Bills

Landscape South Australia Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 15 May 2019.)

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:59): I am proud to speak to the Landscape South Australia Bill. It is a much-needed birthday for the Natural Resources Management Act 2004. There is a whole range of reasons, which I will go into shortly, why it is a much-needed birthday, but just for the clarity of the house and for full transparency, my wife, who is an environmental scientist—as I have explained when I have spoken about natural resources before—was heavily involved in the establishment of what was called in the day 'integrated natural resources management'. The interesting thing is that before I was even elected into parliament—yes, I was preselected in 2004 and then elected in 2006—I had a little bit of inside knowledge of the operations of the act and how it went forward in the so-called management of our natural resources.

One of the main issues for me as a farmer and landholder is that over time farmers and other landholders have switched off, basically. They have switched off to how this legislation, the old legislation, was supposed to assist us as members of parliament and assist the state and departments in managing natural resources across the state. In the old days, we had pest plant boards and soil management boards, and there was much more activity on the ground when these boards were in place.

Sadly, what has happened with natural resources management over time is it has morphed into a huge bureaucracy. I was saddened at the time when the 300-odd staff who work in this space, instead of being semi-independent to a degree—because I do not know if they were fully independent—were morphed into what at the time was the department of environment, water and natural resources and so essentially became part of the system.

I think that was a real tragedy and I have seen firsthand, at ground level, how the old legislation has not worked. As I indicated, my wife, Sally, was heavily involved in setting this up in the early days and I learnt firsthand that a lot of the rules around management of this act and management of resources were more about replacing plans and reviewing plans. These were extensive plans.

They would be either three-year plans or five-year plans that had to be reviewed. Volumes and volumes of work was done in this space. Sadly, as a practical person, it worries me that it was buried in paperwork and not on-ground works. Do not get me wrong: there have been some great projects, especially during the Millennium Drought, in regard to the river, land management on the River Murray flats and other proposals, but the problem is that over time those good projects have been too few and too far between.

As I said, the whole issue has caused a lot of frustration, so that, sadly, a lot of landholders, farmers and others have just switched off. In fact, during the Millennium Drought, when the shorelines of Lake Alexandrina and Lake Albert crept so many hundreds of metres out and Lake Albert nearly completely disappeared, there was an issue of boxthorns and other weeds on the floor of these lakes.

What happened at the time was that the department—and I am not putting a slur on the public servants at all—would go out there and GPS document where these weeds were, but by the time anything was about to happen to them the water came down the system and they were all covered with water, so it seemed fairly pointless. If you are going to GPS something, why not just deal with it with the appropriate chemical treatment that is safe to use in the particular environment you are dealing with, and get on with the job?

In regard to the legislation, this government, under Premier Steven Marshall and minister David Speirs, have a very strong focus on practical environmental outcomes that protect our environment and benefit our communities. They are the two key messages that need to go together. If we are to have one, we need to have the other one. We made it clear before last year's election that communities wanted a reform of natural resources management. We understood that there were good parts of NRM delivery in communities, especially in the regions where a lot of us on this side live, but most people felt disempowered regarding decisions and that natural resources management was not working effectively for them.

As I have indicated, the system became centralised and heavily over-regulated and focused more on nice business plans rather than on real outcomes for landholders. We have introduced a back-to-basics approach to land, pest plant and animal species, and water management. The Landscape South Australia Bill aims to replace the Natural Resources Management Act with the new landscape South Australia act. With this legislation in place, we will have resilient landscapes that are both biodiverse and sustainable.

We want communities, especially our regional and rural communities, to have a greater say on the management of our natural resources, and this legislation will provide more security and confidence in the system. There has been extensive consultation across the state and right across the South Australian community, with local members attending sessions and hearing directly what needs to change as part of the reform. The bill puts people at the heart of landscapes and deserves bipartisan support. Part of the reform will include cost-of-living relief through the capping of land and water levies by CPI. This is another way the Marshall Liberal government is delivering real outcomes for all South Australians.

One of at least 300 promises that we made to the electorate at the last election was that we would make sure that this bill would come into parliament within a year of taking office, and we did this, with minister Speirs introducing the bill. We have worked closely with the minister throughout this extensive reform, and I commend the huge body of work that has gone into the creation of this new landmark environmental bill.

Under the legislation, there will be eight new regional landscape boards, plus Green Adelaide, which will be the metropolitan body. Each board will be elected, with three members from the local community elected democratically. That is a great outcome for community input. Four members will be appointed by the minister, but they will also come from within the community. Another great aspect of this new reform is that the boards will be decentralised, putting the decision-making authority in the hands of the community—right where it needs to be.

