Thursday, 23 March 2023

Bills

Heritage Amendment Bill 2023

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Lizzie Blandthorn:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (09:58): I rise delighted to speak to the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023. I am excited about it because when talking about heritage and preserving so much of our history and culture and everything that makes Victoria great, this bill is modernising the practices by which we can do so, by which we can preserve it.

Our heritage makes us all that we are today. It is a combination of so many things – places, objects, buildings, people, it all feeds into it – and I believe that here in Victoria we have the best culture in the world. One of the big contributors to that is our multicultural culture, if I can say that. It is that blending of food, faith, language, fashion and cultures. It is the melting pot of Victoria that makes it such an amazing place to live. I was fortunate when I was younger: I would work hard, I would do overtime, I would live away, and then I would travel around the world and see so many different places. And I am so fortunate that I am able to call Victoria home. It is also why I am so proud to be here in the Victorian Parliament, and I will put on the record that I truly believe Victoria is the best place in the world in which to live. I think much of the world looks at Australia and thinks how great our culture is – that we have a very fair way of life – but I think the best of it comes from Victoria. Much of the best of what has fed into the culture of Australia and so much that we have has come from Victoria.

It would be remiss of me not to mention some of the things that feed into the culture that we all enjoy. Of course there is the AFL, Victoria being the birthplace and the home of Aussie Rules footy, and for me growing up Dean Jones was quintessentially Victorian. But there are other things. Obviously we have our arts. The comedy festival is fantastic, and we have our graffiti and our art, so there are many, many things that feed into it.

Underpinning all that is tens of thousands of years of history of our First Nations people. I spoke recently in this place about some of the heritage sites of our First Nations people – eel farming in the west and sacred places of meeting – and of course care for country, which we are adopting more and more today. At every citizenship ceremony or every welcome to country I go to I am blown away when elders wholeheartedly welcome all of us onto the lands on which we gather and basically just ask that people respect each other, respect the environment and respect the animals. I think it is such a beautiful foundation for our culture – after the last 200 or 300 years, which have been horrendous, quite frankly, for our First Nations people – and that welcome when new citizens come to Australia is fantastic and it sets the tone. The waves of migrants we have had have all brought their various cultures, and over the last few hundred years that has sped up more and more, which has just added to what we have here.

My family arrived in around about 1854. It was an interesting year, because that was the year of the Eureka rebellion, which my great-great-great-grandfather happened to be at. He was arrested at the time, but I and my family are very proud that he was there, because that has led on to much of our culture and is a fundamental point in the heritage of Victoria and Australia and was important to workers around the world. What came out of those disputes has laid the framework for things like the 8-hour day and pay and conditions that we have all enjoyed. I spoke in here yesterday about equality, and it is those underpinnings of our working conditions that allow for equality, allow for home ownership and allow for family.

As I said, we are very proud that the family were in Ballarat and on the goldfields at that time. I spoke a little bit about this at the Gippsland Trades and Labour Council in Morwell last week at their Labour Day dinner, which was held a few days later. It happened to be St Paddy’s day too, which was pretty good, but it also happened to be the evening that Collingwood were playing Geelong. The TV happened to be on the side wall, so I was a little bit distracted throughout the speech as Collingwood gave Geelong a real thumping. But Collingwood Football Club, much like the Labor Party and the labour movement, are an absolute core fundamental to me and my family because my great-grandfather, who was also Tom, was on the committee of the Collingwood Football Club. I know there are a few Collingwood supporters in here, so I have actually brought a little prop, which I might be able to distribute around later on. My great-grandfather was on the committee, and this is his 1909 Collingwood membership ticket. He did not have to have it stamped. I note that Carlton have something similar on their website from 1935, so they were only about three decades behind where we were then.

The reason why I really want to raise the Collingwood Football Club is because Victoria Park, which I remember going to as a kid, definitely did not have the amenities of today’s AFL football ovals. When going to the toilets and whatnot and for people trying to get to the bar it was quite a different experience. But it was vibrant and really captured the working-class spirit that came out of what back in those days were the Collingwoods, and I will even give Richmond a small shout-out, growing up on the banks of the Yarra: big families, small houses. But, by gosh, when they could get out to the footy, they were there and they were there in huge numbers.

I have had the privilege and the pride of being able to take my boys to Victoria Park. Fortunately it has been preserved, and that is because it is on the Victorian Heritage Register. That is the beauty and that is what we are talking about. It is there, the stands are still intact, they are being used – I have had the privilege of playing in the pub footy league which uses Victoria Park on days when is not being used. This state government has also invested money to ensure that our female footballers, who are just going from strength to strength, are able to use the facility. Our VFL men’s teams use it and our umpires train there. The value of acknowledging and respecting heritage is that you capture something that is quintessential to what it is to be Victorian – and indeed Australian – but you are preserving it for future generations to enjoy and to use. Again, I come back to the point: I could not be prouder of the fact that this bill is modernising our ability to preserve, protect, enjoy, respect, all these things. I could go on about Collingwood for a lot longer but I have promised people I would not, so we will move on to some other items.

These amendments are intended to allow for the publication and inspection requirements to be met in a more modern and flexible manner which would minimise disruption. The amendments also allow the Heritage Council to conduct its hearings online via audio or audiovisual link, and I think for any of us who are engaging in a public way, these modern facilities engage people, they allow more people to get involved and it does not matter what people’s abilities are – age or whatever it might be, not being able to get out on a dark night or be able to get somewhere – they get to be involved. These changes increase opportunities for the public to participate in the heritage process through these more accessible methods of communication. The changes are largely modernising existing processes and enhancing public access to statutory documents. It is vitally important that we protect heritage. To do that we need to make sure we are using the most up-to-date processes, and that is why I am so excited about this bill.

In Eastern Victoria, Heritage Victoria is investing in several important projects to protect and conserve Victoria’s heritage. These include the Omeo courthouse; the church at the Lake Tyers Aboriginal Trust; the Hinnomunjie Bridge; a social history of the Latrobe Valley – I have spent a bit of time in the historical society there, it is fantastic the things that you learn; Mount Martha House; Manyung recreation camp; the Traralgon courthouse; the no. 21 dredger used in the Morwell open-cut mine, which is a massive machine; and the Cape Schanck lighthouse station and McRae lighthouse. Just from this list you can see the immense diversity of our history, from social to engineering to justice, religion, war and maritime, all such important parts of our state’s history to remember.

At the moment I am engaged with a group working to restore an old pub in Eastern Victoria, the Rosedale Hotel. You have got plumbers, you have got tradies – three guys have come together who have lived and worked in the town all their lives, been at the footy club, and what I love is that they are bringing back to life the facade of a beautiful old pub. When you drive through a town like Rosedale you want to see the pub alive, with the beautiful stables out the back. We get the facade updated – we preserve and maintain that heritage, that history – but then inside gets used, it becomes activated. The refurbishment and renovations allow, particularly in a town like Rosedale where both pubs are not currently open, people to come together. The owners have told me – they are very genuine about this; they have all still got their day jobs – it is not about making as much money out of it as they can. It is about bringing community in, making sure that the footy clubs, the netball teams, whatever sports groups, different community groups, can come in there and be together. And I think that is really, really important.

The pub is heritage listed. Private investors buy these heritage-listed places with their own money and do them up, resulting in multiple benefits for the community, as I have just touched on. But it is not always easy to comply with the heritage requirements, and Cam and I have talked about this, so a huge shout-out to the group and the work they are doing. Of course the needs in opening a business have to be balanced with the importance of protection and the importance of expertise in ensuring history is protected in the best way.

Also, a shout-out to all those people working to protect our history from a planning perspective. There is clearly a balance between protecting the past and building the future, and this bill works towards making this process simpler. The amendments in this bill do address the balance, and they increase certainty for owners. Owners will be notified of decisions sooner and within set time frames. Owners will be able to request minor amendments to a permit without a fee. Owners will be notified if a permit exemption is being revoked or amended. Where a place has multiple owners, only affected owners will need to be involved – for example, in an apartment complex, only the owner of an apartment undergoing works or activities will need to give permission for a permit application, rather than all owners in the complex. Owners of unoccupied residences can give consent for entry or receive two days notice of entry rather than being served a search warrant. References to owners have been updated to include government asset managers, so that both are notified in the same way. The bill allows for applications to exclude a place or object from the Victorian Heritage Register to provide a more effective way of establishing the heritage significance of a place or object in the early stages of major infrastructure projects.

As you can see – and I could go on and on about the other things this bill does – it is very clear I think to all Victorians who appreciate everything that Victoria is: quintessentially what it is, the essence of what it is. I mean, this building in itself has an incredible history, and I know some in the chamber are absolutely down to the day of the date and the year. I am not that across the detail, but by gosh I appreciate and value it every time I am here. I grew up in Ballarat, and I had the privilege of working on Nazareth House and working in Sovereign Hill. I am not sure Sovereign Hill is even heritage listed, but God it feels like it is. What the buildings – and I am only talking about buildings; I am not even really going into objects and other places of gathering so much today – provide to this state is amazing. It is a reminder of the wealth that did flow from the goldfields in incredible times. Ballarat Trades Hall, I believe, may have been the first trades hall in the world; maybe it was the Victorian Trades Hall on Lygon Street – I am not sure. Both those buildings stand as a reminder of the wealth that was generated – that there was a fair distribution of that wealth. We see that because that wealth permeated around our suburbs and still makes up many of the beautiful buildings that we see today that we are preserving and enjoying. I am proud to have spoken on this bill.

John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (10:13): Today I rise to speak about the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023. When I think of the word ‘heritage’, to me it means something that is old and something that needs to be protected and needs to be preserved. If I take myself back to my family farm up at Yea, we had an old homestead that was built in the late 1900s. Invariably as buildings get older, you need to do a few adjustments to things. It had a 9-foot tongue-and-groove verandah that ran all the way around the homestead, and it needed to be repaired. At the time when we were repairing it, there were some old newspapers that had been preserved there for some years. We were able to go back and look at a time when that first verandah was put down, and we were able to relate to the things of the day that were going on. We found it quite instructive, so once we finished our job of restoring the verandah, we put the current day newspapers down. Probably we will be coming up to a time in the next decade or so where these things will need to be replaced, and the people that will pull up that verandah will understand the historical value that it had – whatever the news of the day was as we went along. I just wanted to mention that because I think it is important that heritage has these links to people over time, and they should be protected.

This bill affects the portfolio of planning, which is the responsibility of a minister in the other place, Minister Kilkenny. I make this important sidenote to congratulate Minister Kilkenny. In the last sitting week of Parliament, on the Wednesday, Ms Kilkenny rose to speak in her first question time in Parliament in her capacity as the Minister for Planning.

This bill, as I will get to in the bulk of my speech, is widely supported. The amendments proposed in the bill are widely supported by all the relevant stakeholders. Our government has done its due diligence, and I commend the work done to craft these amendments. The bill’s purpose is to make operational improvements to the Heritage Act 2017. Key heritage as well as community groups have been consulted. These include the National Trust, the Royal Historical Society of Victoria, the International Council on Monuments and Sites and the Heritage Council of Victoria. Stakeholders have made it quite clear – consulted parties support the amendments and safeguards, which ensure cultural heritage is not undermined.

I want to make reference to the tabling of the statement of compatibility and the second-reading speech. In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023 is compatible, and on the second-reading speech, the bill will require searchable versions of the Victorian Heritage Register and Heritage Inventory to be made available online. I will get to the substance of the bill shortly, but I want to associate myself with these remarks.

The bill will introduce several practical changes. They include that the Heritage Council will be able to call on the funds set aside as a security measure. For instance, this could be a bank guarantee to ensure compliance with permit conditions or could ensure that when other places have multiple owners, only those directly affected by the act need to be involved. Importantly, it prevents someone from being guilty of an offence if they are acting in accordance with a notice or order served on them.

So what is the bill actually trying to accomplish? It responds to problems that became evident during the pandemic. Clearly when people were in lockdown it was unreasonable to demand access to documents in person; therefore the bill provides for online access to heritage hearing documents and notices. It also removes the requirement that during a state of disaster documents need to be provided in person – something quite reasonable, if you ask me. But ensuring transparency, it always allows for online access of these important documents and public notices, and in addition it clarifies that the Heritage Council can conduct a hearing online at any time.

These amendments also create an avenue for proactive assessment. I think of the tragedy of the Corkman hotel in Carlton. The Minister for Planning at the time, recently retired member in the other place Minister Wynne, said that the government would review penalties after the Corkman pub was demolished. Indeed Minister Wynne went on to say, in quite colourful language, that:

… these cowboy developers thumbed their noses at Victoria’s building and planning laws –

and –

… wilful and illegal destruction of our heritage will not be tolerated.

And I agree; it must not be.

Heritage is important, so proactive assessment of the significance of the affected places and objects will be completed by Heritage Victoria and the Heritage Council long before a project begins. In the early stages of major infrastructure projects, again, this makes sense. The bill makes operational improvements that resolve issues that have arisen since the original piece of legislation, namely the Heritage Act 2017, came into force.

Now I have said what the bill does, I want to let everyone know what the bill does not do. I know it is important to outline the scope of the bill for everyone’s sake. The bill only deals with significant state heritage. Local heritage is managed by local government, plain and simple. It is managed in accordance with the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Local heritage is protected by this – namely, it is protected by the heritage overlays included in local planning schemes.

I had the opportunity to visit the South Melbourne town hall, and it had some structural issues that needed to be dealt with after a water pipe burst and the water collapsed the roof internally.

When we were in there we were able to observe some of the intricate work that was done by a lot of the craftsmen many years ago. To replicate the work that was done all those years ago was quite a task for the current-day builders. The carpenters and plumbers were able to replicate that work to great effect. It is quite interesting: when you see these town halls from the outside you do not have an understanding of what they look like on the inside. I do not think you give them a second thought as you drive past them, but having the opportunity to go through the building itself you just look at the size and scope of the building that was put together many years ago. It is really important that we protect and ensure that the buildings maintain their livability and the opportunity for the public at large to enjoy them. I wait with bated breath to see the conclusion of all that work that is being done. I think it is going to take some years for it to come to its full completion, but the work that has been done by the tradesmen and all those involved is doing everything to make sure that these things last another 100 years.

I note the contributions from the second-reading debate in the Legislative Assembly in the last sitting week, and it is always a pleasure when the house can work together in a bipartisan fashion. I would like to draw reference to the member for Gippsland East in the other place Mr Bull, who noted that the bill was uncontroversial. I would also like to associate myself with the remarks of the member for South Barwon in the other place Mr Cheeseman. Mr Cheeseman spoke about his time on the City of Ballarat council and the importance of preserving our heritage. The member for Ovens Valley in the other place Mr McCurdy said:

The work the Heritage Council and Heritage Victoria do is vital in ensuring our history is preserved for future generations.

Finally, in referencing other members’ contributions to this important bill in the other place, the member for Laverton, my friend in the other place Ms Connolly, talked about the importance of preserving buildings for history and the legacy of the labour history.

This reminds me of the importance of the Curtin Hotel, a place near and dear to many in this place and indeed those in the wider union movement. Just across the road is the workers parliament, and I know the importance and significance of having its heritage preserved. Given all of the works that were undertaken there earlier on and some of the things that were discovered once the facades internally were pulled down, it is just astounding that we were able to preserve them for all time. There are number of times I have attended meetings in the main hall room there, and it is magnificent to see that they are still there for all of our union delegates and members to see.

I would like to talk about the bill in detail now. In division 1 it outlines that the principal act contains several notification and publication requirements. The amendments proposed to the division allow the Heritage Council and executive director to be compliant with the law but through the new means of online publication. Basically these amendments modernise the principal act. They allow its requirements to be met in a more modern manner and minimise the fear of breaching the law as could happen if there were disruptions like we recently saw in the pandemic.

I would also like to talk to division 2 and the amendments in relation to hearings conducted by the Heritage Council. This is similar in purpose to the previously outlined purpose of the bill. Part 12 of the principal act governs the conduct of Heritage Council hearings. Division 2 of part 2 of the bill makes a few amendments to part 12 to allow the Heritage Council to conduct hearings electronically. Let us be real, basically half or more of our meetings these days are held electronically. Why shouldn’t these meetings take place electronically? It is a no-brainer; the purpose is clear. The bill allows the Heritage Council to have greater flexibility in conducting proceedings and to minimise disruption to orderly business if the situation arises again where people cannot meet in person.

