An energy transmission company that bulldozed a ceremonial men’s site in South Australia has failed to participate in reconciliation after an investigation found the company was in breach of international guidelines.
The Davenport site, near Port Augusta, was destroyed in 2020 during the construction of a 270-kilometre high-voltage powerline connecting Oz Mineral’s Copper mine, Prominent Hill to the grid.
Kokatha men Andrew and Robert Starkey are the registered custodians of the site and should have been contacted by the company under South Australian heritage laws.
They say ElectraNet, the owner and builder of the private powerline, bulldozed dunes that were a meeting place for tribes from the western desert and central lakes groups. They say the site contained numerous stone tools and artefacts used in men’s ceremonies.
“The site is gone, the site is gone forever,” said Andrew Starkey, who remains at a loss to understand why due diligence wasn’t undertaken.
“What is so alarming to us is that they can get away with destroying our cultural heritage.”
Robert Starkey (left) and Andrew Starkey (right) with their father Stan and Robert's daughter Zakari. Source: SBS News / SBS News: Peta Doherty
The OECD is an independent body that investigates complaints involving the conduct of multinational companies. It recommended ElectraNet engage in direct dialogue with the Starkeys and update its processes to reflect international standards.
In a final report published this week, the OECD’s National Contact Point found the company failed to contact the Starkeys within the allocated 12 months, or show it had implemented the examiner’s other recommendations.
“[ElectraNet] has erroneously concluded that no substantive recommendations were made,” the OECD statement said.
In a statement provided to SBS News in June, ElectraNet said “it sincerely regrets the damage that was caused to the Davenport Mythological Site despite the high degree of due diligence and consultation undertaken and this was conveyed to the Starkeys”.
It said it had “participated in a healing ceremony at the site” and “engaged additional staff and extended search processes to identify individual recorders of any sites of significance associated with future works”.
But the Starkeys said they had not been contacted about the site, nor invited to the healing ceremony.
“They haven’t conveyed regrets, or apologised, they haven’t done that. On the contrary, they’ve ignored us,” Andrew Starkey said.
The two brothers have spent more than four decades fighting to protect Kokatha heritage sites across South Australia’s western desert region.
“It’s not about deriving benefits or money from these sorts of issues,” Andrew Starkey said.
“At the end of the day, it’s about site protection, and making sure this sort of desecration of Indigenous people’s sites doesn’t occur again.”
Last year, an SBS News investigation revealed , including Andrew Starkey, at a different culturally significant site in South Australia .
Andrew Starkey has spent a lifetime working to protect cultural heritage. Source: SBS News / SBS News: Peta Doherty
“ElectraNet remains committed to the protection of sites of cultural significance and has an extensive demonstrable track record of working collaboratively with Traditional Owners during the planning, construction and maintenance of our transmission network to ensure the protection and preservation of Aboriginal heritage across SA,” a spokesperson said in a statement.
The Australian National Contact Point (AusNCP) acknowledged ElectraNet had negotiated with several Native Title groups. But found it failed in its obligations to complete a detailed search of the Aboriginal heritage register which would have revealed the Starkeys were the recorders of the Davenport site.
The examiner has referred the OECD report to relevant state and federal agencies.
Mr Starkey said the state government had also failed to respond when the Starkeys' legal team raised concerns.
“It would be nice for the state government to invite us to a meeting so we can explain our position, and they can explain why there was no follow-up, because this is appalling.”
A spokesperson for the South Australian government told SBS News: “The government will consider the report and is seeking briefings from relevant agencies”.
What next for Electranet?
Complaints made through the OECD’s grievance mechanism have successfully brought multinationals to the negotiating table. ANZ last year became the first global bank to launch a grievance process to respond to human rights complaints following recommendations from AusNCP.
Dr Alex Wawryk from the University of Adelaide’s Environment & Natural Resources Law Research unit said consequences from a decision were often the result of investor pressure or reputational concern.
“Particularly in Europe, large investment funds are aware of the guidelines and more tuned into corporate and environment social governance,” Dr Wawrk said.
“For ElectraNet, the extent to which there are going to be any repercussions, I’m not sure,” she said.
They haven’t conveyed regrets, or apologised, they haven’t done that. On the contrary, they’ve ignored us.Andrew Starkey, Traditional Owner
The formerly state-owned electricity company is the sole provider of electricity transmission infrastructure in South Australia.
“Unless some institutional investors actually put some pressure on them, it’s difficult to see that they will face any consequences,” Dr Wawryk said.
When the Starkeys lodged their complaint, ElectraNet was majority foreign-owned. In February this year, Malaysia’s YTL Power sold its 33.5 per cent stake for more than $1 billion, boosting the company’s Australian-owned share to 53 per cent.
ElectraNet is now controlled by a consortium of Australian-managed funds invested in Australian Utilities Pty Ltd.
The majority Australian ownership means the company is no longer subject to the OECD’s international guidelines. But Dr Wawryk says it was weak domestic laws that allowed the damage to occur.
“It says a lot for the lack of concern over Aboriginal heritage protection in South Australia, that a company that does not conduct comprehensive due diligence is able to get approval to damage a site and isn’t obliged to pay compensation for the harm caused.”
Do you know more about this story? Or would you like to share your story with SBS News? Email [email protected]
Clarification: The site is referred to as the 'Davenport Mythological Site' in the AusNCP complaint and in an ElectraNet statement.
