Published on: November 2021
Record: HANSARD-1323879322-121290
National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021
Second Reading Debate
Debate resumed from an earlier hour.
Mr DAVID HARRIS (Wyong) (17:52:10):
I continue my earlier contribution to debate on the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021. The New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council also raised the issue that there are technical issues to work through with roles and functions of part 4A boards of management and Aboriginal land councils to ensure that the legislation has no unintended consequences. I now know the Minister or the Minister's office is undertaking some of that consultation. I hope it takes note of the concerns of the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council. But it is not all bad news. The land council indicated to me that it supports the concept of carbon sequestration rights in land and is willing to explore that issue with the Minister. I reiterate that an important part of self-determination is meaningful consultation. Unfortunately, with this bill that has been sadly lacking, particularly when it comes to the part 4A Aboriginal joint boards of management.
The Aboriginal Land Rights Act is about returning control of their land to Aboriginal people. It is essential that when legislation is brought to this place there is proper and meaningful consultation with Aboriginal people on issues that will affect that land. There cannot be an assumption that they will agree. That is not what self-determination is about. I often hear examples from Aboriginal people who tell me there can be a tick-a-box consultation process rather than a meaningful negotiation. I think all of us need to understand that, in terms of giving back self-determination to Aboriginal people, particularly over their lands, it cannot be a tick-a-box exercise. It has to be sitting down and gaining agreement that what is being proposed is seen by them as being in their best interests, not what we think are their best interests.
I got together a group of people who are having a look at a treaty process, not just for what might happen in New South Wales but looking at what is happening in other parts of Australia, as well as in Canada and New Zealand. One of the most important parts of that is the fact that we have to move away from the position where Governments make decisions on behalf of Indigenous people. That has not worked for 240 years in Australia at least. We have to start sitting down and having meaningful discussion and meaningful negotiations on these issues. We do not have to have a treaty in place to do that. We can do it in a respectful way.
As I said, OCHRE, which is the Aboriginal policy organisation in New South Wales, talks about having that self-determination and decision-making on behalf of Aboriginal people. These documents cannot just be words on a page. Everything we do in every part of government must have meaning and intent behind the words in terms of actions. I would say to the Minister that, while many parts of this bill may be well meaning and may be heading in the right direction, the fact that they did not sit down with Aboriginal people, particularly the part 4A Aboriginal joint boards, and negotiate with them prior to bringing the bill to the House shows a serious lack of understanding of what self-determination really means.
Ms FELICITY WILSON (North Shore) (17:57:05):
I am pleased to speak in support of the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021. As we have heard from my colleagues, the bill proposes to make sensible and much‑needed amendments to the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. We are very fortunate to have our National Park Estate because they offer an abundance of activities. I am particularly fortunate to have an area of the Sydney Harbour National Park surrounding my electorate and encapsulating it along much of the harbour. In the North Shore, we are very fortunate to have access to the beautiful Sydney Harbour National Park throughout Middle Head, Georges Head and around to Chowder Bay. In particular, being able to access those lands during lockdown has been succour for our souls.
But most importantly it is our desire to make sure it is more accessible for more people across the community. I acknowledge investments already in place for the national park up at Middle Head in particular where there is a range of investments that the Government has put into place to build new walking tracks, increase public amenity, create new lookout areas and strengthen, restore and refurbish many of the historical military fortifications that are located there. We have military heritage at Middle Head that dates back from the Crimean War onwards, including, for instance, training in tiger cages that were used to harden prisoners of war before going out to battle in World War II. So this site is incredibly important and rich, and this Government is investing heavily in that.
But one of the areas that this legislation will also affect is the park management planning and approvals approach, which could have a beneficial impact on one of the funding decisions that the New South Wales Government has made, which is for the Environmental Education Centre to be instituted at Middle Head. As I have said, Middle Head is a unique place. We have the natural environment, Indigenous heritage and military heritage converging, which happens in quite a few parts of our national park, particularly around Sydney Harbour. But the Environmental Education Centre for Middle Head will be a new home of environmental learning for students across New South Wales. It is a model that has worked successfully in other locations, but there is a particularly unique opportunity here where we see the convergence of those unique elements at Middle Head.
It has been a journey that many members of my community have advocated for alongside me. I really want to thank and recognise two specific advocates for the Environmental Education Centre at Middle Head—the vice‑president and former president of the Headland Preservation Group, Julie Goodsir, and the current president, Jill L'Estrange. They have worked on this project in great detail. They have worked with National Parks. They have worked with Education and the assets management unit that are working on delivering the centre. They are working in detail on things like curriculum and the vision for the Environmental Education Centre. Their goal is to ensure that it opens up more broadly, not just for the local community, but for students and people across New South Wales and, potentially, across the country. It is a vision of which I am very proud and I am equally proud of the work they have put in place.
I also acknowledge that with this legislation, albeit further away from home for me, is the proposal for the creation of the new Gardens of Stone reserves. We know that this is an incredibly profound decision. It is an iconic area of our natural environment in New South Wales and it has been sought after for a long time. This has been welcomed quite strongly from my own community as well as across New South Wales. I am very proud of the announcement that we will be including more than 30,000 hectares of State forests in the Gardens of Stone inclusion in the new ecotourism and adventure destination in the upper Blue Mountains. It is a remarkable decision. I know that these reserves and the significant conservation value they have will make a big difference to recognition of our native environment in these areas and will also feature one of the world's great long distance walks, which will link Wollemi in the Blue Mountains and the Gardens of Stone National Park.
I will speak a little bit more about one specific aspect of the bill, which may seem to be dry to some people but is meaningful in delivering outcomes I have referred to about ensuring that we can increase access to national parks and increase amenity in our national parks. I am referring to streamlining the management, planning and approvals for activities in the parks with things like recreational facilities or even for conservation actions. We know that our plans of management are actually the key to planning documents for national parks and other reserves that are managed by the National Parks and Wildlife Service. This bill provides significant improvements in the time frame for the creation and adoption of statutory plans. These reduced time frames will be achieved by reducing duplication and increasing efficiencies in the process of engaging with statutory advisory bodies. Importantly, the bill will ensure that the highly valued expert and local knowledge contributed by the statutory regional advisory committees will still happen.
The amendment will provide that the exhibition requirements of plans of management for national parks aligned with those for similar purposes in other legislation, such as local environment plans under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, and will reduce the public exhibition period for a plan of management to a minimum of 28 days. Currently the National Parks and Wildlife Service uses a range of communication methods to make sure that it gets the word out across communities so that they can comment on the draft plans of management. Given the widespread access now through the internet, particularly as we have to ensure that we have the adoption through QR codes this past year, we know that if the time frame changes it is unlikely to limit people's ability to participate in consultation on the plans of management. The principle of this is to ensure that our communities can comment and provide their views. The National Parks and Wildlife Service's continuing improvement of processes and technology will ensure it is quick and easy for the public.
The National Parks and Wildlife Advisory Council, which is a statutory body advising the National Parks and Wildlife Service on policy and planning matters for national parks, will no longer advise on plans of management. However, the Minister may seek the council's advice on specific plans of management. This will free up the council to focus on more strategic statewide matters. The requirement for regional advisory committees to provide advice 28 days after the exhibition period closes will ensure the Minister gets timely advice and can progress a new plan or amendment to a plan soon after a plan is exhibited. It will not diminish the quality of advice. Regional advisory committees will need to meet to discuss the draft plan and public submissions on the plan, and their advice will be provided promptly to the Minister. The Minister then has the option of extending the period for the committees providing advice.