In regard to the metropolitan area, Green Adelaide will focus on seven key priorities. It will work towards Adelaide becoming one of the most ecologically vibrant and climate-resilient cities in the world. Another great part of this bill is that, when it becomes an act, it will take away the requirement for extensive bureaucratic business plan development and focus on outcomes for our natural environment. The bill will streamline and simplify a range of processes to remove the red tape that gets in the way of more effective on-ground management, which community people have long been hanging out for.

There is a broader definition of 'landscape' under natural resources than we have seen in past legislation. The scope extends to an integrated hills-to-sea approach and defines the landscape as being made up essentially of three components: the natural and physical environment, including coasts and seas adjacent to the state's land; natural resources, including land and soil, water resources, native vegetation and animals and ecosystems; and the different ways people value and interact with the environment, including environmental, social, cultural and economic values.

This expansion into the coasts and seas will make sure that these areas have the care and attention they deserve. We also recognise the immense value of more than 5,000 kilometres of pristine coastline, which we seek to protect through our broad and strong environmental reforms. This broadened focus will enable the impact of on-land practices on our coasts to be considered in an integrated hills-to-sea approach to natural resources management through decision-making and investment as appropriate.

As I have indicated, these reforms will provide a simpler, more accessible system that will be delivered through a legislative framework that is more focused on outcomes rather than on prescriptive processes, with processes to be set out in regulations or policy to enable them to evolve as circumstances change. These reforms will also simplify the planning load for boards, who will prepare high-level five-year regional landscape plans, but they will be focused on five priorities for regional areas and seven for Green Adelaide. That localised management will enable boards to set their own budget and business priorities unless a change to land or water levy arrangements is proposed or the plan is inconsistent with the regional landscape plan.

There will also be a change in how natural resources management outcomes are delivered, with grassroots grants and the landscape priorities fund increasing partnership opportunities. Boards have a clear mandate to enter financial partnerships to deliver on-ground projects. Also, the prescriptive consultation requirements will be replaced with contemporary and effective consultation and engagement arrangements to enable communities to be engaged in a manner that is right for them and for engagement practices to evolve over time.

Unnecessary administrative processes will be replaced—for example, the requirement to gazette a notice as to the basis of assessment of water taken each year, with a provision for a notice to remain in place unless the basis is changed. Certainly, there will be futureproofing of how information is shared, ensuring transparency and making the method for publishing information technology neutral.

In regard to proposed boundaries, new regional boundaries will more strongly align with connections between regional communities and local government boundaries and better enable communities to work together in managing landscapes. The proposed boundaries have been shaped and informed by the extensive consultation period, completed last year, involving (and I apologise for my pronunciation) Alinytjara Wilurara, SA Arid Lands, Eyre Peninsula, Northern and Yorke, Murraylands and Riverland, Hills and Fleurieu, Limestone Coast, Kangaroo Island and obviously Green Adelaide for the metropolitan board. I have talked about how those board members will be selected.

As part of this process, there will be a clearly defined role in assisting with the management of the impact of native animals. The new state government elected last year, and I as part of it, are very keen to see some better outcomes in the management of native animals. I say this as someone who has farmed country next to a national park, Ngarkat, when I leased some country out the back of Tintinara, and also as someone who is well aware of the impact of overabundant native species in my community and in neighbouring communities—for instance, in the seats of the members for MacKillop and Finniss. This includes not only the invasion of animals like kangaroos and emus, especially during the drought, but also the ever-present corella invasion.

I think it is odd that local governments are the principal people in charge of corella control. I think it should become a focus of the government so that there is a more defined reproach. Hopefully, we can work towards that because corellas are a huge problem. I have spoken in this house before about the Coorong council. Sometimes, I have not been entirely kind about the Coorong council, my home council, but with regard to corella control they have been on the front foot. From what I understand, they have relocated well over 20,000 corellas to a better place, and we will never see them again.

Too many communities and local government sectors are nervous about taking this management issue head on. From neighbouring communities and my community throughout the Fleurieu, I know the destruction these birds can cause, whether it is on bowling greens at Milang or particular trees—and usually quite significant trees—in communities like Langhorne Creek and Strathalbyn in the neighbouring electorate of Heysen, where corellas cause major destruction. We really need to put in place some decent control.