There are also a lot of housekeeping measures in this legislation; for instance, clause 35, clause 36, clause 38, clause 40, clause 41, clause 43, clause 44, clause 47 and clause 52 all amend a relevant section of the principal act to incorporate references to additional land.

This goes back to the sort of work we did a few weeks ago on the Statute Law Amendment Bill 2022, ensuring properly written, cohesive legislation. But here is a big clause, and I want to read it. The explanatory memorandum to the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023 reads:

Clause 57 amends section 87 of the Principal Act. Section 87 sets out offences in relation to knowingly or recklessly performing certain activities in relation to registered places and registered objects. The clause amends section 87 to provide that these offences do not apply to works or activities carried out in accordance with –

• permits issued under Part 4; or

• show cause notices; or

• repair orders; or

• rectification orders.

Clause 58 sets out offences in relation to negligently performing certain activities in relation to registered places and registered objects. Unfortunately it is too late for the Corkman hotel, but it is not too late for future heritage sites. This bill is important.

We also will be making the process more transparent and consistent in other ways. This includes nominating and including places and objects in the heritage register in a more open manner. How? Nominations for land and objects integral to places will, assuming this law is passed, be subject to the same provisions as other nominations. Applications are to be made on a prescribed form. This is accounted for in new sections 27A and 27B. Owners must now also be notified of a decision regarding a refused nomination and any other outcome by the heritage council if their property is going to be nominated to be heritage registered. And now the heritage council will be able to hold hearings on any matters that may be relevant, not just the matters that are raised in submissions.

As I wrote this, I could not help but consider the areas in my electorate that are heritage worthy. Like any other member, I am a bit biased, but I could not help thinking that this legislation ties into that, particularly the proactive assessment of something’s heritage, which this bill actively considers. Think of Chapel Street, which is less than a few minutes walk from my office. Most of the buildings date back to three periods, either the 1860s, the 1880s or the 1890s, and the emporium-developed stage of 1900 to 1915. In the Windsor section, in that beautiful neck of the woods, some of the buildings date back to the 1850s – modest in scope but rich in history. The Heritage Act provides protection for these historic places. Places that are currently protected by the Heritage Act include Flinders Street railway station, Ned Kelly’s boyhood home in Beveridge and indeed this very building, this very room.

As I mentioned in my contribution to the debate on the Human Source Management Bill 2023, our government has proudly and widely consulted on these matters. We want our laws to be the most effective possible. That is why this government has consulted with heritage bodies, non-government organisations and government agencies. These include the exhaustive list of the Major Transport Infrastructure Authority and the Department of Transport and Planning, the Heritage Council of Victoria and others. The fact is that these consulted parties support the amendments as safeguards that ensure the protection of cultural heritage. They are supported as amendments, and they ensure recognition of these sites and so much more.

Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (10:28): I rise and am very pleased to speak this morning on the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023. I will go through some of the provisions of the bill. When we have these bills in the house it always provides a great opportunity for us to talk about our regions, as we have heard in previous speeches, but also to highlight some of the very worthy projects that are either on the table or have been completed over recent years. That is what I wish to do again. The bill amends the Heritage Act 2017 to provide for exclusion determinations and to make other amendments to improve the operation of the act and for other purposes. These legislative amendments will create the following reforms, in theory. They will provide online access to heritage documents and notices in Heritage Council of Victoria hearings, they will allow for applications to exclude places and objects from the Victorian Heritage Register and they will clarify and improve the operations of the Heritage Act.

When we look at heritage documents and notices, there are people in our electorates right across Victoria who dedicate their lives to the amplification, the investigation and the sharing of historical knowledge. I am sure we can all think of different people in our own towns and communities that do that. I know there is a lovely lady in Leongatha who launched a book last weekend on her knowledge. She is a former secondary school history teacher. I think there are a lot of those people who have that enduring passion not only in education but also in telling the important stories, and there are certainly many to be told in the Eastern Victoria Region.

Not only are our historical buildings and heritage buildings and the way they are maintained and preserved very important – hence this bill is on the table today for debate and passage through this house – but it is important to acknowledge those people in our electorates. For example, the mountain cattlemen’s society. They have very small structures now. They can be fences of historical nature or Craig’s Hut, which was there and had been burnt and rebuilt in the period and particulars of its original form. They very much hold history of their forebears close to their hearts. They are called mountain cattlemen, but they assure me that that is a gender-inclusive word, and they have stated so on many occasions. Their passion for their region and the High Country is well documented.

To that point, I heard a Labor member for Eastern Victoria talk about the Omeo courthouse, a beautiful building that is – and often they are – in need of ongoing restoration. When I was in Omeo a few years ago there was the mountain cattlemen’s annual get-together. My family hired the former bank, which has many different levels and places and still includes the vault, which was safely locked so we could not put any children in it. The bank has been converted into accommodation, and it was a fantastic experience for us all. I think that is part of the modern interpretation of heritage: we need to continue to preserve and keep often the facades and the integrity of buildings but make them purpose fit for our modern-day society so that they can be used and enjoyed.

Another such building that has been repurposed over a long period of time is the Traralgon courthouse, and I give a shout-out to the dedicated committee there. The Nationals have been around for about 106 years, and on our 100th birthday we had celebrations right across regional Victoria. We held our 100th birthday celebration in Traralgon in the Traralgon courthouse. We were sitting in the actual courthouse. We staged a Q and A session and the atmosphere in there was really electric because we were not only celebrating our 100 years at the time but also feeling the vibe and the historical context of all that had happened in the Traralgon courthouse before. It would be remiss of me not to congratulate those people who are still involved in that, so thank you to all on that committee.

The other one that is quite close to my heart is the Morwell Historical Society. Again, when we talk about the repurposing of old buildings, traditional buildings, we see that that historical society is in the place of the former masonic lodge. I am sure people in this house will understand that in the past masonic lodges were the most magnificent of buildings and even in our small little towns – there is one in Walhalla, at the top of a hill – masonic lodges were well used and very widespread. But with the time and the change of times, many of the masonic lodges sit idle. This one in Morwell has been repurposed into a lovely events space and repository of information and artefacts for the Morwell Historical Society.

I do have a vested interest, because a former president of the Morwell Historical Society, Bruce McMaster, also went to school with my mother. I think they may be becoming historical entities themselves now. Bruce has resigned and Alan McFarlane, a former councillor in Morwell, is the president there. The whole integrity of the way they deal with historical documents and artefacts is to be celebrated, and they share it with the community. They often have regular events as well.

Martin Cameron and I happened to be in the Morwell Historical Society building the other day because we were promoting scones. Scones probably could also be seen as a historical food source; they have been around since Methuselah. The evening branch of the Morwell CWA is running a scone drive, and they are trying to win a hat-trick – three back-to-back – for the most scones sold across the state by a CWA. I know I might be slightly digressing for this, but it is a really worthy cause. They will help you. If you cannot eat the scones yourself or go down and buy them, you can buy them virtually and then donate them to a charity. A big shout-out to all the fantastic people who run the evening branch of the Morwell CWA. I think that is so wonderful, because it shows the level of passion that people have not only for scones but for the CWA.

Getting back to the topic, I heard a member talk about lighthouses in Eastern Victoria Region, and again, they are an amazing source of beauty and the signalling of a bygone area in terms of communication and monitoring and alerts for our seafaring ships. I have experienced the beauty of the Wilsons Promontory lighthouse on a number of occasions, but a little while ago we trekked down there and stayed overnight and had the experience of being in the lighthouse, and you feel like you are in a very special place, which Wilsons Promontory is.

The whole township of Walhalla is the most beautiful, unique and time-capsuled town – I think almost in Victoria, and I will argue that point as an Eastern Victoria Region member. It is in that beautiful valley, and many of the buildings there have been remodelled to be very sympathetic to the history and custom and architecture of a previous time. One that is true to form is the Goldfields Railway. Like so many of the historical buildings that this bill will capture, volunteers are at the heart of the restoration and fundraising efforts for whatever the particular event or building might be. I saw the Goldfields Railway crew at the Erica show the other day. Graeme Skinner is just an amazing advocate and passionate restorer, and there were many others there as well. They are always inclusive. They need to fundraise to re-establish their machinery, and not only their machinery but their track and new carriages, in order to service the community. I have digressed, because a carriage is probably not contained within the heritage bill in terms of buildings and the register. But these are very important elements of why people need to come to regional Victoria and come to Walhalla.