The bill will provide the Minister with the ability to approve priority conservation actions and establish and maintain infrastructure projects that are not provided for in plans of management or are not consistent with current plans of management. It will be an important alternative to amending the plan of management in many circumstances. Those powers will give the Minister the ability to respond swiftly to urgent, emerging or unforeseen situations that may otherwise impact on protected plants or animals. It will also enable the Minister to ensure important visitor infrastructure projects proceed without delay, provided the critical safeguards are observed. There are many safeguards around those approval provisions. Proposed actions or projects must be consistent with the objects of the National Parks and Wildlife Act.
The proposal must fall within a class of actions to be defined in the regulation. Those provisions cannot be exercised until a regulation is made for that purpose. The regulation will be developed in 2022. Projects will still be subject to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and any leasing and licensing requirements under the National Parks and Wildlife Act. The bill also stipulates that before the Minister may approve an action or project, the Secretary of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment must seek public comment on the proposed approval. The only exception to that is if the Minister considers that action essential for emergency management or restoration of infrastructure, or to prevent imminent risk to the conservation of park values. That may occur, for example, when there is an extreme weather event, wildfire or an illegal activity.
The proposed amendment to provide a ministerial power to approve priority conservation actions and visitor infrastructure projects is a balanced, sensible and well-considered provision that will benefit all visitors to national parks and ensure that priority conservation actions are taken to protect the State's unique biodiversity and precious cultural heritage. I am pleased to recognise that the bill will deliver important outcomes for streamlining management planning and approvals for actions and projects in parks. As I said earlier, on the ground that will have an effect for real people and communities. We will ensure that we increase access and amenities within our national parks—including in my own national park—and, in particular, look at ways to deliver commitments and beneficial projects with our community, like the Environmental Education Centre at Middle Head, because our community always needs to be involved in the decisions about the way we use that space. We need more and more community members to come and enjoy it.
Ms ANNA WATSON (Shellharbour) (18:06:29):
I speak in opposition to the National Parks and Wildlife Service Bill 2021 in its current form, which seeks to make a series of changes to the National Parks And Wildlife Service 1974. I highlight the importance of protecting our national parks, which is a legacy that Labor has proudly built and will continue to defend against the Government with its appalling record on the environment and national parks. If passed, the bill will make substantial and far-reaching changes to the way national parks are managed, resulting in a reduction in consultation and an increase in ministerial powers.
There has not been adequate consultation with all stakeholders when preparing the bill, including a lack of consultation with local communities, traditional owners and environmental groups. I note that the member for Wyong raised that in his contribution earlier this evening. Considering the immense changes the bill would make, that lack of consultation is unacceptable and cannot be supported. Although a number of positive initiatives are being proposed by the bill that would aid in protecting the biodiversity of New South Wales, there is also a number of changes that cannot be supported. Various provisions must be tightened to ensure adequate consultation occurs with those stakeholders, in particular guaranteeing that the First Nations Financial Management Board will be consulted and its approval required to implement some changes.
The proposal to reduce the minimum exhibition period for draft plans of management from 90 to 28 days, while simultaneously reducing the steps involved in considering and making a plan of management, is unacceptable. That does not allow adequate time for any stakeholder to engage in consultation about changes to those important plans, and will result in changes being made that are not in the best interests of local communities and the public as a whole. The National Parks Association of NSW has raised significant concerns over that proposed change, stating, "The bill could be interpreted as an attempt to stifle public engagement in shaping the future of our national parks and reserves." That is totally unacceptable. Similarly, it will provide added powers for the Minister to approve a project that is inconsistent with a plan of management for visitor infrastructure and conservation actions. That will only provide an opportunity for the Government to plough through those plans, enabling unacceptable development in those national parks.
The bill also proposes to establish an open-ended charitable entity to enable tax-deductible donations to national parks, though the New South Wales Government has cut over $100 million from the National Parks and Wildlife Service [NPWS] over the past decade. In fact, we are unable to determine exactly how much has been cut from NPWS because the Government stopped providing standalone budget figures for the National Parks and Wildlife Service in 2018-19. If the Government wants more funds allocated to the maintenance of protection of national parks, it should provide them itself. Why consistently cut funding and rely on donations for the function of one of the core public services and features of this State? There is also a number of negative implications in establishing a trust without appropriate limitations in place for what the funds can be used for. That would all place further pressure on national parks to find the funding itself for its operation, rather than being adequately supported by the Government.
The bill has been dropped into Parliament and onto stakeholders with no consultation and no real justification for many of the changes it proposes. The bill cannot be supported in its current form and must undergo changes to make it appropriate for stakeholders and the wider public that the national parks were created to serve. The long and proud legacy of national parks must not be trampled on by the Government and turned into development grounds, which is exactly what many of those changes will lead to. We know its form and we know how it treats those pieces of grass. The New South Wales Government's own record on national parks speaks for itself, and should be seen as a precursor for what the bill will lead to if not allowed proper consultation and input by stakeholders.
The lack of attention that this Government gives to our beautiful national parks is clear in the inclusions in the bill and in the fact that it failed to celebrate the 50-year anniversary of the National Parks and Wildlife Service in 2017; that it has proposed the F6 motorway should run through Australia's first declared national park, Sydney's Royal National Park; and that it has failed to pursue World Heritage listing for that park, despite being promised by O'Farrell in 2012. I remember that very well. I grew up near the national park and I remember the Government talking about putting the F6 right through the middle of it. You can go back and see that on the public record; I do not make this stuff up.
The Government's lack of attention is also clear in that is has more proposals to develop even further within a number of our national parks, upending and disregarding the plans of management that govern those parks. I have experienced that in my electorate. In October 2019 the member for Kiama, Gareth Ward, announced that the Berejiklian Government had awarded a $6.5 million grant to the manager of NSW Crown Holiday Parks, which trades as Reflections Holiday Parks, to upgrade facilities at Killalea Reserve. Gareth Ward was the poster boy for Reflections. I want the House to keep that in mind.
Mrs Shelley Hancock:
He still is.
Ms ANNA WATSON:
I acknowledge the interjection. The grant that was awarded under the Regional Growth - Environment and Tourism Fund is intended to fund the construction of 15 eco-friendly cabins, a multipurpose function centre, 53 fully serviced campsites, a new playground and walking trails at Killalea Reserve. Further direct funding of $4,430,000 from Reflections will increase the investment in Killalea Reserve to almost $11 million. That project has been met with strong community concern and opposition. I am one of those people. Killalea Reserve is a much-loved part of our local identity in Shellharbour. The significance of that beautiful area on a local and a national level was reinforced when it was officially declared a National Surfing Reserve on 6 June 2009 by a Labor government, and given special protection. My community and I feel strongly about its preservation.
I reiterate that the proposal put forward by Reflections Holiday Parks is not supported by the community. The overwhelming consensus is that Reflections Holiday Parks should be removed as managers of Killalea Reserve as a matter of priority. I have been actively lobbying those opposite for that for some time now. Time and time again, I have stood on the floor of this very Chamber calling for plans to develop Killalea Reserve to be scrapped. I have been given assurances that the management of Killalea Reserve will be transferred from Crown Lands to the National Parks and Wildlife Service, but those assurances have not been backed up with any real action.
It is time that the Government finally does what is right and what is long overdue, and that is to transfer the management of Killalea Reserve to the National Parks and Wildlife Service as a matter of priority, with a community committee that oversees it. Developing this area to make it profitable is not what our community wants. People want to see Killalea left alone. Not every blade of grass has to be developed, which those opposite cannot seem to understand. Make no mistake: This Government is not here to protect our national parks. It is here to ram through planning and development without any consideration for the huge environmental, historical and cultural impacts it will have. That is evident by proposing to slash the minimum exhibition period of draft plans of management, increasing ministerial powers without proper consultation, and shifting of the reliance of funds from government to charitable organisations and donations.
While I support some uncontroversial aspects of the bill, it cannot be supported in its entirety until adequate amendments are made. They should have a clear focus on sufficient active consultation with key stakeholders and consideration for how funds donated for the explicit purpose of maintaining and protecting our beautiful national parks will be handled so that these great State assets will be protected for future generations to enjoy. I will finish by saying that people travel from all over the world to enjoy our national parks, particularly those in New South Wales and especially the Royal National Park, which is located in the Sutherland Shire. If the Government thinks that the Opposition will stand by and watch it destroy, rape and pillage those parks then it is sadly mistaken.
Ms ELENI PETINOS (Miranda) (18:16:12):
I am pleased to speak in support of the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021. I am following the contribution of the member for Shellharbour and whilst I have a lot of time and respect for her, I am completely outraged by her contribution. There is not one member in this place who has a stronger connection to the Royal National Park than me, given that I grew up in Bundeena, which is the only suburb, other than Maianbar, completely enclosed in the Royal National Park. I spent 30 years being part of that community. I know and love the national park and, to this day, go walking there. Every weekend I hike through the various tracks. Until the member for Shellharbour can have a true appreciation for what this Government is doing and the way that our communities truly interact with it, I do not think she is in any place to put on record falsehoods relating to this Government's relationship with the Royal National Park and the M6 motorway. Under the last Premier, this Government categorically ruled out that it would encroach into the Royal National Park for an M6 extension. It is very important that we reaffirm that commitment to the Royal National Park and our communities and residents of the Sutherland Shire.
The bill makes sensible and much-needed amendments to the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 that will improve the conservation outcomes of the Act, streamline park management planning and approvals, harness philanthropic donations, position the Minister responsible for national parks to trade in carbon sequestration rights and biodiversity credits, and create the new Gardens of Stone reserves. As raised by the member for Bathurst, one of the more significant aspects of the bill is the establishment of the 31,545-hectare Gardens of Stone reserves outside Lithgow in the Upper Blue Mountains. The Gardens of Stone reserves is a place of great natural beauty, home to ancient sandstone pagodas, rich eucalypt forests and an array of threatened species and ecological communities.
In addition to providing greater protection to the culturally and ecologically significant Gardens of Stone reserve, the bill will enable a $49.5 million investment into visitor infrastructure to create a truly incredible tourism destination for people across New South Wales, Australia and the world. Visitors will be able to enjoy a spectacular new attraction, the Lost City Adventure Experience, which will be home to Australia's longest zip‑line, as well as an iconic new multi-day walk from Wollemi to the Gardens of Stone, new and upgraded lookouts, camping areas, walking tracks, mountain bike trails and more. Apart from the establishment of the Gardens of Stone reserves, the bill will provide for regulations to support a world-leading ecological health-monitoring framework, which will benchmark the health of national parks in terms of feral animal control, fire management, weed control and threatened species recovery, which is of particular importance to residents of the Sutherland Shire who show great interest and take great pride in our Royal National Park.
The bill also enables the National Parks and Wildlife Service to participate in carbon credit markets and also biodiversity credit markets and reinvest those funds into national park management. In both cases, credits can only be obtained by the National Parks and Wildlife Service for actions that are additional to business as usual. It will streamline management and planning approvals by reducing the minimum period for exhibition of draft plans of management from 90 days to 28 days and reducing the steps involved in considering and making a plan. The bill also modernises the key advisory committees under the National Parks and Wildlife Act by providing that those committees comprise experts appointed by the Minister, rather than requiring the Minister to appoint individuals nominated by stakeholder groups. But today I will focus on the establishment of a charitable entity, which will mobilise philanthropic, tax deductible investment in national parks.
The establishment of a charitable entity will enable the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service to harness philanthropic funds to improve conservation outcomes for national parks. There is significant opportunity to benefit from environmental philanthropy over and above—not replacing—core government funding. It is wonderful to see the creation of such a mechanism created by the bill. It will establish the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Trust, a not-for-profit body corporate, to maintain a public fund to receive tax deductible donations. The donations can be applied to the protection and enhancement of national parks. It will also provide for a board appointed by the Minister, with operating matters and other arrangements set out in the regulations. The National Parks and Wildlife Service will continue to engage with philanthropic partners, such as the Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife and other conservation charities.
The Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife, and the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service have a long and successful history, and that relationship will continue. The foundation has made a significant contribution to national park conservation in New South Wales. However, it is a national organisation that has a range of priorities. There is a need for a charitable organisation that is tightly integrated with the National Parks and Wildlife Service and focused on New South Wales national parks. The National Parks and Wildlife Service philanthropic activities would occur through the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Trust. There is clear evidence that the establishment of a not-for-profit entity connected to the strong National Parks and Wildlife Service brand will, over time, mobilise significant funds. Public and corporate generosity in this regard was particularly evident following the 2019-20 bushfire season.
Increasing interest in environmental philanthropy presents a high potential for the National Parks and Wildlife Service to attract significant and ongoing income from donations—that is, to top up core government funding if such a mechanism is established. Importantly, the bill follows the model of other foundations or funds designed to attract philanthropic investment in national parks or conservation activities. One impressive example is the United States' National Park Foundation, which receives funds from private philanthropy to supplement the funding which the US National Park Service receives from Congress. It is understood the United States' National Park Foundation has raised hundreds of millions for United States national parks since 1967 to spend on their unparalleled parks. In New South Wales, the Taronga Foundation has raised around $50 million over 2015 to 2020 for species conservation programs run by Taronga and Western Plains zoos. The bill provides for secure governance of donations. The trust is overseen by a board, whose members will be appointed by the Minister. The trust and its public fund will also have to comply with the eligibility requirements for entry onto the register of environmental organisations and endorsement as a deductible gift recipient under the Commonwealth Income Tax Assessment Act 1997.
In conclusion, I acknowledge the very hardworking Treasurer, and Minister for Energy and Environment, for his work relating to this very important legislation. I also acknowledge this Government's extensive commitment to our national parks, in particular the Royal National Park, which is nearest and dearest to my local community. I am pleased to recognise that the bill will deliver outcomes to fund the important work of protecting the State's national parks. I think national parks' enormous impact on, and necessity to, the community has been highlighted during COVID, with everyone getting out and about and enjoying the natural assets we all have in our backyards. I commend the bill to the House.
Ms YASMIN CATLEY (Swansea) (18:24:43):
As my Labor colleagues have done, I raise concerns about the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021. The omnibus bill proposes the establishment of the Gardens of Stone State Conservation Area and a number of other positive initiatives to better protect biodiversity in New South Wales. However, the bill also makes substantial and far-reaching changes to the management of national parks that Labor cannot support. Of particular concern are the proposed changes that will reduce consultation and give more power to the Minister. Before putting forward such a significant change, there should and must be much more consultation involving the traditional owners, unions, environmental groups and the local community. In its current form, the Opposition simply cannot support the bill. Labor will seek to improve the bill in the Legislative Council by tightening some of the provisions, such as guaranteeing that First Nations boards of management will be consulted and will have to give approval to some of the changes.
Labor has a proud legacy of protecting the State's national parks. In my electorate of Swansea, the Wallarah National Park was established in 2003 under the then Carr Labor Government. I acknowledge that the Minister for Energy and Environment is very passionate about protecting our environment. It is a shame his colleagues do not share his passion. On this occasion though, the Minister has just got it wrong. That is not to say that Labor supports nothing in the bill. The bill will protect Assets of Intergenerational Significance by providing a method to extend that protection to Aboriginal cultural heritage sites. That will enable the land that those assets are on to be kept secret where necessary to ensure their conservation. Penalties for offences against land declared as an Asset of Intergenerational Significance will also be established. The bill will also make amendments that will enable an Aboriginal land council to create, acquire, hold, sell or otherwise deal with carbon sequestration rights for land that is created or protected under the Act.
