Mount Panorama Heritage Claim Controversy Fuels Political Firestorm
A recent report alleging a heritage claim over a section of the iconic Mount Panorama circuit in Bathurst, New South Wales, has ignited a fierce debate with political ramifications. The initial report, published by The Australian, claimed that the Wiradyuri Traditional Owners Central West Aboriginal Corporation (WTOCWAC) had applied for heritage listing of McPhillamy Park, a significant area within the Mount Panorama precinct. This claim, purportedly linked to the scattering of a former member’s ashes at the site, quickly became a political football, particularly in the context of the upcoming federal election.
Sam Farraway, the Nationals candidate for Calare, seized upon the report, issuing dire warnings on social media about the potential impact on the Bathurst 1000 motor race, a major economic driver for the region. Farraway’s pronouncements fueled public concern and further politicized the issue, framing it as a threat to a cherished Australian sporting event. This sparked immediate backlash and accusations of exploiting the situation for political gain.
However, the narrative took a sharp turn when WTOCWAC issued a forceful statement categorically denying the existence of any heritage application. The organization denounced the media reports as "sensationalist misinformation" designed to reignite "culture wars" and influence the federal election. WTOCWAC expressed dismay at the ensuing commentary, emphasizing their commitment to fostering respectful coexistence between Wiradyuri culture and motor racing at Mount Panorama, also known as Wahluu. They unequivocally stated that any claims of a pending heritage application were "simply untrue."
The ABC subsequently confirmed with the Federal Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water that no such application existed, further discrediting the initial report. WTOCWAC’s comprehensive statement went beyond simply refuting the claim. It provided detailed explanations of the relevant legal frameworks governing Aboriginal heritage in New South Wales, including the Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984. They clarified the procedures for heritage listing and emphasized that simply registering a site card does not equate to a state or federal heritage listing.
Furthermore, WTOCWAC underscored that successful heritage declarations under the ATSIHP Act do not confer any monetary or access rights, serving primarily to protect culturally significant areas and objects. The organization also addressed the complex issue of cultural authority, challenging the notion that Local Aboriginal Land Councils (LALCs) hold ultimate authority on such matters. They highlighted the fact that many LALCs are not managed by Traditional Owners with direct connections to the local area.
WTOCWAC, an award-winning Aboriginal Corporation with members possessing traditional ties to the Bathurst region, also provides cultural competency training at the university level. Their statement concluded with a call for unity and respect, urging community members to disregard racist commentary and prioritize their well-being. They thanked their supporters and reaffirmed their dedication to sharing culture and truth. The incident highlights the sensitivities surrounding Aboriginal heritage and the potential for misinformation to inflame public opinion and be exploited for political purposes. It also underscores the importance of accurate reporting and responsible public discourse, especially in relation to Indigenous cultural matters. The controversy serves as a reminder of the ongoing need for respectful dialogue and understanding between Indigenous communities and the broader Australian society.
