Dear Minister Allan,

Re: Buangor to Ararat Western Highway duplication

I write to request your urgent intervention to protect important Aboriginal cultural heritage and the natural environment facing imminent destruction due to the State Governments continued pursuit of an unnecessarily damaging and expensive option for duplicating the Western Highway between Buangor and Ararat. I have previously written to the Planning Minister on a number of occasions in relation to this matter. I am greatly concerned that the State Government continues to pursue its original route choice, despite information that has come to light subsequently about the impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage, and despite being aware of problems with the original planning process for which there is a clear and obvious win-win solution for all affected.

Several years ago, a group of citizens living in the vicinity of the highway,  alarmed by the location and width of the land clearance VicRoads claims is necessary and aware of similar road widening projects implemented elsewhere in Victoria with much slimmer footprints, engaged a team of appropriately qualified and experienced professionals to independently review the proposed route and its impacts. In the course of this independent review, the option of widening the existing road was assessed by qualified road engineers as a viable alternative. By using well-proven and reliable construction techniques that would minimise the width of the land disturbance adjacent to the existing highway, the team has found that the safety-enhancing objective of the project can be achieved in a way that will better meet the interests of all those involved and affected, when compared with the currently planned route. This includes tens of millions of dollars savings in tax-payer money, quicker and safer construction, and the avoidance of unnecessary environmental impacts, including to Federally-protected flora and fauna species.

We now know also that the planned route will destroy important Aboriginal cultural heritage. The concession that has been made to spare a small number of the culturally significant trees that will be destroyed if the Government's currently preferred route is pursued are entirely inadequate. It is very difficult to understand why such a distressing and needlessly destructive course of action is being pursued, when a better option is available that will meet all needs. Surely the democratic values and process that are the bedrock of our community will be better served, if decision makers give proper weight to the interests of those with long-term connection to the importance of this land. Why would this not be prioritised, when there is nothing to be lost in doing so, and much to be gained -- culturally, environmentally, economically and in terms of confidence in our democratic processes and the trust and confidence on which any good society depends?

Please do what is right here, by preventing this unnecessary destruction.

Yours sincerely,