Strained ACT Heritage Council relationships and inefficient ACT Heritage Unit systems present an imminent risk to ACT heritage sites, according to the Nous Group’s review, tabled in the Legislative Assembly today.
Rebecca Vassarotti, ACT Minister for Heritage, suspended the Council in August, and announced that a review would be conducted; she said at the time she was concerned about poor relations between the Council and the Heritage Group, and unacceptable delays.
The Heritage Council is an independent, statutory body responsible for identifying, assessing, conserving, and promoting heritage places and objects in the ACT; making decisions about the registration of heritage places and objects; providing advice on works and development matters in accordance with the ACT’s land planning and development system; encouraging and assisting with appropriate management of heritage places and objects; encouraging public interest in, and awareness of, heritage places and objects in the ACT.
The Council comprises the Chief Planning Executive and Conservator of Flora and Fauna as ex-officio members, and nine members appointed by the Minister.
The Unit (ACT Heritage) is an ACT Government area within the Environment, Planning, and Sustainable Development Directorate that provides administrative support to the Council and advice to Mick Gentleman, Minister for Planning and Land Management.
The review looked at the Heritage Council’s relationship with ACT Heritage; the impacts on its performance and ability to deliver statutory functions under the Heritage Act 2004; and options to address the review’s findings.
Ms Vassarotti said she had lost confidence in the Council.
“The report from the review paints a concerning picture,” the minister said. “It confirms that there are wide and complex structural issues impacting the performance and relationship of the Council and ACT Heritage. I am saddened and disappointed about the findings. It is clear from the report that the government needs to take urgent action to address the findings and restore confidence in the Heritage Council, and ensure that it achieves its statutory functions and delivers the services that the government requires and that Canberrans expect.”
The Nous Group’s findings
The Nous Group’s review found that relationships among Council members, and between the Council and the Heritage Unit, were strained.
Council members did not have a unified understanding of priorities and governance processes, and trust among Council members had become eroded.
Councillors and Heritage staff felt they needed a better working relationship; some Council members felt they should have a more strategic and directive role, and felt that the Heritage Unit did not recognise or enable this.
Both sides were frustrated about how to work together to improve. Some Council members wanted to assist in creating more efficient ways of working, but were not mindful of the operating context. Heritage Unit staff felt they did not have the capacity to respond to requests that fell outside their day-to-day work.
Unprofessional behaviour created stress in the work environment: some Council members behaved unprofessionally towards other Council members, Heritage Unit staff, and external proponents, while some Heritage Unit staff behaved unprofessionally towards Council members.
The Nous Group also found that frustration with structural and workload issues contributed to stress.
The Council lacked a unified direction and understanding of their strategic priorities, roles, and responsibilities, while their business processes for triaging tasks and delegating workflow needed clarification.
Governance arrangements between the Heritage Unit and the Council were unclear: the Council and the Heritage Unit did not have a common understanding of how they should work together, and attempts to resolve the misalignment were unsuccessful.
Heritage Unit resources did not match the increasing demand or complexity of the work required. The Heritage Unit’s workload had increased substantially in recent years, without a corresponding increase in budget and resources. COVID and stress-leave absences caused by tensions in the work environment had exacerbated this issue over six months.
The Heritage Unit’s internal workflow and business systems are inefficient, including the Heritage Database and linkages to development applications. While work has begun, a digital transformation would improve the efficiency and functioning of the Heritage Unit and the Council, and would reduce current stressors.
Next steps
Ms Vassarotti “expressed [her] loss of confidence in the Council” to its Chair and Deputy Chair, she told the Legislative Assembly. “Both of these members have indicated the need for me to take strong and appropriate action in response to these findings,” she said.
She has written to all members of the Council to provide them with a copy of the report and her views, and to seek their feedback. “Most have taken up this opportunity, and their feedback will be helpful for informing the next steps,” she said.
Ms Vassarotti is consulting with the Legislative Assembly’s Standing Committee on Environment, Climate Change and Biodiversity about her potential decision – which may include ending the appointment of Council members.
Ms Vassarotti will undertake a comprehensive review of the ACT’s heritage arrangements, examining the legislation and how the ACT’s approach to the conservation and management of heritage compares to best practice in other states and territories, and the Council’s functions and role as either a decision maker or advisory body.
“What is clear is that to better position the Council and ACT Heritage to meet the future challenges of managing heritage withing a growing City, our approach to Heritage needs reform,” Ms Vassarotti said.
“As Minister for Heritage, strengthening the ACT’s heritage arrangements and restoring trust and confidence in the Heritage Council and the Heritage Unit will be a priority for me over the coming twelve months.”
Liberals accuse government of lacking transparency
The public report, containing key findings from the review, has been published online.
“The review identifies a wide range of themes that are preventing the effective operation of the Council, and have led to a deterioration of the relationship between Council members and with ACT Heritage,” Ms Vassarotti said.
Canberra Liberals MLA Nicole Lawder, Shadow Minister for Heritage, wants to see the justification for the Nous Group’s findings, and believes that should be presented to the public. She called this morning on the government to table the review in its entirety, rather than simply the public report. The government voted down her motion.
“It is deeply concerning that a review with such damning findings will not be released publicly,” Ms Lawder said. “Is this the sort of integrity and transparency that the Greens Member promised when they got elected?
“For the Heritage Minister to say that she has lost confidence in the Heritage Council and is willing to sack all its members is incredibly serious. Providing an Executive Summary of the review is not good enough and doesn’t pass the pub test on transparency.
“What’s unsurprising is the Minister’s idea of action on these damning findings is to conduct another review of heritage arrangements. One is apparently not enough, despite the clear evidence over many years that the council is not working appropriately.
“Residents and stakeholders deserve to know the truth about what is going on within the ACT Heritage Council. People haven’t been receiving advice from the Heritage Council on time for years, and they deserve to know why.
“Heritage belongs to Canberrans, and the Minister must stop the secrecy and release the review in its entirety,” Ms Lawder concluded.