Everyone knows my little baby is the management of long-nosed fur seals. These fur seals need management. Sadly, I see on so many levels that people are nervous to take on this issue as it should be. I have advocated that there should be a sustainable management plan, including a sustainable harvest and, yes, I will use the word, a cull of these seals. I do not think it would be an extremely hard cull per annum. I talked about it before, and I have presented to the Natural Resources Committee, in terms of the invasion of these seals of the inland waters of the state in the Coorong area and Lake Alexandrina and Lake Albert. I note that these seals have invaded well up the River Murray around Murray Bridge.

They are not native to the area; the local Aboriginal population will tell you that. I note the work that Darrell Sumner has done in raising this issue, and he copped quite a bit of grief over this. Not only is he a local Aboriginal elder but he is also a Vietnam veteran, and I certainly take notice of what he has to say; not everyone does, but they should. It frustrates me that we live in a society that appears too timid to do the hard yards and do what needs to be done.

I am sure that management plans could be put in place, similar to what happens in some areas of the United States, where there is a program of sustainable harvest. These seals are rounded up, taken away and then sent to a better place for the betterment of the community. Some people say that we do not need to cull animals. Well, if we do not need to cull animals why do we have rabbit culls, kangaroo culls and fox culls and shoot deer from helicopters? It is a simple fact of life that, unless we manage these pests appropriately, we will be invaded and overrun, as we have been over time with a lot of these overabundant native species.

I hope that, with the passing of this legislation, in the future we will not be so timid on all levels to take the appropriate steps we need to manage our landscape appropriately and get real outcomes on the ground with regard to pest plants and animals to make sure that we can get those outcomes for environmental and community benefit.

Mr McBRIDE (MacKillop) (12:19): I rise today to speak in support of the Landscape South Australia Bill 2019. The bill is a great next step forward to put the focus on practical management, protection and enhancement of the South Australian landscapes. I congratulate that the Minister for Environment and Water on the vision he has shown in developing the bill in response to a demand from a community that wanted to see reform in the way we manage our natural resources.

I also congratulate the minister on the efficient and effective way the bill has been developed and consulted upon within the community. I understand that the consultation process in the Limestone Coast, with meetings in Mount Gambier, Bordertown and Meningie, were all well attended and provided a valuable opportunity for the community to identify what they thought needed to change in relation to the management of our landscapes, all of which has occurred within a year since the election of the Marshall Liberal government, meeting another Marshall Liberal government election commitment.

The introduction of the bill signals yet another way the Marshall Liberal government has listened to the communities and, importantly, the regions of our state. It is fair to say that, despite the commitment and good work of our community representatives on NRM boards across the state, some sectors felt that natural resources management had become too centralised and had lost focus on the delivery of on-ground outcomes under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004.

Our government has listened to these concerns and ensured that we have developed a bill that has a new focus on the management of our landscapes. This is a focus that is particularly important for my electorate of MacKillop and the wider Limestone Coast, given that it is home to significant agricultural and natural assets and people committed to utilising, managing, sustaining and benefiting from these resources.

A key focus for the primary production businesses of the MacKillop electorate is optimising the productive potential of agriculture enterprises, such as cattle, sheep for wool and meat, viticulture, broadacre cropping, horticulture and forestry. Each of these industries and their associated processing industries are valued by the community of the electorate for the economic and social benefits they bring to the region and the character they bring to the landscape.

The new Landscape South Australia Bill will provide a framework for the involvement of the community and the management of these local assets to minimise impacts from pest plants and animals, protect and enhance the region's productive soils, protect valuable soils, protect valuable water resources, and maintain and enhance the productive potential of the landscape. This is important, as we know that the Limestone Coast region as a whole contributes about $5 billion per annum towards the South Australian GDP, with more than 30 per cent of the state's GDP produced by the Limestone Coast agricultural sector.

The volume of groundwater across the Limestone Coast is significant, with more than 1,300 gigalitres of water allocated, which is notably more than half of all the water allocated across the whole of South Australia. This groundwater, available in an upper unconfined aquifer and a deeper confined aquifer, provides a significant advantage to the productivity of the region and has enabled and supported the establishment of productive pastures, lucerne and other small seed crops, horticulture, forestry, viticulture and the dairy industry. The bill continues to provide the protective measures that regulate and manage the allocation of these waters.

The measures in the bill, which have been brought over from the NRM Act almost in their entirety, are important to protect the prescribed groundwaters of the region. Our government appreciates that a cautious and consultative approach is required for water reform and has been clear from the start of the process that water reform is not part of this landscape reform process. My electorate is known for and home to a great many natural assets, including unique and biodiverse tracts of native vegetation and associated unique and rare flora and fauna.

