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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Wednesday, 3 March 2004) . . Page.. 701 ..

about enforcement of bans; there is an argument that that could be potentially more difficult than just having the containment regulation. On the question of what happens to the cats, as Ms Dundas has said, if there are cats in the nature reserve they are trapped and treated as feral cats.

The really important issues in this are about community understanding about the significance of the suburb that they have chosen to live in being next to this incredibly important nature reserve. By making these regulations, that particular aspect of that suburb is being made quite clear, and this is very important, I believe, for the future of the nature reserve. I have heard people say, “Oh, well, horses do damage” and “Well, development does damage,” and that is right; that is why a lot of conservationists did not even want these suburbs next to this very important area with such intact biodiversity. I do not know whether I need to point it out, but on the whole horses do not eat birds and other mammals. Certainly, people walking their dogs can be an issue with mammals and with tree-creeping birds. The brown tree creeper and the hooded robin particularly are very vulnerable on the ground to dogs as well, and I think that that is obviously something that has to be looked at. We have talked about weed invasion. That is something that also has to be looked at.

I find it quite concerning when I hear the Liberal opposition trivialising this to a degree when it is such an important environmental area. We know that and we know the evidence is in that cats can have a very serious and negative impact on such areas. On the issue of more consultation and the accusation that I am not wanting consultation and so on: there has been a lot of consultation more generally in our community about the environment. It was an issue in the last election and it is certainly an issue federally now. We know that generally the community value biodiversity and are understanding more and more that we cannot afford as a community to ride roughshod over the important biodiversity that is left in our region. More and more people, as they experience impacts personally of the environmental degradation that has occurred—whether it is climate change, drought, the increase in fires or the changing climate and water availability—are waking up to the fact that this is not something we can just disregard. This is something that matters.

When people choose to live in these suburbs, they will know that they are living in a very special place. They are privileged to live there and they have particular responsibilities because they have chosen to live there. The containment option that this government have said they are prepared to support I do see as a reasonable compromise. It is supporting the importance of acknowledging that we have to respect the environment and that, if we are going to have development next to important reserves such as Mulligans Flat and the Gooroo Reserve, we must accommodate that special place by taking responsibility for it.

Mr Smyth also said, “What about Throsby?” Throsby is not going to be developed for at least seven years, as I understand it. So it is not something we need to look at right now, although it is certainly something that will need to be looked at. Also, generally, I think there is an argument for having broader consultation with the community in existing suburbs that are adjacent to nature reserves, to see if we can find an arrangement so that those suburbs either have restrictions and regulation around containment of cats or are cat-free areas. Clearly, that would require consultation because people are living there now and many may have cats, so that would need to be done as a separate exercise.

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