Hansard debates

Mr NORTHE (Morwell) (16:20:21): It gives me pleasure to rise this afternoon to speak on the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Amendment Bill 2019. Obviously this bill has been regurgitated in this term of Parliament. I spoke on this bill, or a similar bill, in June of last year, as many other speakers did, but just to recap: this bill is for an act to amend the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 and to promote Victoria’s biodiversity by establishing objectives and principles of the act. It imposes additional obligations to consider biodiversity in decision-making, improves transparency and accountability and makes various other amendments to strengthen the act and to make consequential amendments to other acts and for other purposes. Previous speakers have referred to specific elements of the bill, and I will not be repetitive in going over old ground. I will speak to the bill more generally but from a local context as well. As all members have spoken about, the protection of our plants, our animals, our biodiversity is extremely important. Those protections should be enhanced where possible. It is important from an attraction and tourism perspective as well. I know from a statewide point of view this is vitally important, but also within my community in the Morwell electorate protecting those particular animal species and plant species and having that biodiversity is an attraction for locals and tourists alike. As an example, quite recently I was able to visit Tarra-Bulga National Park, in my community. It is just a fabulous destination—so pristine and beautiful. On a very cold Sunday I was just gobsmacked to see the number of tourists visiting that particular area undertaking some great walks. It is just beautiful scenery. I noticed a number of the visitors who were there at the time were actually international visitors as well, having a chat to a few of the people who were there. They travelled vast distances for the day. That is what such a beautiful place can do for communities—people will come and visit. So from that perspective it is important to protect what we have. The Morwell National Park is another great destination within the Morwell electorate. I will take the opportunity to congratulate the management of those particular areas, through Parks Victoria but also the friends of parks groups who do a lot of work on a volunteer basis and ensure that it is an attractive destination for so many people. As I mentioned in the debate on the previous bill, it is important that we do have a balance. Whilst it is important that we protect plants, animals and biodiversity, it is also important that we have regard for people, their livelihoods, their jobs and our communities. It is important that, for industries and businesses that work within those particular areas, there are challenges that do arise. If I can give an example, I guess the timber industry is one of those whereby on the one hand it is important to protect certain species and animals, but on the other hand we have an industry, we have jobs and we have employment. We know over time that there has been conflict—I guess that is an appropriate word. It is how we find that balance between ensuring that we do have industries, we do have employment and we do have jobs but also at the same time that we are not threatening our flora and fauna, our animal species, and we are making sure that our biodiversity is protected. I note that the minister in her second-reading speech said that the bill amends the act to ensure that it is stronger and it can more effectively protect Victoria’s biodiversity in the face of existing and emerging threats such as climate change. That is a fair enough statement; however, you do not want to cut off your nose to spite your face, for want of a better saying. What I mean by that is that you do not want to make the regulations and the legislation so onerous that they will potentially shut down or reduce an industry, because it does not necessarily mean that you are going to improve your overall environmental performance. So for example, if there was to be onerous legislation or regulation towards a particular industry, in this case the timber industry—and we can put those in place—but the demand for our timber and paper products did not reduce, then basically those same products would have to be sourced from somewhere. And generally if we see less timber harvesting in Victoria but still the same demand for timber and paper products, then the likelihood is that those products are going to have to be imported. They would be imported from destinations that have probably got less strenuous forestry stewardship regulations and do not have the same environmental regulations and legislation we have here. When you take into account, if that was to happen, the travel miles et cetera and less jobs, it would not necessarily lead to an improved environmental performance. So we need to be careful of that. I think that we need to be careful in other areas too. Again, I know there are competing interests sometimes, but one example that comes to mind is when the highway between Traralgon and Rosedale was being constructed. I understand that you have to manage the environment, the tree species that are there and the native vegetation, but against that a farmer lost a significant tract of land that was compulsorily acquired, which was prime agricultural land. That had a massive impact upon that particular farmer and his family. So again we have to consider not just the environmental cost but the economic cost and social cost to industries such as farming and timber. Again, the same thing happens with the quarry industry. We have a massive quarry industry in the Latrobe Valley, and it is important from the context of a statewide point of view. We have Maryvale Sand, Latrobe Valley Sands, Latrobe Valley Blue Metal and Matthews Quarries. They are all prominent employers within my electorate, but they are also significant suppliers to the state of Victoria. Credit to the government, there is some significant infrastructure investment going on in our state at the moment. We need to ensure we have got that material supply continually coming through. But what we are seeing at the moment is that some of those operations, some of those businesses, have a very limited life. They are all trying to grow and expand at the moment, but they are being stifled seemingly at first base. What I would say on that point is, in my view, we have departments and agencies working in silos. On one hand we are saying 'Economic development and jobs—wow, this is fantastic’, but on the other hand the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) are saying, 'Well, we’ve got all these problems over here’. We have to resolve these issues. It is not that they cannot be resolved, but we have to find a way to make sure that we are all working together for the best outcome for not only that industry and the workers but also from an environment perspective. But that is not happening at the moment, and those projects are being stifled. Again, I say that we should be making sure there is a balance going forward and that we are not impacting upon people, we are not impacting upon livelihoods and we are not impacting upon communities. We have to consider those as well as the environment. The reality is that if we do not resolve those issues, what will happen is Victoria will have to import material from other states, which is only going to lead to higher costs and a worse outcome for the environment. I know that is what none of us in this chamber want. So just to wrap it up, I am not opposed to the bill as it stands. There are some good provisions ensuring we have those protections for animals, plants, biodiversity and the environment, but we also at the same time should not forget people, jobs, communities and families who could be impacted by decisions related to this legislation.