Other proposed changes include enabling the use of digital images and data for compliance and enforcement actions relating to vehicles entering or using a park. I flag that while such a change seems positive on the surface, we must be careful that it does not impact the equitable access to parks by pensioners, people with a disability, veterans and other concession holders. I have already been contacted by constituents who have been adversely impacted by the shift to tie a NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service pass with a specific vehicle registration. That has not accounted for those with a disability who do not always travel in the same vehicle. The bill will also provide the power to make regulations about monitoring and reporting on the ecological health of parks, along with establishing the Gardens of Stone as a state conservation area. Those are all positive changes that Labor supports.
On Saturday morning while I was driving back to the electorate of Swansea, I heard the Minister describing the beauty and wonderful advancements in the Gardens of Stone on ABC Radio with Simon Marnie. I admire the passion of the Minister in that regard. But Labor cannot support amendments that will enable the Minister to create biodiversity credits for management actions carried out on land reserved or acquired under the Act. That change would raise significant questions over the integrity of the current Biodiversity Offset Scheme. The bill will also seek to reduce the minimum exhibition period for draft plans of management from 90 days to 28 days, which is simply not long enough to properly consult with the community. That is only made more concerning by a move by the Minister to enable the approval of a project that is inconsistent with a plan of management.
Given the history of the Government attempting to run roughshod over plans of management to enable development in national parks, the community simply cannot trust it with that power. Over the past decade the Liberal Government has cut $100 million from the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service and now it wants to establish it as an open‑ended charitable entity, which will enable tax-deductible donations to national parks. Forgive my cynicism, but that appears to be a very sly way to further cut the budget of the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. Until the Government address that issues, Labor simply cannot support the bill. Labor is not the only party concerned about the proposed amendments. Both the National Parks Association of NSW and the Blue Mountains Conservation Society have raised significant concerns not just about the change but also about the complete lack of community and stakeholder consultation that went into the bill.
Like Labor, the Blue Mountains Conservation Society is concerned about the proposed power for the Minister to approve projects outside the plan of management. It has raised concerns that the bill appears to give the Minister powers, for instance, to approve infrastructure projects in areas where they are currently not allowed under a reserve's plan of management as long as it meets the test of being for "visitor management", which is a term not defined in the bill, and with a public consultation period of as little as 14 days. The National Parks Association of NSW has also raised concerns about the Government's plans to open up national parks to donations, stating:
Protecting nature and managing national parks is a core public service, which should be funded out of the state's revenue base. It is inappropriate for a Government agency to act as a pseudo charity in competition with the NGO sector. Apart from this basic philosophical stance it invites NSW Treasury reducing their budget to offset any additional income.
I could not agree more. Unlike the Coalition, the Labor Party has a proud history of protecting the State's national parks. In 1944 the McKell Labor Government created the Kosciuszko National Park. The Wran Labor Government built on that legacy and saved the northern rainforests, massively expanded the Blue Mountains National Park and banned sand mining in coastal national parks. Labor under Bob Carr continued to fight to protect and expand our national parks, saving coastal forests in the north-east and south-east of New South Wales, establishing marine parks and expanding the State's national parks by over two million hectares. The Carr Government did not stop there because it also passed the Threatened Species Act 1995 to protect native plants and animals.
What has the Government delivered after 10 years in power? It has a pretty embarrassing record. While Labor in government created 3.05 million hectares of new national park, the Coalition Government has delivered just 300,000 hectares. That is not even 10 per cent of what Labor delivered. The Government's embarrassing record does not stop there. As mentioned before, this Government has cut more than $100 million from the budget of the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. It was so embarrassed by its record on funding the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service that it has given up providing standalone budget figures. Among this Government's shocking record on national parks is its proposal that the F6 motorway could run through the first national park ever declared in Australia, Sydney's Royal National Park.
In 2016 the Government unveiled a plan to add 75,000 hectares of State forest to the national parks estate only to slash that to 23,000 hectares after the Government caved to some classic Nationals grandstanding. Let us not forget that this Government is still proposing the inundation of 65 kilometres of the World Heritage protected Blue Mountains National Park as part of the proposed project to raise the Warragamba Dam wall while not solving the problem of flooding in western Sydney. With a record like that, how can the House possibly give the Minister the power to overrule plans of management or reduce time lines for public consultation? The community simply cannot trust this Government to protect the State's national parks. I acknowledge the work of my colleague the Hon. Penny Sharpe, shadow Minister for the Environment, who is holding this Government to account over its poor treatment of the State's national parks. Until the Government rips the nonsense it is attempting to perpetrate on the people of this State out of the bill, the Opposition simply cannot support it.
Dr MARJORIE O'NEILL (Coogee) (18:34:28):
I make a contribution to debate on the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021. The people of the Coogee electorate are an incredibly socially inclusive and environmentally engaged community. However, nothing is raised more with me than the state of our natural environment and the terrible track record that this Liberal Government has had on it. Among other things, this broad bill proposes a number of positive initiatives to better protect biodiversity in New South Wales. However, the bill also makes substantial and far-reaching changes that will cause irreparable damage to the management of national parks in this State. Such changes cannot be supported. Those changes will centralise the decision-making power with the Minister, which is now standard procedure with this Government and that will disenfranchise academic and local experts. Given the extent of this change, there should have been a far greater consultation process involving all stakeholders, including the local community, traditional owners, unions and environment groups. That has not occurred.
I stand with my Opposition colleagues in opposing the bill in its current form. We will seek to remove the unacceptable elements of the bill in the Legislative Council and tighten some of the provisions, including the guarantee that First Nations boards of management will be consulted and given an approval role in some of the changes. The creation and protection of national parks is core Labor business and is part of our proud Labor tradition of environmental conservation. I stand in this Chamber today to help to continue that legacy and join my colleagues in protecting our precious parks and national parks from this Government and its appalling record on the environment and national parks. The bill is a key opportunity to talk about the precious national parks in New South Wales and the importance of protecting those areas in the future.
I note that Labor supports some elements of the bill such as protecting an Asset of Intergenerational Significance, including providing a method to extend this protection to Aboriginal cultural heritage sites; enabling the land where those assets are to be kept secret where necessary to ensure its conservation; providing penalties for offences against land declared an Asset Of Intergenerational Significance; and enabling the Minister or, for certain land, an Aboriginal land council to create, acquire, hold, sell or otherwise deal with carbon sequestration rights in land that is created or protected under the Act; as well as enabling the Gardens of Stone as a State conservation area.
As I foreshadowed at the start of my contribution, the bill will make substantial and far-reaching changes to the management of our national parks. Quite frankly, they are dangerous changes that mean the bill cannot be supported. The bill would enable the Minister to create biodiversity credits for management actions carried out on land reserved or acquired under the Act. There are significant questions around the integrity of the current Biodiversity Offsets Scheme, which I note has been the subject of parliamentary inquiries, internal investigations and an ICAC investigation. Currently the scheme facilitates a net loss of biodiversity in New South Wales and it beggars belief that the bill allows the Minister to unilaterally create biodiversity credits within a framework that has already facilitated the loss of biodiversity and will undoubtedly lead to worse environmental outcomes.
