Report urges overhaul of WA’s Aboriginal heritage processes amid consultant warning

A major review into native title and cultural heritage approvals in Western Australia’s resources sector has urged more than two dozen recommendations as industry groups warn of consultants “clipping the ticket” as part of the process.

And the state’s peak resources advocacy group believes the findings of the “Kelly report” – authored by National Native Title Tribunal member Glen Kelly – shows the current system is not working, and consultants have become the “primary beneficiaries” of the process.

The report, which was handed down on Tuesday, contains 25 recommendations, including a cross-agency review of Aboriginal consultation measures to reduce duplication and establish consistency.

Following the release of the report, the WA government announced a new Aboriginal cultural heritage standard for exploration and prospecting to provide greater certainty around costs, requirements, and protections.

Aaron Morey, the chief executive of the Chamber of Minerals and Energy WA, said unclear and duplicative heritage requirements and rapidly rising consultation and survey costs had emerged as significant barriers to resources development in the state.

“CME strongly believes Traditional Owners should play a central and active role managing cultural heritage but it has been clear for some time now that the current system is not working for anyone,” he said.

“Mining companies currently contend with nearly two dozen overlapping policies and regulations relating to First Nations consultation that span three tiers of government.

“That has placed an enormous burden on both proponents and Traditional Owners, leading to blowouts in approvals timeframes, consultation fatigue and confusion over responsibilities and requirements.

“This has allowed consultants to become the primary beneficiaries of the system with zero improvement to heritage outcomes.”

AMEC chief executive Warren Pearce said protecting Aboriginal cultural heritage was “non-negotiable”.

“But the current system has become too costly, too slow and too uncertain,” he said.

“Too much of the current system is being captured by consultants clipping the ticket, instead of delivering direct benefits to Traditional Owners and communities.

“Consultants have an important role to play, but they should not be the biggest beneficiaries of the cultural heritage system.”

An ACIL Allen survey commissioned by AMEC found that for every $100 spent by industry complying with cultural heritage legislation, about $60 went to external consultants such as lawyers, anthropologists, and archaeologists.

“Around $36 flows t