For some time now I’ve put my views forward in relation to sacred sites policy in the Northern Territory. One issue is the multiple and at times overlapping levels of protection: sacred sites legislation, existence of native title, heritage, and so on (my personal view supports an Indigenous Land Use Agreement as a way to clarify and streamline conflicting positions).
The motion below was passed unanimously by Council. In my view it is an important motion because it draws upon the diverse views of elected members. From my observations the first two points demonstrate a substantive shift from established views of local governments in regional but large municipalities. I don’t believe that previous Council’s would have had the imprimatur or confidence to unanimously support the first two points. By supporting these points, however, the politically difficult process of highlighting ‘costs’ as the core concern (as distinct to the concern or hostility against protecting sacred sites) was achieved. In such difficult political processes it is very easy for the message to get lost, and very easy to create confusion.
As noted in the last part of the motion LGANT supported our position, and now lobby for it. Unfortunately, it is interesting to note that there has been minimal debate in the Territory Parliament in relation to the issues raised in the motion. From what I hear at least one local NT politician was confused about our focus and interpreted it as against sacred sites generally.
The motion reads:
That Council:
Affirms its full support for the legislative protection of sacred sites;
Recognises the value of these sites to Central Arrernte people and the value of protecting these sites to the township of Alice Springs;
Acknowledges the hurt caused by previous activities undertaken prior to sacred sites legislation and without consulting Central Arrernte people;
Notes that Alice Springs has some of the most stringent conditions in the world relating to sacred sites and some of the highest concentration of legislatively protected sacred sites in the Territory;
Requests the Northern Territory Government absorb all administrative costs, and contribute to the management costs, pertaining to sacred sites within the municipality given the inequitable and unfair nature of placing a cost burden on locations with a strong concentration of sites.
That Council write to the Leaders of both political parties in the Territory and Independent Members informing them of the motion and seeking their support for the reforms noted above in the final point. Further, that a request is made for the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory to lobby for the reforms.







