Senator BOLKUS —I turn to the Australia and World Heritage Division. The budget papers show world heritage international obligations as $1.3 million. What is that being spent on?

Mr Keeffe —We have not got detailed plans for the expenditure in 2001-02 yet. I will take it on notice.

Senator BOLKUS —Taking into account that answer, how much of it do you anticipate might be spent on the processes and meetings related to Jabiluka?

Mr Keeffe —Could you repeat the question?

Senator BOLKUS —How much of that $1.3 million might we expect to be spent on preparing documentation and attending processes related to Jabiluka?

Mr Keeffe —I would say a very small amount of that, but I will take it on notice.

Senator BOLKUS —A very small amount? Take that on notice, yes. We have some nominations that are already completed—Sydney Opera House, convict sites. What is the current state of play in respect of those nominations?

Mr Keeffe —In relation to the Sydney Opera House there are discussions continuing with the New South Wales government at officials level, encouraging them to go forward with a process for finalising their conditions on developing the nomination to a stage where its management arrangements are approved sufficient for it to go forward as a nomination to the committee. In relation to convicts, there are discussions going forward with the states and territories towards a financial agreement and a management agreement across all of the properties sufficient to enable it to go forward with the nomination.

Senator BOLKUS —Quite a few years ago CSIRO, I think, completed a study on the natural values of Purnululu and found them clearly of world heritage value. Are those cultural values still being assessed? What is the state of play with that potential nomination?

Mr Keeffe —The CSIRO evaluation found that there was potential, depending on the area to be nominated, for Purnululu to be put forward as a nomination. The West Australian government is currently considering ways of defining the area. There is an agreement that they would proceed with assessing and looking further at the cultural values, dependent on the agreement of traditional owners.

Senator BOLKUS —You have a budget allocation of $1.2 million for world heritage nominations. On notice, can I get a breakdown of that?

Mr Keeffe —Yes.

Senator BOLKUS —World heritage enhancement, $2.8 million: what do you intend to spend that money on?

Mr Keeffe —Again, I would take that on notice.

Senator BOLKUS —World heritage management has dropped from $15.7 million to $15 million. Can you give us some idea as to where that $0.7 million will be cut back from, on notice. Now, we have a bit of a problem, I suppose, with the wet tropics chair, who is claiming that he will resign if wet tropics is not provided with more funds. How are we responding to that request?

Mr Keeffe —The allocation of funds for world heritage management is through the NHT program. It is a competitive basis across all world heritage areas. Tasmania has a different arrangement, with a special purpose payment of $5 million there. It is on the quality of the applications in each area and how it advances the world heritage convention in relation to protection, conservation and transmission of the world heritage values. Wet Tropics, therefore, is considered, along with all other properties, for allocation of funds.

Senator BOLKUS —Minister, on 4 April in the Senate you answered a question in respect of Kakadu indigenous communities and you said that these communities have benefited from Commonwealth imposed initiatives. Are you aware that, of the 20 new participants in the hospitality traineeship program to which you referred in the answer, there is not a single person from the local Kakadu community?

Senator Hill —I have heard that debate. I think I asked Mr Keeffe to find out the facts. We are lucky to have Mr Keeffe here today. We might all learn at the one time.

Senator BOLKUS —Did you speak to Mr Keeffe before you gave the answer in the Senate?

Mr Keeffe —The answer to the Senate was correct. Then there was—

Senator BOLKUS —It was a great initiative for the locals if none of them are being employed under it.

Senator Hill —But, Senator, as you know, Kakadu and the Jabiru area have grown. The numbers of local residents have grown considerably in recent years.

Senator BOLKUS —So you have more to choose from, but you have chosen no-one.

Senator Hill —It has become something of a magnet. You then get into definitional issues that are far too complex for me in how individuals should be described in terms of their particular community affiliations—clan groups, family groups and the like.

Senator BOLKUS —So what are you saying, Minister? As Mr Beale said, it is not appropriate in a job promotion program and a training program to start picking and choosing individuals on the basis of which clan group they belong to. Having said that, there may be something Mr Keeffe is prepared to add.

Mr Keeffe —The chairman of KRSIS, ex-senator Bob Collins, was heavily involved with promoting the traineeship program in Kakadu. A great deal of effort was made to find people in the Jabiru community who primarily identified with the local indigenous population. There were none of them who actually applied for those positions at that time, but I understand that there are moves that former Senator Collins is arranging to further encourage local community indigenous participation. However, the other indigenous participants—a large proportion of them—were from the local community and population, although not descendants necessarily of the particular traditional groups.

Senator BOLKUS —So last year we get two out of 20 and this year we cannot find any, and you are telling me I have to have faith in Bob Collins looking around to find someone?

Senator Hill —No, we are providing training and job opportunities for indigenous people who are living in the vicinity.

Senator BOLKUS —But it is important to get the locals involved in this, isn't it?

Senator Hill —But they are locals. They have moved in.

Senator BOLKUS —They have moved in.

Senator Hill —What you are advocating is that we should discriminate against them.

