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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 09 Hansard (Tuesday, 17 August 2004) . . Page.. 3743 ..

look at the proposed government tree legislation. However well intentioned, it ultimately works a bit like unfair dismissal legislation. You might think twice about acquiring an asset if you are going to get stuck with it for life.

There are a lot of cost-effective approaches to preserve trees, and the government has talked about them here. It says we are busily planting a whole lot of new tress and watering them, but what are we doing about the established trees in our parks, on our nature strips, on our roundabouts? They are dying across the town. We are encouraging people to spend money but then we do not allow them the luxury of watering to ensure the longevity of their asset. We are encouraging people to water street trees, but we need to be encouraging people to water streets trees without requiring them to stand around holding a hand-held hose during the limited times they have to water their gardens.

One of the issues raised in estimates and has been raised a number of times is what is Urban Services doing about maintaining our old trees around Canberra. Are we being a little innovative perhaps and going out with an auger and sticking a bit of Agpipe down so that people can effectively water trees so that they do not die? Mr Wood touched on it. But drive around, drive down Moynihan Street in Evatt and see how many dead street trees there are, and they are eucalypts. I shudder to think what will happen when the spring comes and we see how many deciduous trees have died over the winter. They made it through the past summer, but I doubt that they will make it through the next one. When the trees start to come out, as they should, in spring, we will see that we have a whole lot of problems.

There is an issue with the government requiring developers to landscape their development and then, after they hand it over, the government not watering it. Mr Wood spoke about Yerrabi and what fantastic work is being done there, but the developer at Yerrabi was required to develop a park. It has highly efficient in-ground watering, which is pumped out of Yerrabi pond, but what has happened? Since it has been handed over to the government, the government has turned off the sprinklers. So, the community paid for that investment when it paid for the houses in the estate, but it does not reap the benefit of it because the government turns off the sprinklers.

The look of the city is very important, as is how we address water restrictions and our water security. I have spoken at length about the irrational approach of this government to water restrictions. Contrary to what Mr Wood has said, I have never said, and members on this side have never said, that we should have tougher water restrictions so that the government can use more water. We are saying that water restrictions are needed but they need to be much more rational than the odds and evens, hand-held approach that we experienced during the past summer. That is a recipe for killing our trees. That is a recipe for killing our gardens. Reasonably mature trees cost thousands of dollars. Many larger trees are literally irreplaceable, at least in our lifetime.

This government is running on rhetoric about being concerned about trees with so-called tree preservation and tree planting days, but when it comes to the crunch, let us look at its record. Let us see what it has done about Nettlefold Street. Let us see what it did to Oakey Hill. If you want to see woody weeds, go to Oakey Hill and see what has happened since it clear-felled Oakey Hill. I was there on the weekend and there are innumerable woody weeds there that are not being addressed by the government.

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