Email to - heritage@pc.gov.au  - Documentary evidence will be sent separately

Dear Commissioners,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide a Summary of my Submission, which will be presented in more detail at the Adelaide hearing on 3rd August.  This submission is from a private individual researcher interested in Australia's historic and cultural heritage.

The EPBC Act which commencement from January 2004, and its implications, is unknown in South Australia.  The public and the media here have been kept in an information blackout. There is no genuine public involvement in, or knowledge by local authorities, of the requirements for the establishment of National Heritage and World Heritage Management principles in the planning process.  Therefore, sites which may meet the criteria for National and World Heritage significance or values, are under immediate threat.

The EPBC Act, AHC Heritage Act 2003, can be summarised thus—

•	IDENTIFICATION of historic places — RNE inadequate	) No co-ordination or
)  co-operative effort 
•	AUTHENTICATION of research about historic places	) of government,
) bureaucracy,
•	PROTECTION - need Legal Audit & steps 1 & 2  		) local governments,
) voluntary groups, or
•	PLAN — impossible without steps 1, 2 & 3			) the community

The biggest problem faced by members of the public in South Australia, is that our local 'system' is completely inadequate in providing meaningful on-going public involvement in the planning process, as required under this new Act.  There is no forum for genuine public discussion; no publicly accessible research centre to co-ordinate a co-operative approach; no historic database library or website readily accessible; no local independent referee to evaluate primary source evidence; no opportunity of direct involvement in the RNE process; no transparency in any planning process.  'Public Consultation' is a farce.

EPBC Act - NHL & WHL Public Nomination Process 
Example—As a nominator of a potential National/World Heritage site, the following three questions will be asked at the Adelaide hearing on the 3rd August.  Unless these types of issues are addressed, this new Act will be no better than the one it replaced.

•	Who authorised/approved/altered the title and boundaries of the NHL public nomination sent to the AHC in October 2004 - 'The Adelaide Park Lands & Colonel Light's Plan', and removed the nominator's primary source references to Colonel Light and his maps?
•	Who changed the nominated acknowledged historic author Colonel Light, to 'the plan'?
•	Who authorised/suggested/approved this fabrication of our history?

Funding
Most of the other issues identified in your paper and the on-line submissions, might be assisted by adopting the Blair Government's Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) concept to the EPBC Act.  You may remember that the Sydney Opera House was paid for by a lottery.

Since 1995 the Heritage Lottery Fund has given over £3 billion to 15,000 awards, including:
•	£342 million to faith heritage including over 1,900 awards to churches and 57 awards to cathedrals
•	£222 million to 567 industrial, maritime and transport heritage projects including historic ships, locomotives, canals and industrial buildings
•	£160 million to archives projects
•	£13 million to over 900 community projects designed to celebrate local heritage
•	£1.17 billion to 2,712 projects involving museums, libraries and archives (many in historic buildings)
•	£1 billion to over 4,000 projects whose main purpose is historic buildings and monuments
•	£604 million to 1,746 projects to support landscape and biodiversity.   http://www.hlf.org.au

Pro-Active Suggestions for New Approaches
RNE - Open up this database nationally to public nomination via a website.  Heritage expertise doesn't reside exclusively in government heritage departments, local councils or Academe.  The NH nomination list shows the value of this already.  

This type of approach might also be useful for compiling a database or National Audit, of potential places of environmental, historical or cultural significance, thereby enhancing their tourism values.  Many international examples - many funding schemes.
Provide a database of on-line links which might assist the public and the AHC councillors with comparative approaches—a few suggestions following.

Heritage Counts (The value of heritage) 
The State of the Historic Environment Report 2004
http:///www.heritagecounts_org_ukheritage_files\heritage_revolution.html

English Heritage   http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/
Our Towns and Cities: The Future Delivering an Urban Renaissance
105 Recommendations of the Urban Task Force
http://www.odpm.gov.uk

TPL The Trust for Public Land - Conserving Land for People - Open Space Pays
http://www.tpl.org/

PPS Project for public space - projects & feedback - case studies, publications etc
http://www.pps.org/

The new EPBC Act will be effective in conserving Australia's historic heritage places, sites and monuments for future generations, if the individual States can be made to adopt it.  The public do not want to see another 5 years spent 'talking' about co-operating.  Please remember that it is the public's money that you are spending.  We would like to cut out all the middle men, the consultants, the self-interests, the litigation and the duplication.

Thank you for your time.