It is home to an extensive and unique system of wetlands and their associated ecosystems, including the Ramsar-listed wetlands of international importance: the Coorong and Bool Lagoon. The region is also home to an extensive, beautiful and rugged coastline, an extensive system of coastal lakes important to migratory birds, rare plants and animal species, and a range of flora and fauna. It is also an attractive tourism destination, and the landscape from the border to the coast holds significant cultural values for the Aboriginal people of the region.

The Landscape South Australia Bill provides an important framework to ensure that the community can be involved in decision-making that will sustain and capitalise on these unique assets while protecting them for the long term. The bill is a reflection of community needs and is clearly important for my electorate and for the rest of the state. It provides a framework for the back-to-basics approach, which was developed through consulting with the community.

It is a bill that gets back to what the community wants from the management of our landscapes: on-ground delivery. It supports seeking to ensure our pest plants and animals are controlled, our soils and landscapes are well managed and protected, and that our important water resources are managed in a sustainable way. The bill reflects contemporary views of our natural systems and the communities within them. The three components reflected in the bill include:

the natural and physical environment, including coasts and seas adjacent to the state's lands;

the different ways people interact with their environment, including environmental, social, cultural and economic values; and

natural resources, including land and soil, water resources, native vegetation, animals and ecosystems.

The emphasis on these three elements will enable landscape boards to take an inclusive values-based approach to the management of the whole of our landscapes and the natural resources that form part of them. This approach will assist in decision-making that will support investment and effort in landscape management. The benefits of replacing the Natural Resources Management Act 2004 with this Landscape South Australia Bill are several, including the bill's focus on ensuring that we have sustainable, biodiverse, and, importantly, resilient landscapes.

We know that it is more important than ever for our communities, their businesses and our landscapes to be adaptive to the increasingly variable climate. Importantly, the Landscape South Australia Bill provides an opportunity to restore community confidence in the management of our natural resources and provides a range of opportunities for our communities to have a say and, importantly, get involved in the management of our natural assets. The bill also delivers cost-of-living relief through the capping of land and water levies to CPI. This approach instils a responsible approach to levy raising and shows that our government has a strong and enduring appreciation and commitment to keeping household and business costs down.

The bill proposes new governance arrangements for managing our landscapes, which I know will be welcomed by many sectors of the community. There will be eight new regional landscape boards. In addition, there will be a metropolitan body known as Green Adelaide. Each board will provide for the democratic election of three members from the local community and four members who are also community members, appointed by the minister to ensure a good mix of skills and experience.

This approach provides opportunities for interested and suitably experienced and qualified individuals to be part of a landscapes board and provides the opportunity for balanced membership that comprises business and environmental representation in which the wider community can be confident. For my part and my experience, it will be important to ensure the board membership represents economic and environmental perspectives in a balanced way that enables wins for the economy and the environment.

Importantly, the structure of the bill is focused on ensuring the authority for decision-making sits with the community, moving away from a more centralised approach to management. I spent a term in the late 1990s on the South-East catchment water management board. This board operated under the now superseded Water Resources Act 1997. My time on the board was a time when important decision-making rested with the board. I am pleased that the bill seeks to return to this approach. I found that the local members of the board had a great corporate governance approach and control of its expenditure and fostered a strong approach that was accountable to the region and community.

I know how important it is to have a good range of skills and experience and how important it is to have the perspective of a cross-range of the community and of different sectors involved. The boards will have the task of preparing a five-year strategic high-level regional landscape plan and annual business plan. These time frames will enable the boards to be agile in addressing new and emerging priorities and monitoring and reporting on the outcomes delivered.

Additionally, under the bill, the board will have a clearly defined role in assisting with the management of the impact of native animals. The bill provides for a responsible and accountable approach to budgeting and income generation through levies. The bill provides for accountable processes for boards to enable them to propose changes to the base and quantum of the levy.

The government has listened to the community and the support was evident to ensure some levy funding is redistributed from the metropolitan area to regional South Australia. This will occur through the attribution of a percentage of Green Adelaide's land and water-based levies to the landscape priorities fund. The establishment of this new statewide landscape priorities fund will provide for this redistribution and enable investment in large-scale, integrated landscape projects to address subregional, cross-regional and statewide priorities.

The collection processes for land and water-based levies will remain much the same as at present, with land levies continuing to be collected through council rate notices. Councils can recover unpaid land levies at the same time as they recover unpaid council rates. Collection of land-based levies by local councils via council rates is the most cost-effective method of collecting levies in council areas, maximising the funding available for on-ground delivery.

