Executive Summary

During a seven-week consultation period 15 public submissions were received in response to the Review of the Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy Issues Paper. The responses received were from interested:

• members of the public (four);
• Aboriginal community organisations (six); and
• individual councils (five).

Comments were received from eight Tasmanian Government agencies.

In addition, three Aboriginal organisations requested a face-to-face meeting with representatives from the Department of Premier and Cabinet and the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment to discuss the review.

Of the six Aboriginal community organisation submissions, four were broadly supporting, or reinforcing comments made in one submission by the Tasmanian Regional Aboriginal Communities Alliance.

The Tasmanian Aboriginal Corporation did not provide a submission to the Review.

Key messages

There was a general view among the non-Aboriginal submissions that a revised Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy should allow both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal organisations, local councils, or individuals to nominate an Aboriginal or dual name directly to the Nomenclature Board; however Aboriginal community responses did not indicate a preferred approach. Most submissions also supported improved consultation and engagement provisions with regional Aboriginal communities and groups.

The majority of submissions also indicated that local Aboriginal groups and organisations should be engaged as part of the authentication process of Aboriginal and dual name proposals, as well as supporting the development of minimum standards to support name nominations. Feedback supported the Board’s ability to seek the consul of any entity or individual that may assist in the authentication and validation of name proposals.

A clear view expressed across submissions was that local and regional Aboriginal groups and organisations should be directly consulted about Aboriginal and dual name proposals, particularly those proposed in their local area and that many Aboriginal community organisations and local groups are seeking opportunities to inform Aboriginal and dual naming in Tasmania. There was unanimous support for the expansion of languages used to inform dual naming to include other Tasmanian Aboriginal languages, local knowledge and for proposals to be based on sound history and research.

The majority of submissions support local government in Tasmania continuing to be actively involved in the Aboriginal and dual naming process, and ensuring that all name proposals to the Nomenclature Board are forwarded to the relevant local council for comment, prior to any formal consideration by the Nomenclature Board.

Lastly, the general view among submissions was that a revised Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy should include a specific mechanism for the Nomenclature Board to consider and replace all current place names offensive to the Aboriginal community, with some calling for the reconsideration of existing place names adopted under the current Policy.