Media Statement - HRC Terminate Claim

Media Statement regarding HRC termination of complaint of Racial discrimination against the Director of National Parks and Uluru-Kata Tjuta Board of Management for banning the Climb up Ayers Rock.

The Australian Human Rights Commission has handed down its decision on my complaint of racial discrimination against the Director of National Parks and the Uluru-Kata Tjuta Board of Management for the ban on Climbing Ayers Rock (full letter below).

The HRC delegate Jodie Hall terminated my complaint about the decision of the Uluru-Kata Tjuta Board of Management that the climb up Ayers Rock be permanently closed because she was satisfied that there is no reasonable prospect of the matter being settled by conciliation.

“I have decided to terminate the complaint about the Uluru-Kata Tjuta Board of Management’s decision to permanently close the Climb, under section 46PH(1B)(b) of the AHRCA, as I am satisfied that there are no reasonable prospects of the matter being settled by conciliation.” P.10

In relation to my complaint against the Director of National Parks’ proposed actions, including the ban on climbing Ayers Rock and destruction of important cultural heritage items, namely the Summit Monument, Chain and 5 memorial plaques the delegate has terminated the complaint on the basis that she is satisfied that it is misconceived, as “closure of the Climb will not come into effect until 26 October 2019 and therefore the acts and associated tasks (regarding the chain, summit monument and memorial plaques) of the Director referenced in your complaint have not yet occurred.” P.12.

Comment

The HRC have had the complaint for 482 days and it is obviously quite disappointing that the case has been terminated without any meaningful outcome. One is left to wonder what use the Commission is if it is unwilling to effectively rule on issues such as this. The HRC claim that it “explored conciliation” but it appears this amounted to merely obtaining the views of the parties, rather than any active attempt to broker an agreement, seek a compromise or even arrange a meeting. In its decision to ban climbing the Park Board not only disrespects and discriminates against the cultural heritage of visitors who seek awe and wonder through the act of climbing and viewing the World heritage listed summit views, but it also disrespects the cultural traditions of past owners such as Paddy Uluru and Tiger Tjalkalyirri who climbed and had no problem sharing the climb with visitors. I remain open to meetings with the Board in the future to discuss potential compromise solutions that honours the Park’s World Heritage values, the cultural traditions of visitors, and the cultural traditions of Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara peoples.

The determination of the delegate that the complaint against the Director of National Parks’ proposed actions is misconceived merely due to timing appears to open up the potential for myself or anyone else refused access to the Climb to launch a new complaint once the ban is in place. Presumably, this might entail an immediate injunction to prevent destruction of cultural heritage (the climb, summit monument, memorial plaques and chain) the Director of National Parks’ is obligated by law to preserve, protect and manage under section 17-2 of the lease agreement.

Future legal action

The costs involved in fighting a case through the Federal Court against a party with unlimited resources with potential for costs to be awarded against me provides a major deterrent against any future legal action. That an Australian Government agency would resort to lawfare as a means to settle an important public policy issue is a damning reflection on the poor state of public debate in this country.

Call for Parliamentary Inquiry

In 2010 the Australian Parliament passed the current Management Plan for the Uluru – Kata Tjuta Park that includes criteria for closing the world famous climb. The management plan omits the rich history of the Climb that shows the Traditional People climbed and had no issue with visitors climbing, that the Climb is a low risk activity for the vast majority of visitors and the Climb remains a significant reason people visit the Park. Our Public Service has an obligation to present Parliament with all the relevant facts so Parliamentarians can weigh the evidence and formulate appropriate policy. In the case of information provided to Parliament for the current management plan of the park the Director of National Parks effectively mislead the Australian Parliament. Either the Director of National Parks deliberately withheld relevant facts, or the Director was unaware of them and thereby failed to meet responsibilities set out in the Act and the lease agreement of the Park (Section 17-2).

At the time the management plan was presented to Parliament in 2009, both then Prime Minister Hon Kevin Rudd and Opposition leader Hon Malcom Turnbull issued public comments strongly in favour of the climb remaining open. The then Opposition Environment spokesperson Hon Greg Hunt indicated the proposed ban would be like “Big Brother” coming the rock. Despite the strong support of Parliamentarians and the general Public, measures to ban the Climb were somehow still included in the Management Plan and somehow it managed to pass Parliament.

It is clear that if Parliamentarians were presented with all the facts about our wonderful Climb when the Management plan was presented, the proposed ban on Climbing would never have been passed.

In light of the evidence I request the Prime Minister take the following actions:

1. Immediately suspend the proposal to ban the Climb and destroy the Summit Monument, 5 Memorial Plaques and climbing chain.
2. Establish a Parliamentary Inquiry to investigate whether the Director of Parks Australia mislead Parliament in 2010 in not presenting all the relevant information to allow Parliamentarians to make an informed decision about the proposal to ban climbing Ayers Rock.
3. Any future proposal to close Ayers Rock to climbing be presented to the Australian public in the form of a National plebiscite to be held at the next Federal Election.