Grave Site Shortage

About this Item
Speakers - Harrison Mr Robert; Amery Mr Richard
Business - Questions Without Notice

GRAVE SITE SHORTAGE

Mr HARRISON: I ask a question of the Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Land and Water Conservation. What is the Government doing to address the shortage of grave sites in Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong?

Mr AMERY: I commend the honourable member for Kiama for asking this question. Since I was appointed shadow minister for natural resources in 1988 the honourable member has shown an admirable and keen interest in how we manage grave sites and cemeteries in New South Wales. He has been careful to ensure that any changes in how we deal with grave sites and shortages in grave sites are dealt with in an appropriate fashion. He should be commended for keeping a close watch on the
Page 5302
matter. The availability of land in urban areas for burial sites is now a problem. In Sydney and Newcastle in particular, and to a lesser extent in Wollongong, land in which to bury our loved ones is steadily running out. A number of burial sites in New South Wales are publicly owned, that is, they are on Crown land and managed by Crown reserve trusts. Others are owned by local councils, churches, or private companies, or are on private property.

The burial sites on publicly owned land are largely found in Sydney and Newcastle, where burial capacity is running out. Many could be full within 30 or 40 years while others, such as the various cemeteries at Rookwood, will be full in barely 10 years. The Government is considering ways to address this problem and today I am releasing a discussion paper that outlines possible strategies. One option is to reallocate burial plots which were bought by people more than 50 years ago and remain unused. The Government will also consider the possible development of new public cemeteries on other State-owned land. However, I point out - and the honourable member for Kiama has a particular interest in this issue - that the option of reusing existing burial sites is most definitely not on the agenda. That practice, known as limited tenure, has been introduced in South Australia and Western Australia, but I would not want it to be introduced in New South Wales.

I take this opportunity to congratulate Peter Luck on his program This Day Tonight, which highlighted the unsavoury practices in the reuse of cemeteries and grave sites in South Australia. The program showed in a graphic way what should be avoided in New South Wales. We should be careful about ever contemplating the practice of burying a person in an existing grave site. The reallocation of burial sites, however, is a possible option that should be considered. The prospect attracts a great deal of support from the industry. There are 204,000 unused burial sites in Sydney cemeteries alone. Of these, some 21,000 were bought more than 50 years ago and may be reallocated. The subject of burial sites is always sensitive, and if the Government were to reallocate unused grave sites it would, of course, follow strict guidelines. The discussion paper suggests a defined process for reallocating burial sites. That process begins with the cemetery trust trying to trace the last known owner of the burial site and offering to buy back what is called the right of burial. If the owner cannot be traced, the cemetery trust will search the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages to determine whether the owner has died and who is the next of kin.

If no next of kin is found the cemetery trust will advertise in local and national newspapers at least three times over the ensuing 12 months. It will also place notices at the cemetery trust office and the unused grave site for 12 months. If either the owner or next of kin comes forward, a decision can be made as to whether he or she wants to keep the burial site or sell it back to the cemetery trust. If the owner or next of kin comes forward after the 12-month period and after the right of burial has been revoked, the cemetery trust would provide compensation either in monetary form or in the form of another burial site. This is an important issue that will affect all of us at one stage or another. That is merely stating the obvious. The options should be considered. I invite my colleagues and their constituents to examine the discussion paper and make their submissions by the end of July. I again reassure the honourable member for Kiama that limited tenure is not an option that the Government will contemplate when a decision is made.

Questions without notice concluded.

Last modified 05/12/2007 16:31:00 : Update this page