The bill makes a number of amendments in relation to notices, publications and inspection of documents. The principal act contains a number of notification requirements as well as requirements for certain documents in the heritage register to be made physically available for inspection. As I said, information is important in general, but to be able to have that in a format that is serviceable for a wide range of people is also very useful.

I thank our Shadow Minister for Planning Mr Hodgett in the other place for doing some extensive research into this. I know that there were some concerns around clause 100 in relation to the general powers of entry within this bill – that an inspector or authorised person must not enter a residence unless there are certain stipulations agreed with. There were some concerns around that. However, Mr Hodgett certainly did a great deal of investigation and spoke to a range of stakeholders, including the Municipal Association of Victoria, Ratepayers Victoria, the Property Council of Victoria, the Master Builders Association of Victoria, the Housing Industry Association, the Royal Historical Society of Victoria and others – the National Trust of Australia. At the end of that we felt that as long as the government is true to form in terms of the objects and aims within this bill and as contained within clause 100 – if the integrity is upheld within that clause – then it would be reasonable to continue and let this pass through this house. With those few words, I will leave my contribution there.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (10:41): I rise to speak on the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023, which is designed to improve the operation of Victoria’s Heritage Act 2017 by doing a range of things, including providing for online access to notices and the inspection of documents and inspection of notices. It allows for applications for exclusion from the Victorian Heritage Register and clarifies and improves the operation of the Heritage Act. In making my contribution today it is important to note, in the context of the broad framework of heritage legislation and planning legislation that applies across Victoria, that the Heritage Act and this bill in particular deal with matters of state-significant heritage. Obviously there is a multilayered framework involved in our heritage and planning schemes that deals with heritage on a number of levels, and this deals with issues of state significance. Obviously at a more local level these are dealt with by other pieces of legislation and the associated planning schemes that are a product of that legislation.

The development of this bill arose following extensive consultation with heritage bodies, non-government organisations and a range of government agencies, all of whom have got an interest in making sure our state’s heritage is preserved. It is good to see that there is so much engagement on these questions across government and through the Major Transport Infrastructure Authority, the Department of Transport and Planning, the Heritage Council of Victoria, Australia ICOMOS, the National Trust of Australia and the Royal Historical Society of Victoria, overall led by the public servants who oversee these issues within the various government agencies. It is important to note that that consultation has revealed that people do think we need to provide the sorts of safeguards that this bill is proposing and ensure that the recognition and protection of cultural heritage in Victoria is not undermined. I am sure all members share the commitment that we all have to making sure that Victoria’s heritage is protected. That has certainly been something that has been reflected in other contributions that have been made during the course of this debate.

One of the important things the bill is doing is updating the mechanisms that exist in the principal act to facilitate better, broader, more modern and more digital access to heritage processes than were conceived as being necessary or conceived as being possible when the original and principal act was developed. Obviously the bill responds to particular concerns and particular limitations that became evident in that principal act during the COVID-19 pandemic, when the sorts of engagement, consultation and inspection regimes that we had been accustomed to doing and accustomed to having as part of our everyday lives suddenly were not possible due to the particular nature of the circumstances and requirements for distancing that that period required. But it is important to draw lessons from then.

What this amendment bill facilitates is improvements and the continuation of access to the heritage processes if those circumstances or similar circumstances, such as disaster, were ever to strike us again. It allows for notices and documents held by the Heritage Council and the relevant executive director to be made available for inspection either in person or online. In a particularly restricted set of circumstances, namely, the declaration of a state of disaster or a pandemic or a state of emergency, it enables the inspection regime, which is an important part of the broad heritage framework, to be restricted to online access so that we can maintain safety and access to heritage documents at the same time.

This also responds to the desire of many Victorians for government services and processes to be adapted and updated to be more modern and flexible so that a body like the Heritage Council itself can expressly conduct its meetings via video link-up. It is important for governments to make sure that the legislative framework that governs our public institutions is modernised and takes advantage of the latest technology, because we know that accessing technology in such ways can be a great facilitator of public participation in the administration processes of government. Giving people, and more people, easier access to the statutory documents that they are entitled to is a good public policy objective and one we should support.

The other significant change that is occurring with the bill that is proposed before us today relates to applications for exclusion from the heritage register. At the moment under the processes and the principal act there is no ability for agencies who are delivering major government infrastructure projects to confirm the heritage significance of a place or object during planning stages. Therefore there is a significant risk that major government infrastructure projects could be disrupted or delayed by the receipt of a new nomination to the heritage register after works have started. The bill makes amendments to allow agencies to apply to the executive director of Heritage Victoria to exclude a place or object from the register.

Any such applications would be required to provide detailed information to support a case for exclusion, including reasons why the place or object should not be included in the register based on assessment criteria published by the Heritage Council itself. It is very much the assessment criteria from the Heritage Council itself being the benchmark and the standards by which such applications should be made. Applications reviewed by the executive director will need to be assessed against the same threshold as applications for inclusion. Decisions to grant exclusion will be made public, and anyone with a real or substantial interest will be able to request the Heritage Council to review the decision. These changes will allow the significance of the heritage place or object to be established and taken into account in the planning stages of the project. As I mentioned before, there has been consultation on these changes with relevant heritage bodies, non-government organisations and government agencies who are involved in these processes from time to time, and consulted parties support the amendments as safeguards to ensure that the recognition and protection of cultural heritage is not undermined.

The bill also makes some general changes and a number of operational improvements to the Heritage Act. Some of these changes relate to processes used for issuing heritage permits, consents for archaeological sites and entering places and objects onto the Victorian register. We believe that they will improve heritage outcomes and make it easier for people to engage with heritage in Victoria. One of the things that will occur to make things a bit easier for people is that the bill will enable minor permit amendments without requiring applicants to pay a fee, so works or activities proposed by the applications are less harmful to registered places or objects and deliver improved heritage outcomes. The amendments will increase certainty for owners by notifying them of decisions sooner and within set time frames and make it easier for communities and stakeholders to participate in heritage processes. I have mentioned how the amendments for online access will make it easier for community members to ensure that their views are heard.

The changes in the bill will also prevent the notification of permits and other key documents over the Christmas period, when community members will be less likely to engage. I think everyone will agree that it is better to have processes in place that stop the cover of the Christmas break being a means of obfuscating consultation in those periods. A provision for additional time is being given through the bill for responsible authorities and councils to make submissions in the permit process. I think you can demonstrate from that part of the contribution that there has been extensive consultation and there is general agreement. The purpose of this bill is to make access to heritage processes simpler because of the importance of state-significant heritage sites in Victoria.

Other members have given some really eloquent contributions about important heritage sites within Victoria and within their electorates. Noting that this is a bill about issues of state significance, I did just want to take a bit of time to talk a little bit about one of my favourite places of state significance in Victoria’s heritage and a building that is on the Victorian Heritage Register and in the Victorian heritage database, and that is the Victorian Trades Hall, which for many of us in this place is a building with a lot of fond memories. For those of us who have had the privilege of being there recently, it is a thriving hub of progressive activism in Victoria and, thanks to the efforts of the union movement and the state government, looks fantastic – looks revitalised. The exceptional heritage and importance to Victoria that has flowed through those halls over the course of the 150-odd years that that building has stood on the corner on Lygon Street in Carlton is a testament to the strength of political activism in Victoria and to the strength of the Victorian union movement, as is the fact that it is a site of living heritage. It is a site that, thanks to the efforts of the union movement and the government to restore, rebuild and strengthen the physical infrastructure of that building, has maintained its core place as a centre for trade union activism and community activism in Victoria.

I want to read a little bit of the commentary on the Victorian heritage database about Trades Hall. It is Australia’s oldest and largest trades hall, and according the Victorian heritage database:

… stands as a symbol of the importance of organised labour within Australian society. Its relatively intact interior and exterior provide an evocative testament to the living traditions of the Australian Labor movement. In particular, flags, banners and honour boards (including one commemorating the leaders of the eight hours movement) are significant artefacts tracing more than a century of union history, and are important historical records in their own right. Trades Hall’s role in Australia’s political history is also significant. In particular, activities leading to the birth of the Labor Party –

which I am sure all members on this side will be proud of –

and support of the great industrial campaigns of the 1890s took place here …

Trades Hall is of social significance as a centre of radical and working class politics and activism in Victoria for over 100 years. Major campaigns and struggles that have had important ramifications for Victorian and Australian society have been coordinated from Trades Hall, and the building continues to serve as a focus of union organisation and left-wing political activity.

Those are words from the Victorian Heritage Register. I think they sum up the importance of that particular building to Victoria’s both physical but also living heritage and the embodiment of the values that have flowed through the halls and we can see continuing now and into the future. That is why I believe that whatever we can do in this place to strengthen the systems and processes around heritage in Victoria we should be undertaking. I think the bill, in a number of very key ways, facilities greater public participation and engagement through the use of more flexible and modern online services.

It facilitates that public engagement in our heritage activities. Hopefully by doing so more Victorians can learn about the wonders of our heritage and the wonders of our past and, importantly, use that as inspiration for the future. Heritage does mean a lot, but I think it can mean so much more when it can motivate us to continue the sorts of important and positive changes that so many of our heritage sites around Melbourne and around Victoria more broadly stand as symbols for. Trades Hall, just up the road in Carlton, is a great example of where our heritage is being preserved, is being protected and is being used to inspire the next generation, who will continue the traditions so that heritage is not something that is of the past but is certainly of the present, and the spirits of that living heritage are in our values.

This bill is a part of protecting those sites of statewide heritage significance. It will improve the operation of Victoria’s broad heritage framework. I am proud to stand with other members of the government in supporting it here today.

Ingrid STITT (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Early Childhood and Pre-Prep, Minister for Environment) (10:56): I am really pleased to rise and make a contribution to the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023, and I acknowledge the contributions of members today. I think it is fair to say that whatever your political persuasion there is much love in the chamber today for Victoria’s unique heritage and historic buildings and the need for us to be vigilant about protecting our shared history.

The bill today does a number of important things, including improving the operation of the Heritage Act 2017. It provides, as a number of colleagues have already pointed out, online access to notices and inspection of documents and notices. COVID-19 really highlighted the need for us to modernise the provisions in the act around these important accessibility issues. The bill also clarifies and improves the operation of the Heritage Act and allows applications for exclusion from the Victorian Heritage Register.

It is probably worth contextualising the bill that is before the house today and just recapping what the Heritage Act actually does in Victoria. It provides protection for historic places and objects of state-level cultural heritage significance in Victoria. Examples of places protected by the Heritage Act include the Flinders Street railway station, an iconic building in our city; Parliament House of course; the Murtoa Stick Shed; and Ned Kelly’s boyhood home in Beveridge. Examples of objects protected by the Heritage Act include the Eureka flag from the 1854 Eureka Stockade and the Minton peacock from the Loch Ard wreck on Victoria’s coast near Port Campbell in 1878. There are currently 2385 places and objects included in the heritage register, so there are certainly significant pieces of history on that register. The act is administered by Heritage Victoria, and Heritage Victoria is part of the Department of Transport and Planning. Victoria’s system for protecting heritage is largely consistent with the frameworks that exist in other Australian states and territories. The Heritage Act establishes the heritage register, and the register lists places and objects that are significant to the history and development of Victoria.

Works or activities that may impact on a registered place or object require a heritage permit from the executive director. The Heritage Act does establish the Heritage Council, and of course the Heritage Council is an independent statutory body. It is the body that decides the places and objects that are added to that heritage register. It also hears appeals on permit applications, and of course it provides important advice to the Minister for Planning and promotes the understanding of Victoria’s cultural heritage through education and information programs.

It is interesting. I did not know until doing a little bit of reading about this bill that shipwrecks are protected in Victoria under the Heritage Act and the Commonwealth Underwater Cultural Heritage Act 2018. All shipwrecks and shipwreck relics that are at least 75 years old are automatically protected by these two acts, so there you go. Who knew? But of course there are a number of really significant shipwrecks from the late 1800s that are important to the way in which white settlement occurred in Victoria. I guess I am also mindful that we are dealing today with recent history. I just want to acknowledge that the history of our state and our country goes back some 60,000 years to the single continuous custodianship of the traditional owners of the land that we are all privileged to be on.

I will not repeat the contributions that some of my colleagues have already made. What I will say is that I think it is really important that our planning and heritage frameworks make it easier for communities to participate in heritage processes. I think that there is an enormous amount of interest out in the community about the history of our state, the history of our city and of our regional centres, and so anything that we can do to make it easier for communities to participate in our heritage processes should be welcomed. These amendments do provide, as others have noted, for online hearings and online access to key documents and notices. This means it will be much easier for community members to ensure that their views are heard, which is incredibly important. There are not too many people in our community that do not have a view about heritage and planning. They hold strong views, and in this way they will have more ability to be heard.

In addition, I think it is important to acknowledge that significant consultation has occurred around these legislative changes. The government agencies and organisations that have been consulted include the Major Transport Infrastructure Authority, the Department of Transport and Planning, the Heritage Council of Victoria, the National Trust of Australia and the Royal Historical Society of Victoria. All of the consulted parties did support the amendments as safeguards to ensure that the recognition and protection of cultural heritage is not undermined.

The bill makes changes to the Heritage Act, which is focused, as I have said, on those state-level significant buildings and such, but the bill does not make changes to local heritage, which is governed by the Planning and Environment Act 1987, so engagement with councils is planned during the release of the implementation material to ensure that there is an understanding and confidence in the proposed reforms. I think it is fair to say that the bill today contains amendments that are non-controversial in nature and are all about enhancing the ability of the community to have their say but also streamline some of the processes involved in these matters.

I just want to touch on a few of my local community’s much-loved historical buildings before I talk about another very special building. Of course I am from Melbourne’s west, and we are very proud of our industrial history in the west. There are a number of significant buildings that I just want to call out, in particular the John Darling mill, which is at Albion station, which I am very lucky to be able to see from my house. It is a beautiful example of an old red-brick mill. It is very significant historically. It is of architectural and historical significance to the state of Victoria, and it is on the heritage register. I have been going past the John Darling mill for years and years and years, either flying up that overpass on Ballarat Road or on the train, and I have long wished for that particular building to get a little bit more love. I am really pleased that our government has committed to an $80 million upgrade of the Albion station, which will also include the ability for that whole historical precinct to be opened up and enjoyed by the community in a way that it just has not been able to for many, many years. One of the really great benefits, I think, of our transport infrastructure program right across the state but in particular in Melbourne’s west is that it is a real opportunity for urban renewal of these fantastic historical buildings which we are all incredibly proud of but I think it is fair to say are not being utilised to their full potential. This is a real opportunity for that urban renewal and for the community to be able to once again take great pride in having buildings of such significance in our area. That is just one small example of why I think such a strong focus on protecting and enhancing the way in which we manage our historical buildings and memorials is so important.

Of course the area of Melbourne’s west that I live in is also a very significant area for its industrial history, and the Sunshine Harvester case and the Sunshine Harvester factory will be familiar to many, not just westies but people who take a keen interest in our industrial history in this state. Of course the factory is long gone, but what has been left behind is a number of really important memorials. There is the Sunshine Harvester hut at the baseball oval just near my house, which dates right back to the very start of the Sunshine Harvester story. Many years later of course Massey Ferguson took over that whole site, and the rest is, you would say, history. But because of the workers that came to the area to work at the Sunshine Harvester plant, the whole municipality around Sunshine and Albion exists basically because of that huge employment opportunity that the Sunshine Harvester factory provided. I know that it is something that locals are really passionate about preserving.

There is also of course the HV McKay Memorial Gardens in Sunshine, which is also a culturally significant place in the area which was established by the Sunshine Harvester Works in 1889, and those gardens are still there today. The reason that we have such a rich and proud history in terms of working hours and conditions in Victoria, won by working people and the union movement, is in no small part due to the efforts of people who worked at the Sunshine Harvester factories in Melbourne’s west.

