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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 13 May 2004) . . Page.. 1881 ..

Mr Speaker, management plans under the land act are made by the Conservator of Flora and Fauna. Allowing work pursuant to the plan of management to take place without further reference to the conservator does make sense because it is work that the conservator has in essence already agreed to. It is the conservator, after all, who is the manager of the nature reserves, and work done to manage the land is done at the discretion of the conservator. The government is happy to support this particular amendment.

MS DUNDAS (9.33): For one reason, time, I will speak to Ms Tucker’s amendments Nos 1, 2 and 3. I know she has not moved 2 and 3, but they all relate to clause 7. If there is a problem with that, just stop me now. But the Democrats are supporting these amendments.

MR SPEAKER: There is a slight problem. You are only supposed to speak to No 1.

MS DUNDAS: I will speak only to amendment No 1 but, in speaking to amendment No 1, I foreshadow that I will support amendment No 2 and amendment No 3.

The bill, as tabled, contains a number of exemptions from the offences created by the bill. These are when vegetation is cleared in accordance with a plan of management for the public or for a development approval of a fuel management plan under the Bushfire Act. Ms Tucker has made the argument that these plans should not automatically give people the right to clear native vegetation. And there is no clear reason for automatically absolving a person from the offences in this act simply because they are done under one of these plans or approvals. There are, of course, different ways of conducting land clearing, and some will have fewer impacts than others. This is the type of question that is within the purview of the conservator when these licences are granted and so there is no need for a blanket exemption.

I note that Ms Tucker has not proposed to amend the clauses that deal with emergencies, and in cases of emergencies these offences will not come into effect and the Criminal Code that provides a defence of emergency as a defence confirms this. So while removing these clauses will probably result in minor additional paperwork it will not affect the capacity of land managers in any momentous way. I note that the conservation officers are exempted from the provisions of the act in any case.

The additional step of applying for a licence will provide an additional level of oversight that land clearing or land damage is not occurring unduly and the capacity to safeguard our protected areas will be maximised.

Amendment agreed to.

MS TUCKER (9.35): I move amendment No 2 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 1913].

This amendment would omit the licence exemption for work in accordance with a development application. The government has argued that in the case of a development application related to a nature reserve the land manager who is, in this case, the Conservator of Flora and Fauna must be consulted, and the decision-maker must take

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