The Commonwealth could encourage the States to adopt the principles and key elements of the legislation. The national body could act as an important link between Indigenous owners at the community level throughout Australia and governments and international bodies. Any administrative structure supporting a national cultural heritage body must be headed by an Indigenous person. Others such as the City of Wanneroo also supported the establishment of a national body to implement heritage legislation. However, a submission from the Tasmanian Aboriginal Land Council noted that it may not always be appropriate for Indigenous ownership to vest with a local group.
Monitoring is passive.
The establishment of a national body would not cause significant changes to Indigenous cultural heritage protection . Fourmile argues that a more comprehensive definition of what constitutes Indigenous cultural heritage should be included in all cultural heritage legislation. Golvan suggests that the definition of cultural heritage in various State and Territory legislation could be extended to include artistic works to give the Aboriginal entities the right to act and protect communal interests in cultural heritage generally, as well as artistic works and designs of traditional significance. He also advocates giving local Indigenous communities the right to protect artistic works and designs of traditional significance, in a similar fashion to the protection of copyright interests under the Copyright Act . Under this scheme, a recognised Indigenous community could apply for an injunction to restrain the unauthorised reproduction of one of its designs, and seek damages arising from such unauthorised reproduction.