caution needed in giving local govt more power - lack of expertise - pressure from vested interest |
| DR345 Australian Academy of the Humanities Historic heritage places have enormous educational benefits for young Australians and economic benefits through tourism. The analysis of a place, which establishes how and why it is culturally significant, should be completed, scrutinised and endorsed, BEFORE any conservation measures are taken |
| DR349 Corporation of Walkerville Fundamentally opposed to negotiated conservation agreements |
| DR354 Barossa Council Heritage conservation should be legally endorsed with a greater scale of fines and administered in the same way as environment laws are |
| DR388 Bayside City Council - Vic 700 individual properties and 16 precincts in Heritage Overlays - to remove Heritage Overlays referred to an independent (of Council) panel appointed by the Minister of Planning. The proposed concept of negotiated conservation agreements is untried, untested and therefore flawed. Sandringham CC attempted voluntary listing of heritage places in 1990 which resulted in approximately 20 listings out of 1200. This led to a significant loss of heritage places ...as a result of demolition. |
| DR392 Royal Australian Institute of Architects (*) Disappointed Draft Report has not appropriately valued the immense environmental, social and cultural benefits that heritage conservations imparts to the Australian community. Voluntary agreements not in the public interest. Can only agree to phase out RNE if all places have been properly assessed. ...any place on the National List has been subject to a long process of rigorous assessment and consultation, and justly deserve to remain on that list due to its founded high level of significance. That place is also deserving of protection, and such decisions should not be related in any way to a negotiated conservation agreements. * The RAIA also notes that the Heritage Council of the States & Territories, whilst appointed by the Minister, represent the community. This recommendation dilutes the role of community in the decision-making process. The growing emergence of cultural heritage tourism, and its associated economic, environmental, social and community benefits, has largely been overlooked by the PC's Draft Report. |
| DR398 Noel McIntosh Heritage hell |
| DR404 City of Prospect Fundamentally opposed to negotiated conservation agreements |
| DR408 Maitland City Council Negotiated conservation agreements removes wider community out of the process of protecting places of value for future generations |
| DR409 Wattle Range Council - SA Voluntary listing system ... will tend to serve private interests at the likely expense of inter-generational equity and community benefit |
| DR410 Real Estate Institute of SA In centuries to come, we want Australia to be respected as a Nation with great heritage and it is for this reason that a comprehensive framework for heritage preservation is required... REISA supports the introduction of a system that gives very clear boundaries with little scope for exemption on properties built prior to the 1920's ...all properties built by the 1920's would automatically be protected for heritage value |
| DR411 Northern Territory Tourist Commission NTTC considers history and heritage as one of the key building blocks to the ongoing success of tourism in the Territory ...conservation which prevents locals and visitors from understanding the historic importance of a site has limited value |
| DR412 City of Subiaco Whether a place is of State or Local heritage significance should not depend on whether the owner consents to the listing or not, as this is not a defining factor in determining a place's level of cultural significance |
| DR413 Victorian Govt (Draft) * (Comprehensive response to Draft Recommendations) Heritage conservation in Victoria is a long established, rigorous and effective system that is widely accepted by owners of historic heritage places and the general public alike. The Draft Report did not fully address the terms of reference... Additionally, the opportunity to identify potential new policies, programs and incentives has not been embraced. Victoria has Overlays - heritage covenants ... The Draft Report does not acknowledge the major contribution made by historic heritage places to cultural tourism in Australia. * In summary. The Victorian Govt does not intend to enact the statutory or regulatory changes necessary to implement any of the recommendations contained within the Productivity Commission's Draft Report |
| DR414 South Australian Tourism Commission (*PATHETIC RESPONSE - NOTHING ABOUT CULTURAL TOURISM VALUES IN SA) To give private owners the power of veto over the interests of the wider community, would, in the SATC's view, be a radical and retrograde step... |
| DR415 City of Unley Re-introduce tax incentives - interim protection not supported |
| DR416 Queensland Govt (Peter Beattie) A wide range of incentives and other persuasive measures adopted and tested elsewhere by heritage management agencies around the world could provide insight into effective historic places, strategies that could be implemented in Australia |
| DR417 The 3068 Group Inc (Residents of Clifton Hill & West Fitzroy Vic) The decision of what is significant and what is not should continue to be determined by conservation experts guided by the Burra Charter or AHC criteria, and documentary evidence. ...We urge the Commission to withdraw this outrageous and radical proposal that flies in the face of over thirty years development in heritage guidelines, practice and planning scheme development.
|
| Submissions closed and report sent to Peter Costello 6 April 2006
|
| DR418 The South Australian Government (Min. Paul Holloway ) - (this submission does not appear in the final report) ..."Heritage management is tightly integrated into South Australia's planning system and benefits from the balanced approach to the inter-dependent aspects of heritage conservation within the broader planning framework. It does not suffer from duplicated heritage-related assessments or jurisdictional conflicts noted as evident elsewhere in Australia." ... (NO COMMENT)
This information is copyright (K. Crilly - 26-10-2006), and should be acknowledged to this website. Please email for permission to reproduce in any publication.
|