Aboriginal Cultural Heritage – moving from management to engagement Gavin Scott, Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia
T Photo: Whitehaven
Engagement with all project stakeholders moves beyond local and State law compliance, to demonstrating that a project has seriously considered the management of ESG risks and has progressed towards the development of strong and sustainable relationships with impacted Traditional Owner Groups.
84
BBMC Yearbook 2021
he Queensland Mining industry is well versed in the importance of correctly managing the impacts of mining projects on Aboriginal Cultural Heritage. Queensland’s Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 has remained largely unchanged for 18 years and is considered to be at the forefront of balancing development and meaningful engagement with Aboriginal people. Ultimately, this has meant that statutory concepts such as maintaining a duty of care not to cause unlawful harm to Aboriginal cultural heritage are well understood. Recently, the industry has seen a greater focus towards understanding and managing Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) risks for natural resources projects. This has had a marked impact on how project developers, shareholders, investors and the broader community have communicated their expectations on how a project should not only manage Aboriginal cultural heritage, but also engage with all impacted Traditional Owners. These expectations only intensified following the 2020 Juukan Gorge incident in Western Australia, which saw the destruction of ancient, sacred caves. The incident spurred a Senate inquiry, encouraged reform to Western Australian