The bill seeks to reduce the minimum exhibition period for draft plans of management from 90 to 28 days as well as reduce the steps involved in considering and making a plan. Plans of management for national parks are strategic and regulatory plans that dictate what can and cannot be done in national parks. Twenty-eight days is not long enough for local communities, councils, stakeholder groups and First Nations organisations to have adequate consultations on changes in those important plans. The bill also seeks to provide a power for the Minister to approve a project that is inconsistent with a plan of management for visitor infrastructure and conservation actions of a class prescribed in the regulations. Given the importance of the plans of management and the history of the New South Wales Government in this space, that inclusion will undoubtedly lead to unacceptable developments in national parks. The provision is designed to avoid public scrutiny and in too many cases would allow the bypass of a plan of management with the stroke of a pen by the Minister. Put plainly, this provision cannot be supported unless it is limited to emergency works.
The bill has been dropped on stakeholders and into this Parliament with no consultation or justification for the outlandish monopoly powers it proposes. While the bill contains some worthy provisions, it cannot be supported in its current form. Labor has done work in this space for generations and understands what is needed to protect our national parks and our precious environment. The creation and support of national parks are core Labor businesses that are a long part of our proud legacy. That is why we cannot support the bill in its current form.
Mr TIM CRAKANTHORP (Newcastle) (18:40:16):
The National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021 is an omnibus bill that proposes the establishment of the Gardens of Stone State conservation area and a number of other positive initiatives to better protect biodiversity in New South Wales. However, the bill also makes substantial and far-reaching changes to the management of national parks that cannot be supported. Given that the proposed changes will reduce consultation and give more power to the Minister, there should have been a consultation process involving all stakeholders: the local community, traditional owners, unions and environment groups. That has not occurred. The Opposition opposes the bill in its current form. We will seek to take out the unacceptable parts of the bill in the Legislative Council and tighten some provisions, including a guarantee that First Nations boards of management will be consulted to give approval to some of the changes. The creation and protection of national parks are core Labor businesses that form a long and proud Labor legacy that its members will defend. Unfortunately, the Government has an appalling record on the environment and national parks.
The bill contains supportable parts such as protecting Assets of Intergenerational Significance, including providing a method to extend this protection to Aboriginal cultural heritage sites; enabling the land where these assets are to be kept secret where necessary to ensure its conservation; providing penalties for offences against land declared an Asset Of Intergenerational Significance; enabling the Minister or, for certain land, an Aboriginal land council to create, acquire, hold, sell or otherwise deal with carbon sequestration rights in land that is created or protected under the Act; as well as enabling the use of digital images and data for compliance and enforcement actions related to vehicles entering or using a park. The bill will also provide the power to make regulations on the monitoring and reporting of the ecological health of parks and will establish the Gardens of Stone as a State conservation area.
Protecting Indigenous cultural heritage on the sites is very important. Only last week I met with an employee who was assessing a vandalised site on Sydney Harbour. It was very depressing and distressing to hear that there had been this vandalism, that it was common and that the authority is very understaffed and finds it difficult to get to all the sites. The Government needs to have a good look at that as well. Parts of the bill that Labor cannot support include enabling the Minister to create biodiversity credits for management actions carried out on land preserved or acquired under the Act; reducing the minimum exhibition period for draft plans of management from 90 to 28 days and reducing the steps involved in considering and making a plan; providing a power for the Minister to approve a project that is inconsistent with a plan of management for visitor infrastructure and conservation actions of a class prescribed in the regulations; and establishing an open-ended charitable entity, which will enable tax-deductible donations to national parks modelled, in part, on the United States' National Park Foundation. That is not a path we should be going down. Stakeholders of the bill had quite a lot to say. The National Parks Association of NSW is not impressed by the reduction of the exhibition period from 90 to 28 days:
POMs [plans of management] are detailed, complex and extremely important strategic plans. They collectively set the management framework for nearly 10% of the state of NSW. They are not development applications, and the adoption of the DA standard of 28 days public exhibition is manifestly insufficient to enable the community to consider and respond to the proposals embedded in each POM.
On the power for a Minister to approve projects outside the plan of management, the National Parks Association NSW said:
This provision appears designed to avoid public scrutiny of development proposals affecting national parks and reserves.
That is not something we want either. On biodiversity offsets, the National Parks Association NSW said:
The entire biodiversity offset system in NSW is currently subject to a parliamentary inquiry and investigation by ICAC. It is a broken system that invites corruption, and even when operated accordingly to the rules results in a net loss of the state's biodiversity values.
That is not something we want to adopt. On opening up National Parks to donations, the association said:
Protecting nature and managing national parks is a core public service, which should be funded out of the state's revenue base.
I could not agree more. Labor has a magnificent record and legacy on national parks. In 1944 the McKell Labor Government created Kosciuszko National Park. From 1984 to 1987 the Wran Labor Government saved the northern rainforests, massively expanded the Blue Mountains National Park and banned sand mining in coastal national parks. In 1997 the Carr Labor Government saved coastal forests in north‑east and south‑east New South Wales, established marine parks, created over two million hectares of new national parks estate and introduced the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 to protect native plants and animals. In 2010 the Rees Labor Government protected over 100,000 hectares of river red gum forests and wetlands, and provided funding assistance for affected workers and regional communities.
In light of our great record and the Government's terrible cuts to National Parks and Wildlife Services [NPWS], I suggest that this Government does not have a great attitude to national parks and seems to have an ideological problem with expanding and providing for them adequately. We have seen nearly $120 million cut from NPWS over two years in 2016‑17 and 2017‑18, and it previously suffered a $24 million budget cut in 2014‑15. The Government should be looking to Labor's legacy and what we have to say on national parks. If the Government is fair dinkum it would adopt our amendments to give real authenticity to its desire to do something for our national parks.
Ms TAMARA SMITH (Ballina) (18:47:56):
On behalf of The Greens, I contribute to debate on the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021. Some parts of the legislation are good and some parts are appalling. We cannot support the bill in its current form without serious amendments. We are seeing a theme of parks and national parks having to pay for themselves, which I find ludicrous when we consider what taxpayer dollars should do for us in this State. The absolute overwhelming majority of citizens care about the environment, want to spend time in nature and love our national parks, so it strikes me as strange that those trees and that biodiversity are expected to pay for themselves. I do not understand it but we are seeing it more and more. The Greens acknowledge the parts of the legislation that will strengthen protections for biodiversity and our great national parks, but I make clear that we do not accept quite a few of the provisions.
The bill (1) changes the statutory process for preparing plans of management for national parks and reserves, (2) enables the Minister to approve actions that are not consistent with an existing plans of management, (3) enables the Minister to create and trade carbon sequestration rights over national parks and reserves, (4) enables the Minister to create and trade biodiversity credits for works carried out in national parks and reserves, (5) establishes a trust to accept tax deductible donations on behalf of the National Parks and Wildlife Service, (6) provides administrative powers in relation to areas declared as Assets of Intergenerational Significance, (7) provides administrative powers to monitor and report on the ecological health of parks, (8) provides administrative powers to use digital capture of motor vehicle details—which is welcome in my area—and (9) transfers and reserves land to create the Gardens of Stone State conservation area, which we also welcome.
The bill amends and interacts with several pieces of complex legislation, including the National Parks and Wildlife Act and the Biodiversity Conservation Act. The legal mechanisms it proposes warrant careful analysis and I commend The Greens Environment spokesperson, Cate Faehrmann, for her analysis and discussions with the Liberal‑Nationals, the Opposition and crossbench members to strengthen the bill to support better conservation. National parks conserve the most intact natural places in the country and the world. They harbour endangered plants, animals and unique ecosystems. They also help assure human wellbeing by protecting watersheds that provide drinking water, and store carbon, which naturally reduces climate change. Recent 2018 data tells us that there are approximately 60 million visits to national parks each year in Australia, generating nearly $18 billion in annual economic output and, as stated by the Minister in his second reading speech, providing 74,000 jobs. To me, that is the parks already supporting themselves.
