House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Flinders Ranges Sacred Sites Flinders Ranges Sacred Sites The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS House of Assembly Black Leader of the Opposition Flinders Ranges Sacred Sites The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS (Black—Leader of the Opposition) (14:08): My question is to the Deputy Premier. Did the minister's department provide approvals that led to the destruction of sacred sites in the Flinders Ranges and, if so, why? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain. Leave granted. The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS House of Assembly Black Leader of the Opposition The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: The Advertiser reported last week: Flinders Ranges traditional owners say they are victims of 'cultural genocide' after unauthorised earthworks destroyed sacred…sites metres from one of South Australia's most prized national parks. Adnyamathanha woman Beverley Patterson said, 'When I saw it, I cried.' The Hon. S.E. CLOSE House of Assembly Port Adelaide Deputy Premier Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science Minister for Defence and Space Industries Minister for Climate, Environment and Water Minister for Workforce and Population Strategy The Hon. S.E. CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Minister for Defence and Space Industries, Minister for Climate, Environment and Water) (14:09): I appreciate the opportunity to talk about that incident in the chamber. As people may have noticed if they have followed the media stories about this, there is a fence line between Beltana pastoral lease and that that has now become the Nilpena Ediacara National Park. That fence line, for about 26 kilometres, is an existing fence line that is in a state of disrepair and the National Parks/Department for Environment and Water have agreed to share the cost of upgrading that with the pastoral leaseholder at Beltana. There is also an additional approximately two kilometres that is at present unfenced that it was agreed ought also to be fenced in order to secure the cattle on the Beltana property. There appears to have been, and without wanting to reach a definitive conclusion, with the best charity, a misunderstanding between the department and the pastoralist who employed the contractor over what had been approved for to proceed and what still needed to wait for advice from the Adnyamathanha about whether there was any Aboriginal heritage that required attention to be paid before making a decision on action. The existing fence, as I understand it, is agreed able to be upgraded. It's the two kilometres that is yet to be cleared and graded for fencing that was not approved by the Adnyamathanha. Because there is an uncertainty about the degree to which there was a communication misunderstanding and also a lack of clarity, from my perspective, about the order of events of seeking and granting approval and who ought to do that and who is legally responsible, the department has determined to have an independent review and is in the process of working with Crown solicitors at present to refine the terms of reference for that review and who will undertake it so that we are able to get to the bottom of the way in which this has occurred not only because it's important that we understand what has occurred in this particular instance but, should it be that it's a communication challenge or a process challenge, we need to make sure that we are learning from it in order to not allow such an error to occur. The department has nonetheless, and had previously prior to the clearance in those two kilometres, asked for advice from the Adnyamathanha about cultural heritage and either has or will be shortly going to the site with Adnyamathanha elders in order to determine what the cultural values are in order to then make decisions about what occurs from now on.