Sussan Ley Minister for the Environment, Reasons for her Decision to allow the desecration of 800 year old sacred birthing trees on the Western Highway that is part of 50,000 years of Aboriginal Spirituality.

Coat of Arms Australian Federal Government
Coat of Arms Australian Federal Government


1. Decision

1.1 I, Sussan Ley, Minister for the Environment, provide the following statement of reasons for my decisions not to make declarations under section 10 and section 12 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth) (ATSIHP Act), in relation to an area known as Djab Wurrung Country, near Ararat in Victoria, and certain objects located in that area.

Note ATSIHP = At Ship Act. Written in 1984 apart from being 36 years out of date it is a bit Orwellian particularly considering the current events occurring in Victoria.

Community road safety benefits

5.116 I considered the views of the Victorian government with respect to the road safety benefits which could be expected to flow from the Project. Reducing the risk of traffic accidents is a core rationale for the Project and is expected to be achieved through the improvements in road quality, dimensions and protective measures listed above. The MRPV representation to the Section 10 Reporter states that in the ten years to 2018, 43 people had been involved in casualty crashes on the Western Highway between Buangor and Ararat, with ten of those being serious injury crashes. Several local councils made representations to the Section 10 Reporter noting the poor safety record of the road, although they quoted older and less specific figures of 11 fatalities and 49 serious injuries in the five years to 2015, between Ballarat and Stawell. The councils also noted recent improvements in traffic accident statistics, which they considered likely to have been contributed to by road safety improvements similar to those proposed for Stage 2B.

This statement is a straight out mistruth, written by one of Sussan Ley`s Sophist Lawyer`s. The response has been crafted by a platoon of them at great expense to our community and our families.

5.117 The 2008 Victorian Transport Plan states that, ‘…duplication of this important road will make it safer and reduce travel times,’ and in his 2003 assessment of the environment effects statement prepared for the project under the Environment Effects Act, the then Victorian Minister for Planning found that Stage 2 of the Project (which includes Stage 2B), ‘…would enable road safety to be improved between Beaufort and Ararat.’

The world has changed it is now 2020 we all know we have to respect and nurture our environment. This is statement written by Neanderthals pre Global Warming.

5.118 I also considered the Applicants’ views on road safety benefits. In correspondence of 17 May 2019, the Applicants dispute traffic accident statistics provided by MRPV and local councils (while noting that those statistics could not be adequately investigated), and provide as an alternative an analysis of publicly available traffic accident statistics given by traffic safety expert, Mr Peter Harris. Mr Harris casts doubt on the statistics provided by local councils but considers those provided by MRPV to be ‘plausible’ (while noting that he did not have access to the same dataset).

The statistics are sitting there in black and white on Vic Roads Web Site and you Minister have a copy of those statistics because I know I sent you the link and the statistics in an email last year. This is another blatant distortion of the truth.

5.119 On the information available it was not possible to conclusively determine the accuracy of the traffic accident statistics that had been quoted by MRPV, or to identify with precision the traffic risk associated with the Western Highway between Buangor and Ararat. However, I had no reason to doubt in general terms that the safety of the Western Highway between Buangor and Ararat could be improved, and that the road safety benefits that had been clearly promoted as a core rationale for the Western Highway Upgrade Project can be achieved and would have a positive impact on road safety.

More huff and puff to confuse the reader, note: The Sophists held no values other than winning and succeeding. They were not true believers in the myths of the Greeks but would use references and quotations from the tales for their own purposes. They were secular atheists, relativists and cynical about religious beliefs and all traditions.

5.120 While the Applicants seek an alternative to the approved Stage 2B alignment, I noted that, in their correspondence of 7 February 2020 and 9 April 2020, the Applicants now accept in general terms the road safety benefits of upgrading the Western Highway. The issue raised by the Applicants is that such benefits would also be achieved if an alternative alignment were to be adopted.

More sophistry A platitude see last comment.

5.121 I accepted that that was likely to be true, although whether or not the benefits would be precisely the same was not clear, and it is possible (as noted above) that any alternate route would have similar impacts on Aboriginal heritage as the approved alignment. Even if it did not, I was satisfied on the material before me that pursuing an alternative route would come at a significant economic cost, as also discussed above, and would also delay the enjoyment of the road safety benefits.

5.122 I considered that a declaration protecting the Specified Area under section 10 of the ATSIHP Act, or the Six Trees under section 12, would have the following negative impacts on road safety: a. delays in realising road safety benefits – while I did not have an accurate estimate of any delay, considering the lengthy planning and assessment process undertaken in deciding on the approved Stage 2B alignment, as well as preparatory activities such as works tendering, detailed survey work (engineering as well as environment and heritage), acquisition of lands including affected properties and biodiversity offsets, and public awareness I accept that this could easily run to two years, which is the approximate duration of the EES process for the approved Stage 2B alignment.; b. consequent delays to related projects including, in particular, Stage 3 of the Western Highway Upgrade Project (Ararat to Stawell), which was expected to have similar road safety benefits and will not commence until after completion of Stage 2B; and c. lack of suitable alternatives – In this respect, I accept the opinion of MRPV, that the Applicants’ proposed ‘Northern Option’ does not conform to the required design or road safety requirements. I was satisfied that the Applicants’ proposed ‘Northern Option’ was likely to be more expensive than the preferred alignment and may have similar impacts on Aboriginal heritage that would need to be addressed.

More legal Mumbo Jumbo to try and convince the reader that there is legitimacy in the argument, Pigs will fly Sussan.

5.123 Having considered all the information before me, I found that there are likely to be community road safety benefits in the construction of the Western Highway upgrade, and therefore that the Project will likely have a positive impact on a broad section of the community. I found that the broader community would be negatively impacted by the making of a declaration under section 10 to protect and preserve the Specified Area, as it would at the very least substantially defer or delay such community road safety benefits. This weighs significantly against the making a declaration under section 10. The extent to which the area is protected under State legislation.

Did you think that spending the money on social engineering, small scale local projects such as land revegetation encouraging and developing the unique Indigenous knowledge of the area may create a lot more jobs that a big road steer the youth of the area away from a life of drugs and crime and reduce the suicide rate which is a factor in your fatal road crash statistics you soulless lying Zombies.  

5.124 Section 13(2) of the ATSIHP Act requires that in order to make a declaration in relation to an area located in a state or the Northern Territory, I must have first consulted with the appropriate State or Territory minister as to whether there is effective protection of the area from the threat of injury or desecration under a law of the State or Territory.

6.8 With respect to the interests of third parties, I accepted that a declaration under section 10 of the ATSIHP Act would have a detrimental impact upon the pecuniary interests of the Victorian Government because of the significant ongoing financial costs resulting from the delay in commencement of construction, the termination of the relevant contract and the additional cost that would be incurred in pursuing an Page 34 of 35 alternative route. I considered that this matter weighed substantially against making a declaration under section 10.

Who created these expenses? “Governments beset on Large Infrastructure Projects as they perpetuate exploitation of the environment and the families and communities who form the environment, instead of developing local community projects that are founded upon creativity.”

Major Road Projects Victoria`s Environmental Impact Statement was fundamentally flawed from the beginning as it did not give proper weighting on the significance of large old trees which resulted in the destruction of over 1,000 of them during the first stage of the project. They then manipulated and coerced the Registered Aboriginal Parties into going along with their plan which has created all of these additional expenses.

6.9 also found that the making of a declaration would have had some impact on the pecuniary interests of commercial communities who are likely to benefit from the improved transport efficiency the Project is expected to deliver. However, in the absence of any modelling as to the predicted extent of these benefits, I accorded low weight to the pecuniary interests of the community.

6.10 With respect to health and safety considerations, I found that there are likely to be community road safety benefits in the construction of the Western Highway upgrade. In this regard, I accepted that the Project would have a positive impact on a broad section of the community. I consider that this matter weighs substantially against making a declaration under section 10, which would at the very least substantially defer or delay such community road safety benefits.

