In April 1990, the State Minister for Environment and Planning wrote to the Chapmans granting them planning permission for the bridge to Hindmarsh Island and the extensions to their marina. Originally numbering around 6,000 members they are the only tribe in Australia whose land lay within 100 km (62 mi) of a capital city to have survived as a distinct people as recognised in the 2002 Kungun Ngarrindjeri Yunnan Agreement. The Ngarrindjeri are one of the 30–40 clan-groups ( lakinyeri) that inhabited South Australia at the time of white settlement. The Chapmans funded a study by Rod Lucas who reported in January 1990 that existing written records did not record mythological sites, but cautioned that consultation with Indigenous groups would be required. The EIS (the Edmonds Report) was completed within two weeks and identified the need for an anthropological study. In October 1989, approval was granted for a bridge, to be financed by the Chapmans, subject to an Environmental Impact Study (EIS). The Planning Assessment Commission rejected the proposal, stating that the development couldn't expand unless a bridge was built from Goolwa to Hindmarsh Island as the existing Cable ferry would not be able to handle the increased traffic. With the marina only partially completed, in 1988 the Chapmans applied for permission to increase the size of the project as the original project was found to be financially unviable. Wendy Chapman was a former Lord Mayor of Adelaide from 1983 to 1985. In 1977, Adelaide developers Tom and Wendy Chapman, trading as Binalong Pty Ltd, purchased 30 hectares (74 acres) of land on Hindmarsh Island in the Murray River estuary and later received planning permission for their company to build a 560-berth marina, car parking, residential development, conference centre, golf course and associated buildings. ![]() Opinion remains divided over the issue to the present day. The Ngarrindjeri and their supporters took the decision as a vindication, and many organisations subsequently apologised. In rejecting claims for damages by the developers, Justice John von Doussa stated that he was not satisfied that the claims of "secret women's business" had been fabricated, although never explicitly stating them to be true. In August 2001, a civil case in the Federal Court of Australia re-ignited the debate. Subsequently, the Howard Government passed the Hindmarsh Island Bridge Act (1997), which allowed construction to go ahead. The Hindmarsh Island Royal Commission found that "secret women's business" had been fabricated. ![]() ![]() Some Ngarrindjeri women came forward to dispute the veracity of the claims. " Secret women's business", as the group's claims became known, became the subject of intense legal battles. The case attracted much controversy because the issue intersected with broader concerns about Indigenous rights, specifically Aboriginal land rights, in the Australian community at the time, and coincided with the Mabo and Wik High Court cases regarding Native title in Australia. In 1994, a group of Ngarrindjeri women elders claimed the site was sacred to them for reasons that could not be revealed. A proposed bridge to Hindmarsh Island, near Goolwa, South Australia (intended to replace the existing cable ferry and service a proposed marina development) attracted opposition from many local residents, environmental groups and indigenous leaders. The Hindmarsh Island bridge controversy was a 1990s Australian legal and political controversy that involved the clash of local Aboriginal Australian sacred culture and property rights. View of the Hindmarsh Island Bridge from the Goolwa wharf.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |