Page 1532 - Week 04 - Thursday, 7 April 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
important, to do the follow-up work so that that initial work is not cancelled out by regrowth or by some sort of comeback by the species. This is particularly the case in a year when we have had such good rainfall and such ideal growing conditions, as we have all experienced in our own gardens. Not following up projects has a real potential to undermine the good work done earlier. So we are concerned about that.
We would also urge the government to seriously consider how they are going to ensure the ongoing proper funding and resourcing of Namadgi. We have seen the recent discussion paper from the commissioner for the environment. I think that produced some fairly strong public reactions, and it is important that we keep that discussion going because there is chronic underfunding, I believe, for both our national parks and our nature reserves, or Canberra’s urban nature parks, with problems with rabbits, weeds, erosion and lack of support for park key groups. These are ongoing issues that particularly apply in the urban environment but also are issues in Namadgi national park.
Overall, as I said, I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this today. I hope that this is an opportunity for the government to provide us with an update on the questions that we have raised today and undoubtedly some of the other questions that arise out of the plan of management, and we look forward to a continuing discussion.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (11.06): Mr Rattenbury has touched on some of the extraordinary issues of why we are here today.
It seems that this debate is essentially an insult to the intelligence of the Assembly and to the people in the ACT who are passionately interested in the operation of Namadgi national park. It is also an insult to the work of the members of the planning and environment committee of the Sixth Assembly. I was a member of that committee at the time when this was put through. That this government would bring on this item today with so little to show for it shows how little regard it has for the administration and management of Namadgi national park.
Mr Rattenbury touched on the issue of the Namadgi advisory board. It was a matter that was discussed at length by the committee and on which the government has done nothing. At the time, the point was made that the advisory board was treated with considerable discourtesy and, although there had been government commitments to re-establish the advisory board, some four or five years down the track there has been no progress on that. Despite commitments from successive governments that there should be Indigenous involvement in the management of Namadgi national park—there did appear at some stage to be bipartisan support for this—again this government’s actions do not speak louder than their words. They have made commitments but they have not followed up on them.
On Tuesday this week the Attorney-General used an important piece of legislation as a filler because the government had no business, and again today the government has put forward this report, which is so outdated, because the government has no business. We are talking about the government response to a Sixth Assembly inquiry. Mr Rattenbury has touched on the fact that the report is so outdated that the government has responded to it. Not only has it responded; it has actually acted on it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video