How disappointing to see the Urban Renewal & Heritage Fund (URHF) pumped by Labor ministers for purposes, it is reported, other than for which it is intended (Sue Neales, The Mercury, February 13). This despite repeated cautions from the head of Treasury. “Details, details” was no doubt the stammered spray Don Challen received in response from Treasurer Aird in signing off and then pulping the paperwork in the face of a Greens and Gutwein led grilling.
Ironic this, when, on the other hand you have the State’s Heritage Council besieged with requests for seed funding from heritage property owners and who, with less than $300,000 to offer (assuming two funding rounds), are largely powerless to assist. The Heritage Council’s most recent annual report indicates assistance was provided to 54 owners in two funding rounds making the odds of receiving funding akin to winning the lottery! Let’s not forget in all this, that private owners are responsible for the presentation and upkeep of the bulk of the State’s historic building stock – an angle the government has been more than happy to exploit in enticing tourists here.
Surely there’s a case for increased fund allocations for heritage property owners who may feel particularly aggrieved, not only in aspects of the manner in which the URHF has been allocated, but more particularly in the ease with which Treasurer Aird has been able to conjure up additional funds in overspending this years URHF budget allocation to the tune of something like +$6.2M.
The increased allocation of funds – be it for the woefully under-resourced Heritage Tasmania, or for distribution through tested and accountable channels like the Tasmanian Heritage Council – would make the world of difference to Tasmania’s historic cultural heritage. Allowing precious funds to be siphoned off in dubious circumstances, possibly (but hopefully not) to enhance local electioneering, is reprehensible; a pitiful and rotten way to act.