If I can just very quickly in the time I have got left talk about one of my favourite buildings in the country, and that is the Victorian Trades Hall Council. I was very lucky as a young woman to get one of my first jobs at the Victorian Trades Hall Council as the receptionist. You learn a lot about a place being the receptionist in any organisation, and Trades Hall was no exception. Back then the building was incredibly dilapidated, the roof was leaking and I think we were all out the back in what they used to call the ‘new wing’, which was from the 1950s or 60s. But I just want to really acknowledge the incredible work, thanks to a whole range of different people and of course the Victorian government and Heritage Victoria and the Trades Hall Council executive, on restoring that building so magnificently. It is one of a kind, it is the oldest workers parliament in the world, and I think it is something we should be enormously proud of in Victoria. I thank the chamber and I commend the bill to the house.

Jacinta ERMACORA (Western Victoria) (11:11): I am pleased to be speaking on this bill, the Heritage Amendment Bill 2023. The Heritage Act 2017 protects places and objects of significance – all historical and archaeological sites and underwater cultural heritage, as mentioned by my colleague Minister Stitt. Heritage has always been of significance to me, and I am proud that across our state of Victoria we have many examples of fine architecture and architectural buildings. It is pleasing to see how often across our state historical heritage-registered architecture sits comfortably side by side with new buildings or developments, showcasing both the past and the present. Three examples in Warrnambool are the St Joseph’s church, where a community hall is being built in between a beautiful old bluestone church and a heritage-listed presbytery on Lava Street. The Uniting church in Warrnambool also has a similar modern building – sympathetic, but proudly modern as well. And the Anglican church on Henna Street now also has a beautiful hall adjacent to its bluestone church.

The Heritage Amendment Bill 2023 will strengthen our ability to make good decisions that positively impact both planning processes and heritage conservation. In Warrnambool some of our more outstanding examples of heritage include Proudfoots boathouse and the Botanic Gardens, which were made or designed by William Guilfoyle – and they are absolutely beautiful. It is wonderful that Warrnambool City Council allocates resources for the maintenance and care of those gardens by a highly qualified person. The Fletcher Jones garden and factory is a particularly interesting 20th century addition to the heritage list in Warrnambool and quite well known. The factory and gardens were established in 1948 by David Fletcher Jones. His ‘modern, new, decentralised garden factory’, as it was referred to at the time, was a result of growing demand and advanced views on employee satisfaction and engagement. The company became renowned not only for the quality of its clothing – an iconic Australian brand – but also for Fletcher Jones’s progressive approach to employee–employer relations and an innovative shareholding scheme. As we all know, there are so many stories behind this heritage.

If you were an employee of Fletcher Jones, you were automatically a shareholder, and David Jones, the founder, believed that satisfaction of workers and involvement and commitment of workers influence, positively, a business. Warrnambool is still awash with qualified tailors and dressmakers as a result of the heritage of Fletcher Jones. There are plenty of people that used to work at Fletcher Jones who now run their own businesses making clothing and altering clothing in the city. The Fletcher Jones factory and the gardens are now a hub for small retail enterprise and the arts community in the City of Warrnambool.

I want to acknowledge the volunteer work and commitment of Julie Eagles, who has contributed a lot of her own time and energy seeking out the stories and experiences of former staff members of Fletcher Jones, documenting them and celebrating those stories. It is very easy to lose the stories of the people within a heritage scenario. The building is there, the gardens are being preserved, but the people were what made it. So I congratulate Julie on the work she does in that space.

The bill seeks to update the Heritage Act 2017 and improve Victoria’s heritage processes so that we can continue to safeguard our collective history. It will bolster online processes and access to documents, facilitate proactive heritage assessments during the planning of major projects and apply several operational improvements throughout the current act. The Heritage Act is administered by Heritage Victoria and also establishes the heritage register, which lists places and objects that are significant to the history and development of Victoria. There are 2385 places and objects and approximately 650 shipwrecks, as mentioned by my colleague Minister Stitt, on the heritage register. They are key remnants of Victoria’s past that we are committed to protecting into our future.

I think it is worth acknowledging at this point that the heritage that this bill addresses is not Indigenous heritage. It is not referring to the 60,000 years of heritage. That involves another separate planning process. This is essentially and largely since settlement of this land, the heritage, which is really quite a short period of time relative to our First Nations people.

In drafting the bill cabinet consulted with heritage bodies, non-governmental and community organisations and various areas of government. This includes the Major Transport Infrastructure Authority, the Victorian branch of the National Trust of Australia, the Heritage Council of Victoria, the Royal Historical Society of Victoria and the International Council on Monuments and Sites. We have seen broad support from stakeholders for proposals it contains.

There are a number of essential improvements proposed with the legislation before us today. The Heritage Council of Victoria has confirmed that it supports the change to remove ambiguity and streamline operations. This will speed up approvals, and I do not think anybody involved in the development sector would argue with anything that improves the approval process. The amendments to the act will ensure the Heritage Council can conduct hearings online as well as require that notices and documents be made available online. It is quite ironic that we have to do an amendment to an act to be able to do that online after COVID, so it is good that we are doing this. It will allow applications for exclusion from the Victorian Heritage Register and will deliver operational improvements to the Heritage Act. In short, these proposals not only modernise our heritage process but also make it more transparent and more accessible to all.

Facilitating online access to the Victorian Heritage Register and the Heritage Inventory also means that they are available electronically even when physical access is impeded, such as during a state of disaster or an emergency, or indeed – dare I say it – a pandemic. Owners of heritage places and objects will have increased certainty via the enactment of this bill. There will be faster and more diligent notification of decisions and permit revocations. There have certainly been, in my experience, lots of projects that do require heritage approvals, and reaching and achieving those approvals has often been a delay point for a major capital project. Other delay points are sometimes the EPA and sometimes the native vegetation and biodiversity. So I do reiterate how much this is a positive step to make things speed up a little bit.

The ability to access online hearings as well as key documents and motions will also make it simpler for community members to engage and ensure they can express their views in important heritage decisions. Under these particular circumstances relevant notices will no longer be required to be displayed in offices. Privacy considerations will also ensure that personal information is protected in materials made available electronically.

In a further improvement to our heritage protection processes, the bill sets out a framework for exclusion applications whereby heritage significance can be proactively assessed and settled in the early stages of major infrastructure projects. This is particularly important if we safeguard our heritage and also facilitate the ability of growth projects to advance in a timely manner.

Continuing heritage nominations are an essential component of protecting our cultural history. However, under current arrangements, without a mechanism for settling heritage determinations in advance, as this bill provides, major planning projects are restricted to reacting to heritage concerns as they arise. When this occurs midway through a major project, it can significantly blow out both the time frames and budget. The resulting disruptions can be substantial, even if it is ultimately determined that the heritage protection is not applicable. Whole communities living and working around infrastructure projects as they take place are often further inconvenienced. I think it is fair to say that as much as new infrastructure is embraced by communities, it is always a relief when major projects are completed.

The test outlined in the bill to grant an application for exclusion is a high bar. It will only be granted if the place or object has no reasonable prospect of inclusion in the heritage register. It is a little bit like our speeding system on the roads – if there is very little traffic on a country road, the speed limit means you can go a lot faster. It is the same here – if there is very little heritage significance, there is a capability of leaping straight ahead and saying, ‘No, this is not relevant. Go straight ahead.’ That is the lay explanation. The process is balanced by several safeguards, including that the applications may only be made by certain prescribed classes, that they must be supported by detailed information and that the Heritage Council’s decisions are made public and opportunities are made available for review.

There are several operational amendments to the Heritage Act, which was last updated in 2017. These will improve both its efficiency and its transparency. These changes include allowing some minor beneficial alterations to applications without charge, facilitation and revocation of outdated permit exemptions and further enhancements of protections of archaeological sites. The bill will make a generally positive impact in circumstances where proposed works are identified as harmful to a registered place or object by enabling applicants to amend their permit applications without a fee. Significantly, owners of heritage places and objects will also have increased certainty via the enactment of this bill. There will be faster and more diligent notification of decisions and permit revocations.

For those who may be concerned about privacy due to online access, if this bill succeeds in amending the Heritage Act to ensure that permit applications are available electronically, no personal information of any individual is to be publicly available. The address of the location of the place or object subject to the application is the only identifying information.

Heritage is important. It is highly valued by all generations in our communities. People value our heritage as place makers. It is valuing places and objects in our community that makes our places special. That is why the heritage places in the south-west of Victoria are highly valued and respected by the community. I fully support the changes that this bill will make to streamline the process.

