Territory Stories

Parliamentary record : Part I debates (11 November 1986)



Parliamentary record : Part I debates (11 November 1986)


Debates for 4th Assembly 1983 - 1987; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 4th Assembly 1983 - 1987




Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory





Publisher name

Northern Territory Legislative Assembly

Place of publication


File type



Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory



Parent handle


Citation address


Page content

DEBATES - Tuesday 11 November 1986 Mr B. Collins: 'That is a lie. Mr Palmer: It sounds like you, Bob. It sounds like you, son. Mr SPEAKER:OrdeT! The member for Arafura will withdraw that interjection. Mr B. Collins: Mr Speaker, I withdraw it. Mr McCARTHY: AsI said, Kakadu is not in my area of responsibility and neither is Uluru. Until recently, we in the Territory government felt unwelcome in those places, but we are mending those bridges and I will be going out to see more of Kakadu. For the information of members opposite, I have been over Kakadu just recently. The most fitting description for a good percentage of Kakadu National Park is 'scrub'. That description may shock those Friends of the Earth who, in spite of having never been to the park, insist it must be locked away for all time. Escarpment and wetlands make up less than 35% of Kakadu. The Gimbat and Goodparla pastoral leases, which offer nothing more significant in the way of features worth protecting than Kakadu, have less thari 10% of escarpment country. It is the sort of country that would rate as a devalued listing in the eyes of the World Heritage body, and it has been suggested that attempts to get a second-rate area inscribed on the World Heritage List would affect future attempts by Australia to have other areas listed. The member for Arafura talks about the criteria for World Heritage listing. There are 4 of them. ' Mr B. Collins: You have boned up in the last 2 hours, have yciu? Mr McCARTHY: There are 4 criteria for World Heritage listing and I was aware of them before. They have been in this speech for' days. Natural properties nominated must: (i) be outstanding examples representing the major stages of the earth's evolutionary history; or (ii) be outstanding examples representing significant ongoing geological processes, biological evolution and man's interaction with his natural environment as distinct from the periods of the earth's development - this focuses upon ongoing processes in the development of communities of plants and animals, land forms and marine and fresh water bodies - ,or (iii) contain superlative natural phenomena, formations or features or areas of exceptional natural beauty, such as superlative examples of the most important ecosystems, natural features" spectacles presented by great concentrations of animals, sweeping vistas covered by natural vegetation and exceptional combinations of natural and cultural elements; or (iv) contain the most important and significant natural habitats where threatened species of animals or plants of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation still survive. It might interest honourable members to know that the federal government has made its application on the basis of all 4 of those criteria, not just one. Mr B. Collins: There are 12. Mr McCARTHY: If it has found a few others, so be it. 774