Thread: Watch Your Parts!!!!!

Can you enlighten us as to the make/model of these rare vehicles? Two members from my club sold their vehicles in Europe, to help pay for their trip.

Aaron.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

I beg to differ, it was related to Australian Law and obtaining temporary export permits for some of the vehicles. The particular vehicles are supposed to be sole survivors of their particular type/s and are considered part of Australia's WWII heritage by the Australian War Memorial.

Mate

The only Australian law regarding permits for exporting from Australian shores are in relation to defense and strategic items. a S1 Landover hardly comes under this category.
the second part which I think you are calling law is that the national heritage list, or any thing on the list must have a permit to be exported or may be exported but with restrictions IE can not be sold etc etc.

interesting class A item which can not be exported " period" are Victoria crosses and Ned Kelly’s armor. think that says a lot.

Class B covers heritage machinery but this is not the Australian law that you are referring to.

1970 UNESCO Convention on heritage is what you want as this is acted upon by the receiving country IE the country where the item would be sold in.
It is illogical and impractical to impose an export requirement on an item. Once it has left our shores Australian law has no effect. If I can send a S1 to England, regardless of what Australian law says. My ability to sell that item in England is solely decided by English law.
In the case that you present, Ministerial approval was needed for the 2 vehicles ( not all as you imply) of cultural significance and ( arguably) in public ownership ( museum) to leave Australian shores. Any thing else is an understanding or agreement or statement given to justify and acquire such permission.

some vehicles were sold. the 2 in question were not sold and if there was any intent to sell I doubt that they could have been because the receiving country is a signature of the 1970 UNESCO Convention.

Besides the Australian war memorial is not the decider of what is of cultural heritage or not, although they can make representation to have an item included or judged as cultural sensitive to Australia.

In the case of the land rovers you have mentioned, there case was not that they were the LAST survivors but that they had additional history. it is this fact that the rarity of the vehicles and there interesting history COMBINED made the case that they be classified as heritage items, thus requiring and export permit. Other vehicles of the same vintage were not classified as such and were sold overseas.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

I beg to differ, it was related to Australian Law and obtaining temporary export permits for some of the vehicles. The particular vehicles are supposed to be sole survivors of their particular type/s and are considered part of Australia's WWII heritage by the Australian War Memorial.

Given that the Australian War memorial opened on 1941 it is incredible that their charter did not then (as it does not now) save examples of every piece of equipment that they should have "considered" were/are part of Australia's military heritage.

Some citizen (or group) has the interest or foresight to find, identify, acquire, haul, wash & scrub, research, repair, restore, hunt for parts and accessories, register, insure, display and maintain a "movable heritage" article.
Then some anonymous non-performer can "consider" its future, while hiding behind and interpreting very vague motherhood type legislation that started out to protect aboriginal items, then encompassed wreck relics and has continued to expand.
The next phase in this socialist thinking is to compulsarily acquire the item as these "experts" are more capable to "protect" it.

Bob

Not going to get into conspiracy theorys or on Australian officialdom ommitting to recognise it's own history and arranging to preserve much of our heritage. However my point is that some vehicles are currently refused export permission by the Government on heritage grounds.

The corollary to that is if people think that 1948 or any other Land Rover in this country is of such importance to our heritage that it shouldn't leave our shores, then they need to get onto the Federal Government to have them declared as such.

Otherwise market forces will rule the day.

didn't they all come from england in the first place

Kelvin,
They would have spent a month or so at the factory, a a few days trip to the dock, a couple of weeks/months on a boat then 60 odd years in Australia. So for the UK they hold perhaps 2 months of heritage/cultural value, for Australia considerably longer. It'd be awfully hard to display an export market vehicle in context in the UK unless its on the back of a truck or in the factory under assembly.

The trouble is the majority of people see the vehicle/item as just that, the steel, aluminium and rubber conglomeration, when the story that goes with the vehicle is far more important. That is why patina and in-use modifications are also important to the historian, as they help tell the story of the item, its working conditions, methods of repair/manufacture and what it meant to its owner/user.
This is also why reproductions, no matter how perfect they are, are not valued the same as original articles, they don't have any story.

Originally Posted by weeds

didn't they all come from england in the first place

No if you're talking about the vehicles that the AWM had their grubby fingerprints on, many of them were built here with mechanicals from Canada, USA and locally built components.

The 1948 Land Rovers were built in the UK, but should we allow the first LR to arrive in Oz back to the UK? That is the question.

Diana

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

No if you're talking about the vehicles that the AWM had their grubby fingerprints on, many of them were built here with mechanicals from Canada, USA and locally built components.

The 1948 Land Rovers were built in the UK, but should we allow the first LR to arrive in Oz back to the UK? That is the question.

Diana

what’s with the WE thing??

I would say its up to the owner, after all this is not a communist country.
and if some one or some organization feels that it should stay in aussie, then cough up.

isn’t there a thread about a LR that thumped around Australia making docos? No one wanted that one until a member here ( and good on him) decided to take on the wreck. And if I recall correctly none of the museums were interested. If for example this LR was to be exported, plenty would complain but as this example has shown very few are prepared to do any thing about it other than complain.

Which brings up to the point. If a LR wreck is exported and then lovingly restored, that’s brilliant. Better than sitting under a gum rotting away like so many of then are. There even forgotten landys video around here some where