Nicholas McGOWAN (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (11:26): It is a great honour today to rise and speak on this bill. For very many people heritage – in the common sense of the word when we hear about things being heritage listed – often divides people, and yet right across the world, including locally here in Australia and Victoria, we would be all the worse off without these protections. I think that almost goes without saying, but I will say it nonetheless.

Here in Victoria there are some 2400 places and objects that are significant both in the sense of history and the development of our state and which are included on the heritage register. When a property is included on that register it does not necessarily guarantee that that object or place will never be changed, nor does it prevent an owner from using that object or place for a different purpose. But what it does do is help preserve for our children and our children’s children an aspect of our society which is deemed to be incredibly valuable by all of us. It is important to understand that successive governments in this state have over very many years invested not only in identifying objects and places but in their restoration or their upkeep, and that is a critical component.

It is also important to give some life to what we are discussing here today overseas and abroad in communicating an understanding of the full treasure, the full value of heritage, but also then perhaps looking closer to home. Perhaps I might start close to home, and then I might look overseas and abroad at the significance and importance of preserving every bit of heritage that is possible.

I will indulge here because I will look first at the Eltham library. It is relatively new; in fact this was in 1993. It is a beautiful library. It is the second library in my lifetime in Eltham. It is heritage listed because it is a mudbrick library. For those of you who are familiar with the opera house in Sydney Harbour, and there are not many who are not, it bears some resemblance to that approach to design. It is personally one of my favourite buildings in the suburb of Eltham.

Another one which will be well known to those present today is Montsalvat. Montsalvat was founded in 1934. It is Australia’s oldest artists community. It is home not only to artists to this very day but to very many ceremonies and events that take place there. I have been there for not only celebrations but also mournings – for funerals – and it is a place that is of very important local and state significance.

It would perhaps surprise some people who are listening today, or who may look in the future at what has been said in this place, that any number of local cemeteries too can be included as sites that are worthy of protection. In my district again, Eltham cemetery, Hurst family cemetery, Kangaroo Ground cemetery, Nillumbik cemetery, Queenstown cemetery and Arthurs Creek cemetery are all cemeteries that for their own reasons have attracted heritage protection with the register. I have seen the cemetery in Eltham evolve over the years, and it has become today a very remarkable place, a place that is not just the final resting place for very many hundreds of locals and those who are from further afield but a place to reflect and spend time in. It started off as a small community of locals who were keen to ensure that it was not only preserved but expanded, and over my lifetime I have seen that cemetery turn into quite an amazing tribute in very many ways to all those people who have their final resting place there.

Again in the Shire of Nillumbik, other areas of note include the Alistair Knox Park, the Monash Bridge, the Christmas Hills Mechanics Institute and the Eltham justice precinct. One that I am particularly, I suppose, connected to is the old courthouse in Eltham. When I was, I am sad to say, much younger than I am now I was fortunate that I was able to gain employment at the youth access service centre in Dudley Street in Eltham. I think I was in the order of 14 or 15, which made it, I guess, legal to work as a cleaner at that stage. I was a cleaner: I went there after school and cleaned toilets and vacuumed the floors and did the dishes. Very shortly after I started that job in Dudley Street, the centre moved to the old courthouse in Eltham, and that courthouse to this day continues to be used as a facility. I was part of the team, the workforce as it were, that went into the courthouse and continued to clean and marvelled at the courthouse – the old safe that is included in that courthouse. I took great pride not only when I worked there but also in subsequent years when I returned and had the opportunity to attend meetings by the many community groups who continue to use that for any number of meetings and services, including counselling.

I was listening before to the discussion in this chamber by my fellow member Melina Bath, and I could not help but observe and perhaps be a little bit envious that she might be having some more scones than I am. I am particularly fond of scones, so I was very keen to hear that they too – well, I am not sure the scones themselves are protected; the argument might be put, but nonetheless I would be only too keen to understand that aspect of protection more and to perhaps at some point visit with you.

Members interjecting.

Nicholas McGOWAN: It is important for the public record that I am not really a cream and jam person. I am more just a cream person. I do not like my cream infected with the jam.

Harriet Shing: Now it’s on the public record for the rest of all time, Mr McGowan.

Nicholas McGOWAN: For the rest of all time that is on the record. So if someone comes and –

Harriet Shing: Just cream. That is weird.

Nicholas McGOWAN: Just cream. I am happy to have the jam on the side, but those who infect the cream with the jam are egregious.

Harriet Shing: No coming back from that one.

Nicholas McGOWAN: There is no coming back from that one, that is true.

I will make my way back to the bill itself. I said at the beginning of this discussion that I think it is important to see this bill within a context. Not only is that a local context, but perhaps there is an international aspect to this as well, in helping communicate to those who perhaps are not as enthusiastic about heritage protections as some of us might be that internationally these kinds of protections serve us particularly well. If we can be leaders in this space, particularly in terms of the bill and bringing everything online and making it simpler for the public to interact, then that is a positive thing. I have written a note of a couple of places I have had the good fortune of visiting throughout the years, and I understand their importance culturally as significant places. One that comes to mind for me in particular is visiting in Türkiye the Pamukkale calcium baths – an incredible site that requires ongoing protection. For those people who are fortunate to visit that at some point in the future, they would well understand the value of protecting the site, which has such a rich history but also is a very fragile environment in very many ways.

I was also very fortunate in my time overseas to have the opportunity to travel to places like Aleppo in Syria. Aleppo has a magnificent, or I should say had a magnificent – it continues to have it, but unfortunately it is afflicted by war – medieval fortified palace. At night-time, if you were lucky to be in the city of Aleppo, the entire city was dominated by this fortified palace, which was lit up. If you were on the rooftops having dinner in Aleppo, you could not help but observe and see one of the most magnificent cities on earth.

That reminds me somewhat of the pyramids, and not only of Cairo and Egypt. We all talk about Egypt when we think about pyramids, but people in this chamber might be surprised to know and learn that in fact there are more pyramids in Sudan. They are much more numerous; however, they are smaller, much smaller than the pyramids of Egypt, which of course attract much more attention and fame because of their size.

I am reminded also of the salt mine in Kraków. This just goes to show how not only here in Victoria but also right across the world very many things, places and objects can attract protection. Some might be surprised to hear that a salt mine can attract protection. The salt mine in Kraków I would rate as one of the most magnificent tourist attractions throughout all of Europe. It was considered and used for very many purposes throughout various world wars, but to this day it operates for tourists who visit Kraków. It is a very sombre but beautiful city for many reasons, and it would be remiss of anyone to visit that city and not visit the salt mine.

I have also had the great fortune of going to the ancient city of Xi’an, where the terracotta warriors are. I think that was back in the year 2000. Tens, if not thousands, of terracotta warriors remain to this day protected and preserved for all time so the people of the world can both admire and understand the great history of China and the great history of the people in that place.

Speaking of history, Yemen is a country that does not attract much discussion in this place. Yemen is a country which I am particularly fond of, and I have been there a number of times – I am very fortunate to have been there. I found myself in the enviable position at one point of being in Marib. Marib is not necessarily a place that many would know of, but it is significant in this debate today because, unbeknownst to me at the time, there is an ancient dam system. In fact it is one of the great treasures of the ancient world. It is an ancient dam system, where literally the remnants of a gargantuan built dam are preserved and used. It is even rumoured that that entire area was the resting place, the home, of the palace of the Queen of Egypt, Cleopatra herself. For those who are keen to go to Yemen, unfortunately you may have to wait some time, but when you do go and you go to Marib, you will be most delighted.

I have got one other example from abroad and then I am going to come back home to Victoria, and again it illustrates I think the importance of thinking outside the box when it comes to heritage. On this occasion I talk of a prison cell. There are many prison cells; in fact there are many prisons, including one in Ireland that jumps to mind, but this one is not in Ireland. There was a prisoner, and the prisoner’s number was 466. That prisoner was admitted to this prison in 1964, I think I am correct in saying. That prisoner was referred to as prisoner 46664. To this day that is a somewhat cherished number, because of course that was Nelson Mandela’s number and the prison was on Robben Island. It further illustrates my point that we can protect very many things. Often in public discourse heritage items, objects and places that are protected receive initial ire and sometimes criticism. There was probably a point in time when those in South Africa itself considered the protection of Nelson Mandela’s prison cell as something abhorrent. Thank goodness we are well away from those days and at a point where it is something that is now somewhat of a revered number, certainly for the people of South Africa but, I would argue, for the people of the world.