The planning processes will be streamlined through this bill. The act will take away the requirement for extensive bureaucratic business plan development and focus on outcomes for our landscapes. I am pleased that the landscapes bill has sought to be less prescriptive in relation to processes. A benefit of this process is that the sometimes cumbersome planning process for boards will be simplified. Processes for planning will be set out in regulations to enable them to evolve and be responsive to the relevant issues and the needs of local communities. This is something that I know will please constituents I have heard from and who feel at times overconsulted and at times disillusioned by planning processes.

Partnerships are a key feature of the Landscape SA Bill. It encourages and requires the board to work in partnership to deliver beneficial landscape outcomes with a range of other organisations, volunteers, landholders and non-government organisations. The bill will support ensuring the delivery of a grassroots grants program, increasing partnership opportunities and embedding a direction so that boards have a clear mandate to enter financial partnerships to deliver on-ground projects.

On the matter of regional boundaries, the bill provides to improve their alignment. The new regional boundaries will now better align with communities and other traditional local government boundaries. As I frequently highlight in this chamber, the primary production sector is a fundamental and key driver for the economy of the regions and the state. The bill is enabling and has enshrined the principle that the boards will work in partnerships and collaboratively with primary producers and local communities to deliver real outcomes on the ground.

I look forward to any opportunities the implementation of the landscape scale restoration projects, through the landscape priorities fund, may deliver for our primary producers and the broader communities of my electorate and, indeed, the state. I also appreciate the role of the bill in providing a role for the board in the management of declared weeds, which are a threat to both our natural biodiversity and agricultural produce.

I see many benefits for our regions and communities in the implementation of this new landscape bill. I look forward to the passing of the bill and seeing it implemented across the state. I again congratulate the minister on his leadership in the delivery of this bill and commend the bill to the house.

Dr HARVEY (Newland) (12:33): I rise today to support the Landscape South Australia Bill 2019. This bill is a central pillar of the Marshall Liberal government's reform of natural resources management that will replace the Natural Resources Management Act 2004. Prior to the 2018 election, the feedback from the community indicated a loss of confidence in the Natural Resources Management system that had been in place since 2004. It is fair to say that in principle the NRM was supported at its introduction but had, over time, become over-regulated, increasingly centralised and overly focused on business plans rather than on practical outcomes.

In the lead-up to the 2018 election, the Marshall Liberal team committed to reform natural resources management with a back-to-basics approach to the management of land, animal and plant pests and water. The approach recognises the disconnect that had grown between the system of management of these resources and the communities that protect them and depend on them. The approach will decentralise the management system and empower local communities, giving them a greater say and greater control over the management of these resources.

Key to ensuring that this new system would achieve this end was the extensive process of consultation that was undertaken from June through October 2018. The early engagement phase, which included meetings concerning native title, primary production, regional councils and conservation of the environment, was followed by a series of 25 community forums across the whole state, including the regions and metropolitan area.

Groups, including land managers, primary producers, volunteer groups, industry groups, representatives of Aboriginal nations, other tiers of government and advocacy groups, were able to offer their views on their priorities for natural resources management. We believe that this important reform will create resilient landscapes that are both biodiverse and sustainable whilst also providing more confidence in the system of the management of these resources by giving our communities a greater say.

The bill sets out the establishment of eight new regional landscape boards: the Alinytjara Wilurara, South Australian Arid Lands, Eyre Peninsula, Northern and Yorke, Murraylands and Riverland, Hills and Fleurieu, Limestone Coast and Kangaroo Island, plus a board for the metropolitan body, Green Adelaide. These new regional boundaries have been drawn up to better collect communities of shared interests together into shared regions as well as accounting for the boundaries of local government areas. The process for drawing up regional boundaries was also informed to a significant extent by the views of regional communities collected through the consultation process that was carried out by the government in 2018.

Each board will consist of seven members. Three members will be elected by the community through a democratic election process, with the remaining four (also from the local community) to be appointed by the minister. This process of appointing members to the board will ensure that much greater control of boards is held by the local community whilst also ensuring that there is a good mix of skills, knowledge and experience.

Boards will provide strategic leadership on five priority areas set out in the regional landscapes plan, with seven priorities for Green Adelaide. The focus of the activities of the board will be to facilitate landscape management, in particular the management of soil and land, water resources and pest plant and animal control, as well as a defined role in the management of the impact of native animals. Boards will also have responsibility to set out their own budget in annual business plans, the income of which is gathered through land and water levies.

Every region will be responsible for administering a grassroots grant program to support the work of volunteer groups and other not-for-profit organisations on local projects. This will provide much greater opportunity for local partnerships and, in particular, encourage financial partnerships. Each region will also have a general manager who will be responsible to the board for managing the business of the board and who will be responsible for employing and managing staff. The board will repair water affecting activity control policies and landscape affecting activity control policies.

The bill cuts unnecessary red tape by removing requirements for extensive business plan development and will refocus attention on achieving substantive outcomes for the natural environment. Red tape reduction will also include a streamlining and simplification of other processes that in the past have restricted the achievement of real outcomes for the environment and the community.

A key commitment of this reform is to ease what had been a constantly increasingly burdensome financial cost to the community by capping the increases to land and water levies to CPI. This is just another example of the Marshall Liberal government fulfilling our commitment to deliver lower costs for South Australians. Increases in land and water levies by a greater rate than CPI would require the local board to apply, with final approval to be determined by the minister. If such an increase were approved, the minister would be required to table a report in the House of Assembly, where the proposal can be disallowed or amended.

In council areas, councils will continue to set the land levy rate under the Local Government Act based on the amount that they are required to contribute to the relevant landscape board. Outside council areas, the regional landscape board will gazette the levy rate and be responsible for collecting the levy. In areas where the land levy is charged based on property values, the CPI cap will limit increases to the rate set by councils.

As is currently the case, increases in the capital value of a person's home and the capital value in a council or region will impact the levy calculation. In the case of water levies, the cap will apply to the rate that is set by the minister and the minister will be able to approve increases to the water levy above CPI if they are satisfied that it is appropriate in the circumstances to do so, which would then be subject to the approval of parliament.

The minister will only be required to approve a business plan if it is inconsistent with the board's regional landscape plan or contains a land or water levy proposal to increase the land and water levies above CPI; to impose a levy in an area of the state where it has not previously applied; or to change the basis of the land or water levy. In these cases, there would be a structured process to put such a proposal to the parliament.

Land levies are collected through council rate notices and the collection of these fees by local councils is the most cost-effective method of collecting levies in these areas, maximising the funding available to achieve real outcomes for the natural environment. Importantly, though, levies collected in each region will be spent in the region, with the exception of a portion for the priority landscape scale projects and services that support cross-regional outcomes. This portion will be held in a new statewide landscape priorities fund.

It is important to note that the primary production sector is a significant driver of our state's economy and South Australians from right across the state, including the metropolitan area, benefit from the success of this sector. Therefore, it is important that this sector benefits as much as possible—of course, in a sustainable fashion—from these reforms. The primary production sector will benefit from these reforms to the management of our natural resources.

Firstly, the pressures of the costs of doing business for these businesses will be eased by the cap to levy increases. The principle that boards will work in partnership with primary producers in local communities to deliver real outcomes on the ground will be enshrined in legislation. The landscape priorities fund will deliver landscape scale restoration projects and provide greater opportunities for natural resources management focused programs and initiatives to benefit our primary producers.

The minister, boards and other decision-makers will be required to be informed by local knowledge and expertise, together with the best available science and planning, in making other decisions. Local landscape boards will be required to consider the local situation, conditions and other factors before requiring landholders to prepare and implement an action plan to address land degradation issues on their property.

There will be a greater ability for action to be taken quickly against neighbouring landholders who are failing to control pest plants and animals on their property and boards continuing to work alongside landholders to provide support, advice and a helping hand when needed to empower them to deliver sustainable primary production and natural resources management outcomes.

Green Adelaide, which is the metropolitan region, will have a particular focus on greening Adelaide's streets and parks, with priorities to manage our coastal environment, urban rivers and wetlands, green streets and parklands, water-sensitive urban design, controlling pest plants and animals, nature education, and flora and fauna in the urban environment. Green Adelaide will deliver initiatives to confront the challenges of a changing climate and urban density, and to pursue an agenda to transform our city into a world-leading, sustainable and green climate-resilient city.

This work will play an important part in ensuring Adelaide's livability, environmental sustainability and economic prosperity for years to come. This bill represents a fundamental shift in the management of our natural resources—a focus on real outcomes, rather than bureaucratic processes—and a shift to much greater control for local communities. This major reform also ensures that cost increases are kept to an absolute minimum.

It is easy when discussing reform of this magnitude to get lost in the technical details of the bill which perhaps distract from the very real positive impact that this bill will have on the everyday lives of South Australians. Soon after my election as the member for Newland, I held a community forum in Kersbrook. A number of local residents, many of whom are farmers, raised concerns with overregulation and increasing costs, often with particular reference to NRM boards.

Concerns of this type have been consistently raised with me whenever I speak to my constituents within the Adelaide Hills. It is clear to see and understand the frustration that people have had with NRM boards. The disconnect between local communities and the boards has resulted in a sense from locals that they are being dictated to on things they have been doing for decades.

