Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (10 December) . . Page.. 4893 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

It is not certain that other woodland communities in the ACT are under such threat that they would also qualify for declaration. They have not been nominated or assessed. Therefore, inclusion of ecological communities is unlikely to be an effective way of preserving trees, as most trees would not fall within the assessment criteria established by the Flora and Fauna Committee, which comprises experts in biodiversity. I would also note that there are sufficient procedures available under the Nature Conservation Act for the Conservator of Flora and Fauna to take action to prevent felling of trees on areas containing a declared ecological community.

In relation to the qualifications of the conservator, the proposed amendments again clearly demonstrate a misunderstanding of the role and functions of the conservator. The conservator is not intended to be the Government's expert adviser on matters relating to conservation of flora and fauna. That is why we have a statutory committee of recognised experts called the Flora and Fauna Committee established under the Nature Conservation Act.

Mr Berry: Take it easy.

Mr Corbell: You are so well read.

Mr Moore: You are such a greenie, Bill.

MR STEFANIAK: Well, I used to be the environment spokesman a long time ago. The conservator's role is also not restricted to matters of conservation of flora and fauna. The Land Act quite clearly - - -

Mr Berry: He is lusting to get the job back. You are in trouble.

MR STEFANIAK: No, he is doing a wonderful job; it is all right. I like trees, Wayne. The Land Act quite clearly places the statutory responsibility for management of all categories of public land in the hands of the conservator. While this involves management of the nature reserve scheme, it also includes urban parklands, sportsgrounds and lakes. Competent management of this range of land uses requires the capacity to balance competing interests, which would include recreational, social, economic and equity of access issues, as well as issues relating to conservation and other aspects of environment protection.

Finally, I would note that, unlike Government presented legislation, there is no evidence that this Bill has been subjected to the usual scrutiny and analysis of its implications for business, the labour market, the environment and other social issues. As I have noted earlier, the issue of tree preservation is not one to be considered lightly and dealt with in a cursory manner. Given the deficiencies I have highlighted, together with the equity implications for rural lessees, the complex time- and resource-consuming approval process, and in the absence of any demonstration that the Greens' amendments are meeting any community demand or need, it would be irresponsible for this Assembly

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .