Page 4863 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The amendment that I will be moving, which is an amendment to Mr Stanhope’s amendment, adds paragraphs to the base of his. The motion, as amended, would be Ms Le Couteur’s No 1, Mr Stanhope’s No 2 and then my paragraphs would follow and would be numbered 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7.
As I have already mentioned, the first paragraph, noting the importance of urban trees, is something which I have covered, as is the fact that many of the trees do in fact go back to the original gazettal of the suburbs; so they are very much a part of Canberra’s history. Especially given that many older residents do live in the inner north and inner south, often in their original homes built perhaps in the 1940s or 1950s, the removal of these trees is going to be quite traumatic for them. So it is important that they are consulted and it is important that they are a part of the decision-making process and very much kept up to speed as to what is actually happening and how they can be involved.
I do think it is also important that we remember that we do not necessarily need to replace all the existing trees, after they are removed, with the same particular type of tree. I think there are many experiments in Canberra, with regard to trees, that have not necessarily worked well and I think this is a prime opportunity to actually look at what sort of treescape we want in our suburbs and what sorts of specimens we do want to plant and which ones are going to be the best for our climate, which are going to be best for our quality of life and which are also going to be easiest to maintain at a reasonable cost to the taxpayer.
All these issues are never going to be easy and in many ways I do not envy the government in having to deal with this issue. It is not a pleasant one and it is going to be an issue that I hope the Canberra Liberals will be taking on in 2012, in October, because it is certainly something that is going to be a significant issue for many decades, not just the coming few years.
The issue of consultation is absolutely vital and I cannot reiterate enough that it is a real imperative the government does engage people properly on this. I do not think anybody wants to go out in front of their house one day and see a chainsaw. No-one wants to drive home and find that a tree at the front of their house has been removed. So it is absolutely vital that the government does communicate exactly what it is going to do. This problem did not come about overnight and the solution does not need to come about overnight either. The solution should be a gradual process and one that does engage the community properly.
I move my amendment to Mr Stanhope’s amendment and I urge all in this place to support it. I move:
Add the following paragraphs:
“(3) notes the importance of urban trees which help define the character of our suburbs;
(4) recognises the significance of trees in older suburbs where the existing trees are the plantings that were made at the time of gazettal of the suburb, thus being of special value to residents;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video