These people care about the environment and, in fact, they rely on it very heavily for their own livelihoods, and our reforms will fundamentally address these concerns and make a tangible difference to the lives of South Australians, particularly those living in the regions. I am certainly proud to be part of a government that empowers local communities to have a greater say within their own communities. This is very much a general philosophy of this government, and we are seeing it applied in many other areas, another notable example being the introduction of boards for local health networks.

Where in the past we have seen a push towards the centralisation of decision-making, which is generally felt to be imposed on local communities by a castle in the CBD, this government respects and understands the fact that local communities, with appropriate support, are best placed to make decisions for themselves. I commend the minister for his work on the bill, which represents a significant body of work, and I commend the bill to the house.

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (12:44): I rise to make a contribution on the Landscape South Australia Bill today. From the outset, I would like to congratulate the minister, his staff, the Department for Environment and Water and the many people from around the state who have contributed through the consultation process to the drafting of this new bill. It is certainly a great body of work.

I want to talk initially about part of my life's journey and part of the reason I came to be in this place, and that is that I spent 30 years as a farmer on Eyre Peninsula, mostly growing grains but also keeping sheep for wool and meat. I and farmers around Eyre Peninsula, around the state, around the country and around the world are essentially landscape managers, and it is beholden on us to do that as well as we possibly can. This bill particularly highlights the role of primary producers, and I certainly appreciate that.

As farmers in the Australian environment, we have altered our natural landscape significantly to produce agricultural goods. Given that Europeans have only occupied this land for a relatively short time, it is possible for us to remember in relatively recent history what the natural landscape was like, what it looked like and the balances that were part of that landscape. In other parts of the world—Europe is the prime and probably best example, but there are others as well—the farmed landscape has come to be regarded as the natural landscape itself, so it is a different mindset. There are different parameters around primary production in other parts of the world.

Europeans are very much still new in the Australian landscape, and we have certainly changed the landscape significantly. We have upset many balances. I think that part of what we are doing today is attempting to restore a balance—not the original balance but a balance—back to our landscapes, our environment and our production systems that we rely on. Our aim as primary producers always has been to use the landscape productively yet sustainably, and therein lies the challenge.

I have a theory in my own mind that the more productive a farming system is the more sustainable it is, but that can be for a whole range of reasons, not just economically but environmentally as well. We have seen our farming systems evolve significantly over the last 150 years. I have often talked in this place about how South Australia was key in developing some of those farming systems. In fact, they were transported right around the world to similar environments, across southern Australia, through the Middle East and even to parts of America that enjoy a similar climate and temperature.

Very soon after I started farming, I recognised that there were some environmental issues not just on our property but in the district as a whole. For us, they were primarily around waterlogging and salinity. I began planting trees almost immediately. I am sure that the member for Hammond will appreciate that it was a number of years before I realised that the best way to ensure that trees survive is to fence them off, otherwise they become particularly palatable fodder for whatever livestock is running around. Protection of those planted trees was a good thing.

I often think that, in these days of much discussion about climate change and the efforts we might make to address that, the single best thing any of us can do is plant a tree. An even better thing would be to plant many trees, but I digress. I began planting trees and by the mid-1990s I found myself living down the road at Edillilie. I was an inaugural member of the Edillilie Landcare Group. We formed the Landcare group, coming together as like-minded land managers. I am very proud of the work that we did as a Landcare group. Almost every day, I still drive past the very first plantation of trees that we put in place and fenced off, thus they survived.

Whole-farm planning was a big part of those early days. It was before Google Maps. Those of us who took part in this program had to purchase a large aerial map of our property, and with various different coloured textas we drew soil types and drainage lines. I see a few nods in the chamber. Other people have been through that as well. It was a really important part and it fitted into what we wanted to do in relation to a catchment management plan.

I think there were about 50 farmers who lived within the Cummins-Wanilla Basin and over a couple of years almost all of them took part in this farm management planning program. From that, we developed a catchment management plan, which we worked on diligently for a number of years. In the early days, funding was available for landscape and environmental works, generally on a one-for-one basis.

The groups were able to apply for funding to both federal and state governments and match that from their own input, often in kind, actually doing the work themselves to fence off creek lines and those trees that we did not want the sheep to eat. That was a really exciting time. I joined the Lower Eyre Peninsula soil board. I particularly enjoyed that because of course the soil is our primary resource and we are reliant on that for everything that we grow and produce.