I think that gives very many examples of why we can be proud of our history and why we need to not only protect it but also seek to ensure that we ourselves capture it and make it available to the public in a way that is accessible, particularly in this modern age.

With that being said, I will turn specifically to the bill itself. It is clear to me that while much has been said in this place – and very little I disagree with – I do repeat and echo member Bath and some of her comments with respect to the general powers of entry in clause 100. I am somewhat concerned with respect to the absence of written consent and there only being two clear days notice. It would be my preference and it would be remiss of me not to state that I think that period should be a longer period. I think, like any of us, we are busy. We could be overseas; we could be working; we might just be away from our homes for a couple of days. I do think it is important that a reasonable amount of time is given when notices are served. I think that would help the entire public have great confidence – not that they cannot have confidence – in the way we both conduct ourselves as a government and also conduct ourselves to ensure that the places and the objects that we seek to protect in Victoria are protected in a way that achieves buy-in and will forevermore provide them to the people of Victoria.

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Water, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Commonwealth Games Legacy, Minister for Equality) (11:41): We have heard a wideranging number of contributions today, and what they have really shown to us is the rich context and place-based importance of heritage to every part of Victoria. Indeed sitting in this building it is very easy to be brought back to the starting point of post-settlement identity and what it has meant to really tap into the aesthetics of a period, the social ideas and priorities at play during those times and the nature of specific professions. Again, here in Parliament, looking at the perpetual updates on renovations that we have here, I suspect this building – or indeed both buildings, because it is two buildings – will be shrouded in scaffolding until the world in fact stops turning, but that is okay because it is as much about conservation and preservation as it is about renovation.

Heritage here in Victoria occupies a really important space in our understanding of history and the recognition that we have and ought to always have for history in the context of where we are heading. What I would encourage anybody to do who is interested in this debate – and I know that there are many committee organisations and groups and individuals who have dedicated much of their lives to cataloguing and to documenting history as it manifests in buildings, in ruins and in locations that have had contact post-settlement – is to honour that work and have the necessary level of public record of that work. A browse through the Victorian Heritage Register online is something that you would be well worth investing some time in. It is broken up into segments of history, and it is really fascinating to be able to see the evolution of building styles, the way in which various types of buildings and of structures and of treatments of land have changed over time and also the concentration – growing over time – of the number of buildings, particularly as we work our way into either the centre of Melbourne or indeed major regional centres. Looking at that growth in everything from courthouses through to hotels and from mills, which Minister Stitt referred to, right down to a range of other areas – missions, shearers cottages, marks upon the landscape of structures long gone in their entirety but nonetheless ever important – we can take a journey through that time and understand what it is that we have done to grow and change and evolve over the period that we have been here post-settlement.

There is a range of interlinking frameworks that cover the field of heritage. When we look at the work that the Heritage Council does, it is important to note that its processes for determining what should go onto the register are well understood. It is also important to note that as we proceed with the work to understand and to participate in the way that the Heritage Act 2017 operates, online access becomes ever more important. That is what this bill is in effect changing – the ease with which people can obtain access to notices, to inspection of documents and to other processes.

It is also about making sure that we can allow exclusion from the Victorian Heritage Register. This is very separate from the heritage overlays, which are regulated by local council. That has been flagged in a number of contributions here today. But there is often an element of confusion about the way that different heritage systems overlap and interlink.

It is also really important to note that the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 is the instrument by which First Nations and traditional owner heritage matters are addressed. We have a number of components to the heritage system, and this bill amends the operation of the Heritage Act itself. They are the carve-outs that I have just talked to. Making sure that we clarify and improve the operation of the Heritage Act itself is why we are here today.

Making an effort to respond to the impact of the pandemic has been as much about access to documents and to information online as anything else. I think it is that forced innovation that we have seen across a variety of sectors and industries that is also at work in this particular bill. Providing that access to heritage processes online is key to the ongoing work of the Heritage Council, the register and the heritage system in Victoria and making sure that documents that are held by or on behalf of the Heritage Council and the executive director are in a position to be inspected either in person or online. This is of especial relevance to rural and regional Victoria. When we think about the number of heritage listings that exist across some of the oldest heritage places in Victoria, they are right to the borders of our states. They include things like the courthouse up in Omeo and historic buildings right down to Port Albert and out to Warrnambool. They cover the areas as far west as you can imagine and then up to the border. We need to make sure in providing access and opportunities to inspect documents that an online capability is incorporated as part of the system by which heritage is determined, registered and then regulated over time.

We also want to make sure that there is a level of responsiveness to any changes that might occur to a situation whereby people could access documents in person. We have had no shortage of circumstances to test limitations on in-person access over recent years. Again, to go to the point that I made earlier about forced innovation, the opportunity to provide ongoing online access in such a case as these exceptional circumstances and therefore to limit access to information or documents in person is a really sensible middle ground, as is the access being provided to people wanting to inspect a document or a notice in person upon request.

This is a bill, again, that does strike a balance between people being able to attend an office and go through documents and information – a comparatively easier exercise for people in metropolitan Melbourne or with immediate access to those offices – and people, for example, with limited mobility, people with the tyranny of distance before them and people with challenges around access that may indeed prefer to access documents or notices online. That is as much as anything about inclusion – again, a consequence of what we are doing, not just in Victoria and not just around Australia but globally, to respond to the need of citizens to be able to find and consider information in written form virtually rather than only in person.

Making sure also that we have publication and inspection requirements able to be met in a really modern and flexible way minimises the disruptions that might otherwise be at play through a range of other situations, including social distancing measures. Further to that, the Heritage Council being able to undertake its hearings online or via audio or video link is an important component of that access and of safeguarding the business-as-usual operations that should and indeed must continue in circumstances where in-person hearings or consideration of decisions required would perhaps be very limited, again for reasons relating to social distance, emergencies or natural disasters. Preparation for potential limitations on access is very much at the heart of this particular bill, and in making sure that we also have a measure of better access for the public to be part of these processes, Heritage Council hearings can be undertaken online or via video link within public access points as well.

The bill does reflect to a large extent the process of modernisation, which is being rolled out with a significant measure of purpose across governments. I know that local councils are also working towards making remote and virtual access a greater part of what they do, and that also goes directly to the operation of heritage overlay decisions and the dissemination of information. When we are in a position to provide people with access to information early and with access to accurate information that tells a fulsome picture of the nature and status of a site or a building or a structure that comes within the remit of the Heritage Council’s work, then we are better equipping our communities to understand, for example, how those sites, buildings or structures might fit in with the broader historical understanding of a geographical area. Ms Bath knows this only too well. When you go to a rural or regional town and you can talk about the way in which the courthouse, the hotel, dairies, for example, and town halls have all been developed within a specific time frame, you can see how communities have built themselves up over years, where the key points for growth are and have been and how that ties in to communities and to families, who have often got many generations of identity and connection to those particular towns and regional centres.

This has an amplifying effect on the work that is already taking place across the state of individuals, groups and organisations who are actively committed to understanding more about their communities and about the history of their environments, including by reference to the council overlay of that heritage piece and including as that interlinks with the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 as well.

So we have an opportunity here to make sure that we are not just aware of the challenges that exist around the current inability of agencies delivering major government infrastructure projects to confirm the heritage significance of a place or object during the planning stages and therefore enabling, through this bill, agencies to apply to the executive director of Heritage Victoria to exclude a place or object from the Victorian Heritage Register but also in a position to make sure that through the streamlining mechanisms in this bill we can have threshold assessments as applications for inclusion able to be reviewed by the executive director and decisions able to be made public, with anyone who has a real or a substantial interest being able to request that the Heritage Council review its decision.

These changes allow the significance of a heritage place or object to be established and taken into account in the planning stages of a project. We have all seen, with the development at pace of infrastructure, projects and developments across the state to accommodate and recognise population growth and increases in demand for infrastructure and facilities, that it is amendments such as these that will make more sense around streamlining the processes associated with a request for exclusion from the register. On that basis I commend the bill to the house.

Lee TARLAMIS (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (11:57): I move:

That debate on this bill be adjourned until later this day.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned until later this day.

Business interrupted pursuant to standing orders.