Senator BOLKUS —On that basis, the people of Woomera would be local, too—the ones who have moved in. We are actually talking about long-term traditional connections with the land here, and they are not getting access to this.

Senator Hill —That is absolutely wrong. They all have access to it.

Senator BOLKUS —Well, they are not being employed under it.

Senator Hill —If they do not want to do it, how do you suggest we persuade them?

Senator BOLKUS —Well, Minister—

Senator Hill —I would have thought you would applaud a program that provided the opportunity for training and jobs for indigenous people in the Jabiru area.

Senator BOLKUS —I would applaud it if some of those with a traditional connection to that land were involved in it. I do not know what you have done or what people have done to try and involve them and incorporate them in the program, but two out of 40 over two years is not a good track record, I would suggest to you. Minister, in the same vein, you referred to investment in indigenous education at Jabiru. There are claims that some $600,000 had been invested in such education, but are you aware that not a single dollar of that $600,000 has been spent?

Senator Hill —We found funding to provide for an indigenous education unit in the local school. Then there was a major debate among the indigenous people as to how it should be spent. Added to that there were different views from the new headmistress. Mr Keeffe again was dispatched to Jabiru to sort it out.

Mr Keeffe —There is now community agreement between all of the Aboriginal organisations—including the Gundjehemi Aboriginal Corporation, and the Djabulukgu Association—along with the community Aboriginal Student Support and Parental Awareness Program, the school council of Jabiru and the school principal on the model that they seek to have utilised. There is agreement in principle with the Northern Territory Department of Education for delivery of that Aboriginal education unit, and the deed of grant is close to finalisation.

Senator BOLKUS —What was the problem with the previous headmistress?

Mr Keeffe —The previous headmistress?

Senator BOLKUS —I think the minister referred to some problems. Was it the same headmistress?

Mr Keeffe —No, there was a change. The `new principal of the school' is the term that they use. The change in principal led to an approach from the Jabiru area school for a new model of education, the construction of an Aboriginal education unit within the domain of the school and the utilisation of under-utilised space there. This was a different model from the approach that was recommended by Murray Garde through the KRSIS approach that Bob Collins chaired. A community meeting last week resolved those differences, and now there is a consensus between the school and the community on how the needs of indigenous children—particularly focusing on the descendants of traditional people connected with that country—can be provided with language and culture programs.

Senator BOLKUS —I turn now to cane toads. What have we got in place to control cane toads advancing on the park?

Mr Keeffe —That is a question for Parks Australia North.

Senator BARTLETT —In relation to the wet tropics, are you aware of the cassowary recovery plan?

Mr Keeffe —Yes, I am.

Senator BARTLETT —Have you got details of the budget involved in that—that is, basically how much over how long?

Mr Keeffe —I can take that on notice.

Senator BARTLETT —Thank you.

Senator Hill —The answer is that nobody yet has found a way to stop the cane toad. They spent 13 years of the Labor government marching towards Kakadu.

Senator BOLKUS —Mr Cochrane, what do we have in place? Nothing can work in the eyes of the minister, and that may very well be the case.

Senator Hill —We have a research program.

Mr Cochrane —Practically speaking, there is little that we can do to prevent them in the long run moving through Kakadu. We are doing our best through active surveillance and the removal of hitchhikers and early arrivals that we find, and we are dispatching them. But, given their fecundity and the capacity of eggs and small toadlets to move rapidly through the river systems there, there is no practical way that we can filter them out without having some very significant impact on other species there and at exorbitant cost.

Senator BOLKUS —Are we looking at listing them as a declared pest, for instance?

Mr Beale —The relevant consideration would be as a `key threatening process' under the endangered species provisions. Scientifically, the advice we have had is that cane toads have not yet led to the extinction of any species, even though they have very severe impacts on populations for a period of time, and that therefore they cannot be considered to be a key threatening process.

Senator Hill —I have never accepted that.

Mr Beale —But the minister has never agreed with that.

Senator Hill —That is very academic.

Senator BOLKUS —Do we have a budget to try to combat them at all?

Mr Cochrane —We are undertaking a range of actions. Most of them have been awareness raising with Aboriginal communities and with the tourism industry in particular. I would have to take on notice how much money we have spent exactly on that. But over a number of years we have been ensuring that people can recognise cane toads and that we are aware of where they are likely to come in and where they have made incursions in the park. Also, we are doing our best to be vigilant and removing any of those that are in advance of the major front that is moving through.

Senator BOLKUS —In terms of mitigating the impact they might have on the areas there, there is nothing we can do at this stage. Is that what you are saying?

Mr Cochrane —There is very little we can do once they actually move into an area, to the best of our knowledge.

Senator BOLKUS —Moving back to the new heritage legislation, have the criteria been established for the listing of places on the proposed national heritage list?

Mr Leaver —Draft criteria have been worked up over the last three years, and so an advance draft has been prepared through a public consultation process.

Senator BOLKUS —That is available publicly, obviously?

Mr Leaver —The earlier drafts were certainly publicly available, but the final draft has now been submitted to the minister for his consideration.