One thing led to another, and in 2004 the Rann Labor government installed the NRM Act and established NRM boards around the state. I applied and was successful in being appointed to the first Eyre Peninsula NRM board. In a way, I cut my teeth with NRM during that time. We had some very capable board members at that time. I particularly mention Brian Foster, the presiding member and chair of that committee. Brian is a wonderfully capable farmer from Lower Eyre Peninsula. He brought some insights and skills to that board that we really appreciated.

At that time, we were establishing the NRM board as a driver for natural resources management across Eyre Peninsula and across the state, I think we did a good job. What ultimately happened was that the bureaucracy became more centralised and as a board we had less authority and more and more decisions and directives were coming from North Terrace and Victoria Square. People started to realise that and became frustrated with the way that NRM was going. I spent one term on the board because I got busy doing other things, which ultimately led my to being in this place. It was a really important project for me.

As I said, people were becoming increasingly frustrated with the way that NRM was being managed and with the lack of on-ground works. Through the nineties and early 2000s we, as a group and as individual landowners, were able to access funds and do some really important on-ground works, such as fencing off creek lines, natural vegetation and remnant native vegetation. In a way, that frustration has led us to where we are today. I congratulate the minister on recognising that and on the bulk of work he has done in bringing the bill to this place.

Ultimately, we need a landscape that is more resilient than we have and we need to be adaptive in the way we create that. We are not going to go back to the original, pre-European landscape; there are far too many of us who rely on the natural environment for our livelihood. In fact, the average Australian farmer produces enough food for about 70 other people in the world, so much of what we produce is exported. We are also more than capable of feeding our own population.

We need to be adaptive along the way, and part of being adaptive is developing those farming systems. No farming system is perfect. Just when you think you have all the problems solved and a system working, something is thrown up to challenge that. It might be resistant rye-grass, a plague of conical snails or wombats in the Far West. I will come to that as we talk more about the landscape bill.

This new bill, however, establishes a new framework for how we manage our state's natural resources based around the vision that provides a simpler and more accessible system by removing unnecessary bureaucracy, simplifying procedures to improve responsiveness and providing greater flexibility for improving best practice over time. Key elements of this reforming bill are replacing regional natural resources management boards with new arms-length regional landscape boards and giving communities and landholders a greater voice in how natural resources are managed.

We have been talking during this debate about Green Adelaide. This is a relatively new concept, and it will be a new and separate board. That board will be focused on seven priorities that will help Adelaide, our capital city in which 75 per cent of our population lives, to become the most ecologically vibrant city in the world—a challenge indeed. There will be a cap on increases to land and water levies to reduce cost-of-living pressures for all South Australians, and there will be more action on the ground with a focus on partnerships, a simpler approach to planning, and creating opportunities for natural resources management, focused programs and initiatives in regional communities.

This is an election commitment that we made to the people of South Australia. It was quite clear to us that our communities wanted reform of NRM. We listened to those communities. There were good parts of the pre-existing NRM delivery, but people felt disempowered regarding decisions and that NRM was not really working effectively for them. The result was a heavily overregulated and centralised system that focused more on nice business plans rather than outcomes. I know one of the real banes of previous boards was having to spend so much time preparing business plans and environmental plans that really were continually being rolled over. A lot of time, effort and resources were being put into that.

As a result, we propose a reform of NRM and a new start that refocuses natural resources management on a back-to-basics approach to land, pest plant and animal species, and water management. The legislative crux of this is the proposed replacement of the Natural Resources Management Act with a new landscape South Australia act, which hopefully this afternoon will pass through this place. We believe that this reform will create resilient landscapes that are biodiverse and sustainable. It will also give our regional and rural communities a greater say in the management of natural resources and provide more security and confidence in the system.

I mentioned earlier that extensive consultation occurred throughout our communities and right across the state. I thank the minister for the opportunity that we had on Eyre Peninsula in both Ceduna and Port Lincoln to take part in that. They were both well attended, and all that was contributed by those who were there was taken on board. The measures that come into play also deliver cost-of-living relief. That is a big part, as people will understand, of the Marshall Liberal government. We are doing that, in this instance, through the capping of the land and water levies to the consumer price index (CPI).

As I said, the new act will replace the NRM Act. There will be eight new regional landscape boards, plus Green Adelaide, which will encompass the metropolitan area of South Australia. In relation to the electorate of Flinders, the Eyre Peninsula board will cover the bulk of the electorate of Flinders—the electorate that I represent—but also the Alinytjara Wilurara board has some overlap with the seat of Flinders. In fact, they have offices in Ceduna, which I visit from time to time. I must congratulate those regional staff who put a lot of work into natural resources management and working with local communities. I am sure that will continue. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 12:59 to 14:00.