Indigenous Cultural Heritage Schemes in Victoria, Queensland and ...

Kelleher also asserted a similar argument of silencing Indigenous voices in
regard to the way that CHMPs were structured by the Act:
A CHMPlan is “a written report, prepared with the assistance of a cultural heritage
advisor”. This advisor must:
• be “appropriately qualified in a discipline relevant to the management of
Aboriginal cultural heritage, such as anthropology, archaeology or history; or
• have “extensive experience or knowledge in relation to the management of
Aboriginal cultural heritage”.
Again the Act silences the Indigenous voice. The very method prescribed by the Act for
protection of culturally significant heritage ‘steals it away’ from Aboriginal people, into
the hands of ‘experts’, more likely than not non‐Indigenous. Again ascertaining oral
history is not mandatory even when the ‘expert’ is non‐Indigenous. In contrast with the
permit process, the consultant is not even compelled to consult with the RAP, let alone a
relevant Aboriginal knowledge holder.
It is hard to see how any “truthful” cultural heritage assessment could possibly be made
without consultation with knowledgeable Aboriginal people, unless the area has already
been extensively considered and stories fully documented and reference made to these. 94
Kelleher’s final major criticism of the Act was in regard to the role of VCAT.
Despite the Act’s requirement for VCAT to include on its membership someone
with ‘sound knowledge of and experience in’ Aboriginal heritage matters,
‘VCAT’s planning division will handle AHAct matters although its routine work
arises from vastly different legislation whose objectives include facilitating
development and whose day‐to‐day work is the robust consideration of
development applications.’ 95
94 ibid, p. 13.
95 ibid, p. 14.
32