Senator BOLKUS —How many places do you anticipate will be on the new list if it gets through parliament?

Mr Leaver —In relation to the places of national heritage significance, there will be none. It will start as a blank sheet of paper and go through a public nomination and assessment process, and it will be progressively built up over the years. The new legislation also provides for Commonwealth heritage places that can be transferred from the Register of National Estate within the first six months of the commencement of the act. On a rough assessment, there will be something like 600 places that would be suitable for transfer.

Senator BOLKUS —So the criteria have been established for listing of Commonwealth places?

Mr Leaver —Yes, the draft criteria have been worked up over the last three years.

Senator BOLKUS —They are before ministers now, or have they been published?

Mr Leaver —No, they are before the minister.

Senator BOLKUS —You have said that there would be none on the new list, but let us look forward five years or so. What would you imagine we might have on a new list—

Mr Leaver —It is purely speculation, but one would expect that one could deal with half a dozen a year.

Senator BOLKUS —Will there be public consultation on the proposed criteria?

Mr Leaver —There has been over the last three years.

Senator BOLKUS —Just as an indication, for instance—my coming from Adelaide—would the Adelaide Parklands by any stretch of the imagination qualify for the new list?

Senator Hill —The legislation has not even been debated in the Senate yet. I think it is very speculative to talk about its application in practice.

Senator BOLKUS —You cannot legislate without looking at its application, can you?

Senator Hill —You can look at the scheme and see what it is all about, and you will find that with listing comes significant Commonwealth responsibility. So it is not going to be a case of listing everything that comes along. These are supposed to be places that are really of outstanding national significance—and so much so that the Commonwealth accepts an ultimate responsibility for their conservation.

Senator BOLKUS —I have had a look at that, and I have come to the conclusion that the Adelaide parklands would not qualify on the new list. I would not be far off, would I?

Senator Hill —I do not know why you have reached that conclusion. If you would facilitate the passage of the legislation, then you would get closer to learning whether you were right or wrong.

Senator BOLKUS —No, Minister. You see, I do not want to walk into this blindly, like you might be suggesting that we do.

Senator Hill —There has been a debate in the five years that I have been in this job. You might remember that the idea was initiated by the Australian Heritage Commission—that we are recognising the inadequacies in the existing system. We have had discussion papers and public consultation and draft bills and Senate inquiries. If you are coming blind to this issue, Senator, then you have clearly closed your eyes for the last five years.

Senator BOLKUS —Minister, you are asking us to pass the legislation then live with the consequences. I am using Adelaide parklands as an example because obviously it is something I am close to. But I have looked at the criteria. Maybe Mr Leaver could help us here. I just cannot see how, under your new criteria, the Adelaide parklands would qualify. Mr Leaver may be able to dissuade me from that.

Mr Leaver —We have been very careful, through the public discussion process, not to make any suppositions about the likelihood or otherwise of any place and its entry. The point we have emphasised is that there will be thresholds established and there will be a very public process, firstly of nomination and, secondly, of independent expert advice as to whether those thresholds have been achieved by any particular property. So whether the Adelaide parklands succeed in crossing the threshold of national heritage significance will be very much a result of that public process.

Senator BOLKUS —Have any approaches been made to state governments about their willingness to enter into bilateral agreements for the assessment of actions that significantly affect national heritage in the future?

Mr Leaver —No, not in regard to national heritage places.

Senator BOLKUS —I presume, in that context, that the government has no intention to provide financial assistance to the states for them to improve their state regimes, given that many properties will have to go on state lists after they drop off the federal list.

Senator Hill —The whole concept is that the states meet their responsibility and the Commonwealth meets its.

Senator BOLKUS —In terms of ATSI heritage—and you can take this on notice—can you provide a table of annual funding for indigenous cultural heritage from 1998 to the present?

Senator Hill —Through the Australian Heritage Commission, their identification and conservation and listing processes, et cetera, in relation to indigenous heritage?

Senator BOLKUS —Yes.

Senator Hill —Yes, we can do that.

Senator BOLKUS —Moving to the chair of the world bureau, Mr Peter King—Minister, when do you say that Mr King will retire from the position?

Senator Hill —When does he retire?

Senator BOLKUS —He is a preselected Liberal candidate. You have obviously deemed fit that he should stay on as long as possible. You rejected calls for his removal. When do you think is the appropriate time for Mr King to stand down?

Senator Hill —Australia holds the position for 12 months. His role—

Senator BOLKUS —Is he here?

Senator Hill —Is he in this room?

Senator BOLKUS —No, is he in the building?

Senator Hill —Not that I know of. The bureau meeting to be held in July, which he will chair, is a major function. He has a formal role at the next meeting of the committee, which meets in October.

Senator BOLKUS —So you think it is appropriate for Mr King to hang onto this position regardless of when the election might take place?

Senator Hill —That depends on when the election might take place. But at the moment there is no election. He is in the job. I thought he did a very good job up in Cairns.

Senator BOLKUS —That is debatable, of course. That is all I have.