We have no immediate concerns regarding items numbered (6) to (9) above. Indeed, we commend the New South Wales Government for the reservation of the Gardens of Stone State conservation area, the improved protections for Assets of Intergenerational Significance and the proposals for systematic monitoring of the ecological health of the protected area network. I welcome that and would like to see it extended beyond national parks to river catchments across the State. However, we have significant concerns about items (1) to (5). Our view is that whilst we understand that some tightening is required, substantial modification of item (1)—changes to the plans of management process—is needed to avoid unacceptable impact on the opportunity for meaningful engagement with community and stakeholders about the future conservation and management of individual parks. More and more people are expected to engage in a short window, sometimes at the end of the year. With such important issues and biodiversity at stake, that must be carefully looked at.
Items (2) to (5)—the introduction of a ministerial power to override plans of management outside the current emergency powers and amendment processes—are extreme and cannot be justified. We find the introduction of carbon and biodiversity credit schemes reprehensible. The idea that we would have the words "national park", "biodiversity offsets" and "biodiversity credit schemes" in the same breath says it all. It says to me that the Minister has had to sit down with the far right and the National Party to make a deal. Having good practices in the bill that support conservation and then talking about biodiversity offsets, which are licences to kill biodiversity, is ludicrous, absurd and frightening, and should be wholly excised from the bill. We will be making that case in the other place. The establishment of a tax-deductible trust also has no place in the bill.
We are seeing all over the world that temperatures in national parks are increasing at rates never seen before and that precipitation is decreasing. In the past decade, fires have taken a massive toll on the biodiversity of Australia's national parks and on all the species that are part of their magnificent ecosystems. I will not belabour that point, which has been made by all members on this side. Those ecosystems need a lot of protection. More than 500 national parks in Australia cover 28 million hectares, or close to 4 per cent of the country. The commitment by the environment Minister and now Treasurer to expand the national parks trust is very welcome. But there is no point in expanding the trust, the area of national parkland, if what one is doing in there is crazy. Offsetting, underfunding and trying to make the parks pay for themselves is crazy.
We have sadly seen funding slashed for national parks in this country and in our State, which has put us historically in doubt regarding our ability to meet the targets we agreed to as a nation in the international Convention on Biological Diversity. We committed to protect 17 per cent of terrestrial environments by 2020, and we are nowhere near that. It was not that long ago we saw a push to de-gazette a national park in this State, the Murray Valley National Park. Funding cuts have a major spill-on effect, limiting the ability to expand national parks to include critical endangered habitats. The loss of staff expertise has been outlined in this debate. In my electorate, National Parks and Wildlife Service staff lament that they do not have the time to do their conservation work as there is so much pressure on them to manage the tourism impacts to parks and reserves. I have seen the impact of those staffing cuts in the past six years. It hurts the environment because they do not have time to do the important work at which they are experts. It is also counterintuitive.
A recent World Wildlife Fund study found that 82 per cent of Australians are worried about future generations growing up with less access to nature and wildlife, and 70 per cent would like more national parks and nature reserves. I am pleased that our current environment Minister has sought to increase that. I particularly acknowledge the Arakwal people of the Bundjalung nation and their tireless efforts in creating the Arakwal National Park in the Ballina electorate. I give a huge shout-out to all the conservation groups in New South Wales that advocate continuously on behalf of nature. There are too many to name, but I particularly recognise the Nature Conservation Council and the North East Forest Alliance in my area. I give a huge shout-out to all the amazing National Parks and Wildlife Service staff in my electorate for all of the work they do to conserve nature.
I sincerely hope that in 100 years, and in 500 years, someone in this House will be reading out these national parks and many more in the Ballina electorate: Arakwal National Park, Lennox Head Aboriginal Area, Bundjalung National Park, Cape Byron State Conservation Area, Nightcap National Park, Broken Head Nature Reserve, Tyagarah Nature Reserve, Mount Jerusalem National Park, Ballina Nature Reserve, Richmond River Nature Reserve, National Parks and Wildlife Discovery Program - Northern Rivers, Broadwater National Park, Captain Cook Park, Goonengerry National Park, Victoria Park Nature Reserve and Boatharbour Nature Reserve. The Greens do not support the bill in its current form.
Mr ROY BUTLER (Barwon) (18:57:58):
It will come as no surprise to the environment Minister that I speak on the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021. I ask that the Minister address the concerns I raise in his reply speech. I have raised many issues with the Minister regarding national parks and State forests since being elected to this place, including National Parks and Wildlife Service staff conducting aerial culling of goats in parts of my electorate where the mustering of goats for the meat market forms a key part of the local economy. National parks have been dubbed a really bad neighbour in Barwon, not paying their portion of shared fencing costs, allowing feral animals to overrun parks and flow into neighbouring farms, allowing the proliferation of weeds to spread well outside park boundaries—the list goes on.
The latest purchase of farmland in the Far West for new national parks has people in all camps asking questions, from the pro-parks camp to the pro-conservation-alongside-farming camp. They are all asking the same question: How can the National Parks and Wildlife Service possibly manage this additional land without additional staffing resources? It is already struggling. The Community and Public Sector Union is asking the same question—500,000 hectares of additional national parkland and no additional staff members to manage it. The recent feathers in the cap of the environment Minister's national parks buy-up—Avenel and Mount Westwood stations, 150 kilometres north of Broken Hill; and Koonaburra Station, 140 kilometres south-west of Cobar—are both within the Barwon electorate. Those purchases fall within the Liberal-Nationals Government's plan to expand the national parks landholdings by 400,000 hectares—double what the Government initially set out to acquire.
The Government has now acquired 520,000 hectares of land since August 2019. The majority of those acquisitions have been agricultural land in the Far West. As taxpayers, we rightfully deserve to be able to ask questions about those acquisitions, namely: How much did the Government pay for it? A few numbers have been kicking about, none confirmed by National Parks or the Minister, but most people settle on around $30 million for the last tranche of properties. Through his department, the Minister has not answered questions asked about the cost by my colleague in the other place. It is a huge amount of money, and I do not begrudge any landholder who willingly sells their property getting a good price. But having a government player in the property sales market has priced young pastoralists out of the market. In previous sales to the National Parks and Wildlife Service, the Government has significantly exceeded offers that young farmers have put on the table and priced them out of the market.
"Now, Roy," I hear some say, "in an open market the highest bidder has the right to win on the day." My response to that is: At what price to the local community? On average, those pastoral properties put back half a million dollars annually into the local community, as a base. In good times that can rise significantly. There are jobs on the property and in the local community for contractors and supply businesses. Overnight, those jobs and customers have disappeared. The Minister has said that economic activity will be replaced through ecotourism and four-wheel drive tracks. The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers [SFF] Party strongly supports access to State forests and national parks for recreation. I know the Minister enjoyed mountain biking with the member for Orange. However, history and experience from elsewhere in New South Wales shows us that the money brought in from tourism does not even come close to making a dent in the economic loss for communities in Barwon.
I am not saying that those important ecosystems do not deserve to be protected. They do, but National Parks and Wildlife Service staff are not the only ones capable of such work. Graziers and farmers are great caretakers of our land. Members who are sceptical should look up the Enterprise Based Conservation Program. It was started initially as a pilot program to see whether a payment-based conservation scheme could work on private properties, and it did. Landholders managed designated conservation areas on their properties. Contracts stipulated the conservation outcomes and management techniques, and landholders were paid a small fee for meeting the requirements. Weed management, pest and feral animal control, and soil erosion were all part of the deal—things that we know from experience, having national parks as neighbours, they are not great at keeping on top of.