6.11 With respect to the extent to which the area is protected under State legislation, I was satisfied that any area of Victoria which is of cultural heritage is protected from harm by the Aboriginal Heritage Act if it satisfies the definition of an Aboriginal place. I accorded significant weight to the fact that a CHMP under the Aboriginal Heritage Act was approved on 18 October 2013 by Martang as the relevant RAP and that it is an offence for a sponsor of an approved CHMP to knowingly, recklessly or negligently fail to comply with the conditions of the CHMP. I also placed some weight on the specific measures contained in the CHMP for the management of Aboriginal cultural heritage likely to be affected by the activity relating to the Project. I also accepted that MRPV has made a commitment in good faith to avoid five of the Six Trees (Trees E2, E3, E4, E5, E6).

She states! It does not matter that the Victorian Government was caught in a major unethical conduct which even the Victorian Ombudsman cannot see? Was Martang coerced with a bit of land worth $1 million through their slush fund, Trust for Nature, and we will just put that under the carpet in the interests of money.

The cultural and living force be damned it is all about the money.

6.12 Accordingly, although I acknowledged the views of the Applicants on the CHMP and the role of Martang, I was satisfied that the Victorian Aboriginal heritage protection regime provides some degree of protection for the Specified Area. However, given that I accepted that the Specified Area is nevertheless under threat of injury or desecration, I considered that the extent to which this matter weighed against making a declaration under section 10 is slight. 6.13 For these reasons discussed in paragraphs 6.5 to 6.12, I concluded that there was sufficient evidence to allow me reasonably to form the view that the impact on the pecuniary interests of third parties, the health and safety considerations supporting the Western Highway upgrade, and the extent to which the area is protected under State legislation outweighed the loss of Aboriginal heritage value in the Specified Area.

6.14 Based on the material presented to me and for reasons set out above, I found that:

 a. I received an application for the purposes of section 10(1)(a) and section 12(1)(a) of the ATSIHP Act;

b. I was not satisfied that Tree E1 is a significant Aboriginal object for the purposes of section 12(1)(b)(i) of the ATSIHP Act;

c. on balance, I was satisfied that the Trees E2, E3, E4, E5 and E6 are significant Aboriginal objects for the purposes of section 12(1)(b)(i) of the ATSIHP Act;

Note last page deliberately made impossible to copy therefore screen shot.

Sussan Ley Federal Minister for the Environment signs off.
Sussan Ley Federal Minister for the Environment signs off on desecration..

In this thirty five pages of legal Mish-mash Sussan Ley the Minister for the Environment does not address:

  1. The lies told by the Victorian Government with regards to the road accident statistics.
  2. The coercion by The Victorian Government in relation to Martang.
  3. The Importance of respecting our heritage as a nation and gaining respect for family and community in our culture.
  4. The relocation of the millions spent on this wasteful dinosaur into rebuilding our rural economies through land revegetation instead of a truck that feeds a Bunnings box.
  5. The destruction of 1200 large old trees in the preceding development of the highway that somehow seems to be forgotten.
  6. The error with regards to the significance of Large Old Trees to the sustainability of the ecology of the land contained in MRPV`S original Environmental Effects Statement.

The document written by the Department of Environment Zombie lawyers refers to 800 year old living and spiritual birthing trees that through their life force and a knowledge that dates back 50,000 years allows the original peoples of this land to directly connect with their ancestral being.

This decision by Sussan Ley is just a further perpetuation of the genocide and is actually genocide upon a genocide, as it severs the connection between the present and the past, between the living and the spirit, between the conscious mind and its connection to wisdom, if that is not desecration by a pirate culture. I ask you, what beats it?

Hitler and the Nazis burned the books, Cromwell and the round heads murdered the fairies and now Sussan and the robber pirates desecrate the dreaming.

If you can stomach a plate of cat shit for breakfast go to this link and you can devour the writings of the soulless zombie lawyers who wrote the decision for Sussan and refer to 800 year old sacred birthing trees that for part of a 50,000 year old spiritual knowledge base as OBJECTS.

Sussans reasons for permitting desecration.