Page 4306 - Week 12 - Thursday, 24 October 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
However, we have also heard from the community that the system of managing trees on private land can be inflexible, and we are seeking feedback on how the legislation and strict criteria can be improved. We want to hear from the community about how we increase the contribution of trees on leased land and enhance our canopy without significantly impacting on the private enjoyment of leased land. I encourage the community to come forward about their experiences with our tree laws and where they can be improved to achieve the overall outcome of improving our city’s tree canopy coverage. Consultation on the review of the Tree Protection Act is open until 8 December 2019 and I look forward to reporting back to the Assembly on progress in 2020.
I present a copy of the following paper:
Canberra’s tree canopy coverage—To protect and increase—Response to the Assembly resolution of 25 October 2017—Ministerial statement, 24 October 2019.
I move:
That the Assembly take note of the ministerial statement.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (10.41): I thank Minister Steel for this statement which, of course, was in response to my motion in 2017. We are the bush capital but the number of trees, the amount of bush in the bush capital, is decreasing. Earlier this year the Greens delivered a Canberra first, not a world first but a Canberra first: a commitment from the government to achieve a 30 per cent urban canopy target and a 30 per cent surface permeability target.
By introducing an urban canopy target, we are working to secure our current tree canopy, which is at 20 per cent, and ensure that it grows and ensure that we plant many, many more trees in the years to come. These trees are going to provide much-needed shade and habitat for our city, while reducing impacts of the urban heat island effect.
My motion covered street and park trees, trees on private land, and making room for trees in new suburbs. As Minister Steel alluded to, a lot of people are very concerned about the loss of trees in our suburbs. It is a standard thing in terms of planning objections and I note in my electorate of Murrumbidgee there is a large proposal in Weston for the current—I was going to say “the former”—AFP site. It is the development which currently intends to remove all the existing trees.
The fact that that can even be regarded as a legal proposition is really quite worrying. They intend to plant more trees but those trees, clearly, will be a lot smaller than what is planned to be removed. And I anticipate there will be considerable community unhappiness about that. We need to change our laws so that that is not regarded as an acceptable solution.
Trees are continually being lost through redevelopment. It is not just in these larger redevelopments but, when one house is knocked down and replaced by a bigger house,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video