Women's and Children's Hospital

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (15:21): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs a question about the state government's Aboriginal heritage search and clearance protocols.

Leave granted.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO: Construction has started on the new $3.2 billion Women's and Children's Hospital on the former police barracks site at Thebarton. The site and the broader River Torrens precinct is regarded as the most significant Kaurna cultural location in Adelaide because of its proximity to a large Kaurna campground, and with that, of course, the Premier's preferred golf course. Indigenous elders strongly believe the building site is home to many Aboriginal remains and as such extra precautions are required.

I am informed the site has been and is being excavated without proper cultural impact monitoring or necessary consultation with traditional owners. I am also informed that under normal Aboriginal heritage search and clearance practices two qualified heritage monitors are supposed to be assigned to each excavator on site and that is not being followed at the Women's and Children's Hospital site. My questions to the minister are:

1. Are you comfortable with the current Aboriginal heritage search and clearance protocols being undertaken on the site of the new Women's and Children's Hospital?

2. Have any Aboriginal remains been located on the site so far?

3. Have any other Aboriginal artefacts been found on the site?

4. When will the government release the cultural heritage management plan for the site, which is required for major projects and which outlines protocols to be followed when discoveries are made on a construction site?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector, Special Minister of State) (15:23): I thank the honourable member for his question. It is, as I mentioned in an answer to an earlier question about strengthening the protection for Aboriginal heritage in this state, under our Aboriginal Heritage Act, which was first introduced in 1988 I think, an offence to damage, interfere or destroy Aboriginal heritage.

There is a process that is often undertaken where there is deemed to be a risk of that occurring. Under the provisions of the Aboriginal Heritage Act, pursuant to section 23 an application can be made and it is most often made by a land-use proponent, whether they be a public or private land-use proponent, wind farm developers, housing developers but also government when building roadways or major infrastructure, such as in this case the Women's and Children's Hospital.

I will go and check, but to the best of my memory there was an initial application made during the term of the former government on the former much more constrained site where the Women's and Children's Hospital had been proposed, the site where it wouldn't have allowed for expansion or growth in any meaningful way to meet the future needs of South Australians in the Women's and Children's Hospital.

My understanding—and, as I said, I will double-check this—is that an application was made during the term of the last government under section 23 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act and authorisation was granted for that project to go ahead with, as is usually the case, specific conditions in relation to what happens if there are discoveries, particularly of Aboriginal remains: how they are handled and how that works.

As I said, I will double-check, but to the best of my memory there was a further section 23 application during the term of this government, although plans for the Women's and Children's Hospital under this government are significantly more ambitious than they were under the last government, to make sure that there is that ability for future expansion and to cater for what we need now in a much more meaningful and significant way.

Again, with permissions granted under section 23 of the act, there are conditions put in place in relation to protocols to be followed. I will check, but I don't recall it having been reported that there was evidence of the conditions of protocols set down not being followed, but I am happy to go away for the honourable member and check that. As I said, for many major projects, authorisations are applied for. On the occasion that they are granted, there are often conditions attached as to how projects are undertaken. I am happy to go away and check if there have been any concerns raised.