The Government holds the data and case studies from those programs, and it is a proven model. It is a win‑win for conservation and farmers. Farmers are able to diversify their income, building resilience for dry times and ensuring valuable environmental assets are conserved for future generations. Yet instead of paying small annual fees to farmers, setting up conservation agreements and allowing farms to remain productive, the Government is spending millions of tax dollars to acquire properties with many questions unanswered. On one level, it is poor economic management; on another, it shows the arrogance of the environment department boffins in Sydney. There absolutely is a proven better way, and it is not the buy-up.
In another part of my vast electorate sits Baradine, which was once a bustling timber worker village. The timber workers of Baradine earned a living cutting cypress pine. It is pretty good stuff—resistant to termites, making it ideal for building houses. Bob Carr ended Baradine's fortunes with the stroke of a pen. He declared 350,000 hectares of the Pilliga iconic. It took a major employer out of the town, but it also killed off some of the biodiversity. Some areas of the Pilliga are now so locked up that species that should be found there are no longer there. Reports from the Government prove that statement. We must again question why the National Parks and Wildlife Service staff think they are the only ones who can manage land for environmental purposes. I ask that the Minister consider the Baradine experience when making environmentally focused decisions. He does not want a reputation like Bob Carr has in Baradine.
It would be remiss of me, as a member of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party, not to talk about the benefits of volunteer conservation hunting on suitable public land. It might shock members to know that volunteer conservation hunters perform beneficial environmental work and save the taxpayer money. They also spend money in local economies, helping business to continue and providing more employment—shocking, that, for a group of people some parties in this place like to demonise. It costs the taxpayer over $3,000 per hour for aerial shooting to occur. In one example that the SFF has uncovered, government-employed aerial shooters spent 40 minutes hunting down just one deer. I urge the Minister to work with the SFF on a plan and process that would give access to volunteer conservation hunters to assist in pest management and control in suitable national parks across New South Wales. Such a plan would be a massive win for the Government bottom line—something that I know will prick up the Minister's ears as Treasurer—and for Government plans to eradicate pests in parks.
I take this opportunity to talk about the establishment of an Aboriginal ranger program in western New South Wales, which the Minister went close to talking about in his second reading speech. The program, which I have lobbied for and will continue to lobby for, must be well resourced and well funded with recurrent funding, rather than by way of another grant process. The Minister should look to the Federal Government's Working on Country program, which predominately operates in northern Australia and currently supports over 118 ranger groups and funds over 831 full‑time equivalent jobs. Aside from the many environmental benefits of Aboriginal rangers, the ranger jobs have many social and economic benefits.
A report commissioned by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet found that Aboriginal land and sea management delivers up to $3 worth of environmental, social and economic value for every $1 spent. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have reported flow-on benefits, including increased role models, better mental and physical health, strengthening of culture, women's empowerment and more. With over 16 per cent of people living in the Barwon electorate identifying as Aboriginal, an Aboriginal ranger program would have enormous benefits to my communities. I again encourage the Minister to establish such a program in New South Wales.
Given that the substantial purchases of new parks are in regional New South Wales and will take money away from local economies, the benefits of biodiversity offsets need in some way to be directed to regional New South Wales developments. If biodiversity offsets are part of this bill, it needs to be made clear that developments that are of public good in regional New South Wales are able to access these offsets to facilitate the developments going ahead. This change could make the difference between regional developments with a clear benefit to a community going ahead or not. Minister Kean is a nice bloke, and I get along with him well. He is the type of bloke that if he and his neighbour shared fence that was falling down, he would chip in half. Fair is fair, after all. I make a simple request of him today: Get the National Parks and Wildlife Service to be a good neighbour. Get it to pay half of the shared fence costs, both materials and installation. Address the outrageous situation we have now where the National Parks and Wildlife Service pays less than half the cost of the fencing materials.
Mr MATT KEAN (HornsbyTreasurer, and Minister for Energy and Environment) (19:06:18):
— In reply: I thank the member for Port Stephens and acknowledge her longstanding commitment to the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the environment more broadly. Her points were well made. I will work with the Hon. Penny Sharpe, who is leading for the Opposition in the other place, to address a number of those concerns via amendment. I thank the members representing the electorates of Bathurst, Blue Mountains, Manly, Canterbury, Camden, Wyong, North Shore, Shellharbour, Miranda, Swansea, Barwon, Coogee, Newcastle and Ballina. I acknowledge the member for Barwon, given he is in the Chamber, for his contribution. I will address some of the points he raised shortly, and I will absolutely take up the issue of shared responsibility for fencing.
The National Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill 2021 makes important amendments to create the Gardens of Stone Reserves and, in doing so, delivers on the aspiration of a generation of conservationists. I take this opportunity to acknowledge the outstanding work of Keith Muir. There are few people more dedicated to our environment and to ensuring that we protect our most threatened and endangered species. He has devoted his life to this cause, and future generations will thank him for it. I recognise the concerns that he has raised. He has texted me personally, and I take his concerns and opinions very seriously. Again, we are working through those issues with the Opposition. I am confident that we will land this bill in a place where everyone is happy that the appropriate protections and governance are around our national parks. They are such important assets and need to be above politics.
I will touch on a couple of matters that have been raised. Whilst working through this bill, there were a number of changes within the Government. I took on the role of Treasurer. Whilst I had some engagement with this legislation, the level of engagement was not what it might have been. That said, I have spoken to a number of trusted environmental groups. I acknowledge the NSW Nature Conservation Council [NCC], under the outstanding leadership of Chris Gambian. In my time as environment Minister, he was my most trusted adviser on matters of the environment. He is honest and has integrity. If he can do something, he tells me; if he cannot, he lets me know. He has raised a number of these issues, and I will work through them with him to make sure that we land this bill.
The idea that the Government was somehow seeking to deviate from the plans of management is false. I make that very clear. There is a need to make sure that the plans of management are working to support our national parks, not the other way around. For minor and non‑commercial activities, such as ensuring the National Parks and Wildlife Service replaces a walking track that is unsafe or builds kids' play equipment, it is appropriate to have a faster process to deal with that, so that our parks are a drawcard to all people, including families with young children. That is how we will encourage more people to care about the environment.
I am such a committed environmentalist and I am committed to national parks. My family would holiday in national parks. I did not come from a family with great means. What means my parents had, they pumped into our education, which meant that holidays were spent in our national parks camping, kayaking and picnicking. They were places for family events. I go there today and I see new families experiencing the joy of our national parks, attracted by the visitor infrastructure and kids' playgrounds. I am hoping that will be the gateway to creating a whole new generation of environmentalists and people who will love our national parks. If they ever get an opportunity like I had—and hopefully like the member for Port Stephens may one day have—they too will be great advocates and champions for our national parks and our environment.
The bill makes several changes to modernise the National Parks and Wildlife Act to ensure that the National Parks and Wildlife Service can continue to do its job to protect our precious natural environment and ensure that the parks estate is available to all. National parks are not just the domain of conservationists and environmentalists, although they play an important role. We need to make sure that national parks are there for everyone, which is what I am trying to achieve with this bill. I note the comments relating to this Government's record on conservation, which I want to address. It was a Coalition government in New South Wales that established the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Coalition governments have a strong record in conservation and protecting our environment, and I hope that is a record that I have revived in my time as the environment Minister.
I correct the record and outline exactly what this Government has delivered for national parks, particularly in the face of differing information from my political opponents today. The National Parks and Wildlife Service currently has the largest budget in its history. I am proud to have fought for that and delivered it. It also has more staff and firefighters than it has ever had. Since 2019 the Government has added nearly 400 staff. We have made two of the largest acquisitions in the history of national parks. When they are gazetted, we will have added over 500,000 hectares to the national park estate during the time that I have been the Minister. That is a significant addition. My deputy chief of staff will correct me if I am wrong, but we have increased the national park estate by over 5 per cent in the time that I have been the Minister.
