Plans for changes at the South Australian Museum have triggered criticism from all sides. 

The South Australian Museum's controversial restructuring plans will remain under the scrutiny of a Premier's review, after the Upper House dismissed a proposal to initiate a secondary parliamentary investigation. 

The rejected motion sought to have the Statutory Authorities Review Committee evaluate the museum's restructuring strategy, funding sources, and the prospective impacts on its operations.

On April 26, Premier Peter Malinauskas announced a temporary halt to the museum’s restructure, pending the outcomes from a governmental review. 

This decision followed substantial public concern about the changes, which critics argue could undermine the museum’s global reputation and its significant progress in Indigenous relations.

Since 2016, under anthropologist John Carty’s direction, the museum made strides in rectifying historical grievances with Indigenous communities by returning ancestral remains and revamping policies on their management. 

The museum, holding a collection of about 4,600 Indigenous ancestral remains, had earned international praise for its efforts in reconciliation and increased custodianship by Indigenous people.

However, the recent restructuring plans proposed by the museum's management have reignited tensions, prompting fears of a rollback on these advances. 

The changes suggested a reduction in research roles and modifications to the management of secret/sacred collections, alarming both Indigenous and non-Indigenous stakeholders.

The restructuring plan was poised to scrap 27 research and collection roles, substituting them with 22 positions that critics argue would be less specialised and more generic. 

The reorganisation included the elimination of specific roles like that of the head of humanities and the Aboriginal heritage and repatriation manager, which have been central to the museum's reparative initiatives.

In response to growing unease, Premier Malinauskas has commissioned a three-member panel to review the proposed changes to ensure they align with the museum's operational and community obligations. The review is expected to present its findings by June.

Frank Pangallo, an independent MLC who supported the now-rejected secondary review, said an independent evaluation of the museum’s plans is needed, separate from governmental oversight. 

The museum’s management has defended the restructuring as a step towards sustainability and relevance in the modern age.