The Government has made significant additions to the national park estate, and the purchases have been targeted towards areas of high conservation value. The member for Barwon knows that the Narriearra Caryapundy Swamp National Park protects wetlands that we think will qualify for Ramsar listing. It is a key bird‑breeding ground, and it is something that will greatly enhance our national park network. It is not just about conserving the area—and I understand the concerns about locking up and leaving—but also building visitor infrastructure to attract tourists to help diversify the economy of Tibooburra. We want to see more people travelling to the regions and seeing the spectacular sights of our State, with its beautiful, natural environment.
The National Parks and Wildlife Service is the first agency in the world to commit to zero extinctions on the national park estate. Again, that is something I am proud to have spearheaded. We are delivering the largest investment in visitor infrastructure in national park history. We are spending about $150 million to upgrade walking trails, bike tracks and campgrounds—the visitor experience—which will encourage people to visit our national parks and visit the regions. It will help them fall in love with these important environmental assets so that they too can be champions of and advocates for our environment. We have launched a world-class ecological health monitoring framework. We are delivering the largest feral animal control program ever undertaken in our national parks. We have returned six extinct species to our national parks, including the bilby and the numbat, which has been missing for around a century. This is important conservation work and I am very proud that we have delivered it.
The member for Port Stephens referred to the proposed establishment of a charitable trust. It is not uncommon for protected-area agencies to have dedicated charitable foundations, which are designed to raise additional funds and not to replace core funding. There are a number of philanthropists who care about national parks and want to do their bit to support the Government's important work in conserving nature and protecting national parks. One example is the United States National Park Service, one of the world's most eminent protected‑area agencies. We are basing our model on what they do in the US. We can learn a lot from other jurisdictions that protect land such as Yellowstone National Park and Yosemite National Park.
Using private donors to support government investment enhances those national parks. It does not diminish them, and it does not take away from the need for government to spend significant money protecting those national parks. The National Parks and Wildlife Service currently works with a range of philanthropic organisations, including the Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife, the WWF, The Nature Conservancy and others. These organisations and others have made valuable contributions to national parks and these partnerships will continue. However, the bill aims to deliver a dedicated charity for the National Parks and Wildlife Service—a body that can raise philanthropic funds for our parks to add to government funding, allowing us to do even more.
A number of members referred to the Biodiversity Offsets Scheme. The bill aims to provide for a gold‑standard biodiversity credit that is created by important restoration work on our national parks and on land that can be added to our national parks. The credit provisions would help achieve this outcome. However, I understand many stakeholders wish to consider this further, and I am happy for that dialogue to occur through a separate process. We will work through these issues in the upper House. Those issues may be sent to a committee for consideration while we pass the substance of the bill, particularly the creation of the Gardens of Stone National Park.
Hansard
The issue of the digital parks pass was also raised, and I note the concerns about equitable access. The National Parks and Wildlife Service will convene a working group in early 2022 to review the operation of the digital parks pass with a view to removing any impediments to the uptake of concession benefits. This will include pensioner and disability groups. I note that the member for Port Stephens raised the issue. My office has been inundated with those concerns and we will work through that to make sure we get it right. Again, we want to ensure that everyone can access our national parks, including our seniors and those living with a disability. I just have been handed a note and can inform the House that I have been under-promising and over-delivering on how much new national park estate I have created. On my watch, since 2019 the Government has realised a 7.8 per cent increase to the national parks estate when all the acquisitions are gazetted; that is a small caveat for .
TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Mr Greg Piper):
Would the Minister repeat the number?
Mr MATT KEAN:
It has been a 7.8 per cent increase to the national parks estate. I am a great admirer of Bob Carr and Bob Debus for the work they did for our national parks. However, unlike the Carr administration, we have not forcibly acquired State forests or anything like that. We have actually gone out on the private market and purchased areas of national park. We have prioritised purchasing key conservation assets and there is a big difference in our approach to getting the job done.
In relation to our joint management with Aboriginal owners under part 4A of the National Parks and Wildlife Act, I have been proud to hand back land to Aboriginal owners at both Mount Grenfell and Nuntherungie. The proposed bill has the potential to deliver significant economic benefits to Aboriginal owners through carbon and biodiversity credits, and philanthropic partnerships. We have included specific provisions so relevant provisions do not commence until further consultation occurs. However, we are happy to look at amendments which further address the relationship with part 4A land.
I thank the member for Barwon for his remarks. I assure him that new national parks in western New South Wales will deliver economic benefits for regional communities. They provide a great opportunity to diversify those economies. However, I understand the concerns in relation to taking productive land away. We have got to get the balance right. My plan to invest in significant infrastructure to draw tourist dollars into the regions is part of meeting that objective. We have almost finished a very exciting new campground at Narriearra. Perhaps I can find some time to get up there and take the member for Barwon to see the spectacular landscape. The member for Port Stephens would be very welcome to join us. We probably need to go up in autumn, after the rains have come through—
Ms Kate Washington:
Mr Temporary Speaker, you are allowed to come too.
Mr MATT KEAN:
Everyone is allowed to come. We can throw a party up in Narriearra Caryapundy Swamp, but we want to go after the rains have come as the landscape just comes alive. It is incredible. I had the opportunity to see it just after the rains when we purchased it. You are driving through desert and then this whole landscape just explodes with life. It is absolutely incredible. We will be investing in campgrounds, walking trails and other infrastructure at our other additions to the estate, as well as obviously providing extra staff. I am determined that new parks in western New South Wales will mean even more jobs and economic benefits to those communities, and I very happy to work with the member for Barwon to achieve that aim. I appreciate that there are particular issues in the west of the State and will continue to support the member and his community to ensure they get the maximum benefits out of this investment in our environment.
I note the concerns that have been raised, particularly in relation to biodiversity offsets, priority approvals, the application of Assets of Intergenerational Significance on part 4A land, and the administrative processes pertaining to plans of management. I understand amendments will be moved in the other place arising from ongoing discussions with members and stakeholders. I very much welcome the constructive way in which those members, particularly the shadow Minister, has worked with me and my office and I look forward to working constructively on those amendments.
I will finish where I started by stating that our national parks need to be above politics. They need to be there for everyone in the State to enjoy, regardless of ability, age or background. We need to encourage people to get out and enjoy these spectacular assets. They are absolutely incredible. If we want to ensure that future generations will stand up for our environment, then there is no better way than getting them to appreciate our national parks. That is what I was trying to do with this bill. I understand there are some things that need to be worked through, and we will do that constructively in the upper House with the Labor Party, The Greens and the crossbench. But I think what all members want to see here is a great outcome, with national parks that protect our environment, protect our threatened and endangered species, provide a wonderful experience for everyone in this State and become a tourist drawcard in New South Wales.
I look forward to achieving those objectives, with the moving of appropriate amendments. However, the opportunity to create the Gardens of Stone National Park, which for nearly 80 years the conservation movement has fought for, is one too big to pass up. I urge Legislative Council members to get this bill through that House and back to this House to pass it. We can park anything that is causing concern to stakeholders and members in this place and refer it to the committee process or take it off the table. However, let us focus on the things that we can all agree on—namely, the Gardens of Stone and ensuring that the governance framework around our national parks is fit for purpose. I commend the bill to the House.
TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Mr Greg Piper):
The question is that this bill be now read a second time.
Motion agreed to.
Third Reading
Mr MATT KEAN:
I move:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to.
Search
Call 02 9909 2594
northshore@parliament.nsw.gov.au
