Motions

Native Vegetation

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (15:56): I move:

1. That a select committee be established to inquire into the management of native vegetation in the Hills Face Zone and the Mount Lofty Ranges, with particular reference to:

(a) the interface between landowners and the native vegetation branch;

(b) the role of the Native Vegetation Council;

(c) the role of local councils;

(d) the balance between the protection of native vegetation and bushfire clearances;

(e) the appropriateness of penalties; and

(f) any other matter.

2. That this council permits the select committee to authorise the disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any evidence or documents presented to the committee prior to such evidence being presented to the council.

I seek to refer these matters in relation to native vegetation to a select committee of the Legislative Council, and I will just go through some of the history. It has been a matter that has been taken up by our Leader, the Hon. David Speirs MP, who was the Minister for the Environment under the term of the Marshall Liberal government, and he has a very particular interest in all things environmental, as do a number of us as well.

The particular trigger for this has been a site in the Adelaide Mount Lofty Ranges, at a property on Mount Lofty where there has been a significant amount of clearance. Probably the best way for people to get an understanding of this particular case is to look on the ABC website. There are two articles that I have accessed, one from 26 February 2023 and one from 2 August 2023. The second article is entitled, 'Calls for further investigation into native forest clearance on Mount Lofty'. That has an interactive map on it, where people can see the before and afters by clicking the ruler left and right, and I think that probably speaks for itself.

There have been some changes to planning laws in the intervening period, from when the clearance was approved in 2014 and the current period, and this matter seems to have fallen into an area where the law is different now, the clearance would probably not have been allowed to take place, but it also highlights that there are some issues with native vegetation. We have sought to keep this inquiry quite discrete, limiting it to the Hills Face Zone and Mount Lofty Ranges for several reasons, because we did not want it to get too out of hand. These references, if they are too big, can take a very long time. It can be hard to come to a fast conclusion, and they can raise a whole lot of matters that are extraneous to these particular matters.

As a member of the Environment, Resources and Development Committee, it was my preference that that committee would take this inquiry on. We are currently doing an inquiry into trees on private land. As part of that, we have received evidence from, in particular, the Conservation Council, Trees For Life and probably other organisations as well. Quite separate to contacting those organisations about this, they have identified that native vegetation regulation generally is an issue that needs some clarity and improvement.

Back to this particular property at hand, the leader, the Hon. David Speirs, actually wrote to the Environment, Resources and Development Committee in May seeking that this become a term of reference. He stated in his letter to Ms Jayne Stinson, the Chair of the committee:

By way of brief summary, in October 2014 the owners of the property at 104 Mt Lofty Summit Road, Crafers were provided with approval to clear 0.110 hectares of vegetation, for the purposes of constructing a dwelling and associated structures. I understand that clearance of stringybark forest has been occurring at the property since 2015, however, clearance is ongoing.

The community is deeply concerned about the extensive and ongoing clearance at the property, with information recently provided to the South Australian Parliament by the Minister for Climate, Environment and Water, Hon Susan Close MP, confirming that the Native Vegetation Council has issued a compliance notice to the property owners, because 'there were reasonable grounds to believe that native vegetation clearance had occurred in excess of that approved by the Native Vegetation Council'. The enforcement notice requires the clearing to cease, however I have witnessed firsthand that despite this enforcement notice, environmental destruction in the form of clearing is continuing. For your interest, I provide links to footage of the clearance which will demonstrate the sheer magnitude of the environmental destruction which is occurring:

I note that there are people in that vicinity who have been quite upset with the ongoing clearance of native vegetation. He goes on to say:

Regardless of whether this clearance was consistent with approvals that may have been granted at the site, I strongly consider that there is justification for the ERD Committee to consider this matter, with particular reference to:

1. Whether the scope of this residential development is appropriate in this location, which is affected by the following relevant planning overlays:

a. Environment and Food Production Area;

b. Heritage Adjacency;

c. Native Vegetation;

d. Regulated and Significant Tree; and

e. State Significant Native Vegetation

2. Whether the scope of the clearance, if it has occurred in accordance with approvals, meets the community's expectations for management of 'state significant native vegetation';

3. If the clearance has occurred beyond the scope of the approvals, whether the penalties associated with this activity are adequate;

4. Whether the relevant authorities (Native Vegetation Council and relevant local council) have appropriate enforcement powers to prevent ongoing clearance at the site…

That particular point is germane to the terms of reference to the committee that I am moving today. The letter continues:

5. Whether what has occurred at this site served as a case study, highlighting reforms required to native vegetation and planning and development laws.

That matter was sent to the committee and was considered by the committee. The correspondence was referred to the minister, the Hon. Susan Close, and the committee received a response from the minister. She says:

Regarding the matter at 104 Mt Lofty Summit Road, Crafers, I am advised that this relates to a native vegetation clearance approval granted in 2014 for 0.75 ha and that there has been no further unauthorised clearance beyond the incident recorded in December 2021.

There is some dispute about whether that is correct or not. The minister goes on to say:

I understand that there have been numerous reports since this time, however these have been found to be false, or in some cases related to the movement of already cleared vegetation on the property. It is important to note that the movement of vegetation has been at the request of the Native Vegetation Branch and to clear the area subject to unauthorised clearance to allow for regeneration of native vegetation and required restoration works to be undertaken.

The minister then goes on to address each of the points that the Hon. Mr Speirs has made and says that the overlay provisions would not have applied to this development because it was under the previous approvals process, which was the Development Act 1993. I quote:

As a result, it was assessed against the relevant policies from the Adelaide Hills Council Development Plan by the Relevant Authority, rather than the Planning and Design Code overlays. Further, under the previous planning system, no referral to the NVC was activated…

In short, it was approved under those previous rules. The new rules and planning overlay, I understand, came into effect in 2019 and would have required this application to go to the Native Vegetation Council. As the minister says in her letter, they would have been unlikely to be supported. She goes on to say that:

It has been determined that approximately 0.5 hectares of native vegetation has been cleared beyond the scope of the existing [Native Vegetation Council] approval. At the time that the clearance occurred, the NVC considered the unauthorised clearance to be within the minor scale.

So it seems like this one slipped through enforcement which could or should have been undertaken. It has not been at the level I think would—it fails the pub test, I think, for many people, particularly as we know with respect to the Adelaide Mount Lofty Ranges that we have issues with the loss of biodiversity and bird species across the Adelaide Hills. So when it comes to some of these areas which are of significant biodiversity, they do need to have much greater protection.

I think we need to look at the interaction between local council and how the delegations to them in terms of management and authorisation—what their role is. I think this is something the community is very interested in. There are significant implications for biodiversity and potentially significant biodiversity loss in the Adelaide Mount Lofty Ranges. For those reasons, we are moving that this matter be considered by a select committee.

I think I did mention that we had sought that this be looked at by the Environment, Resources and Development Committee. The soft answer was, 'No. The minister is doing her own investigation,' but I think it is certainly worthy of a select committee in the New Year.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.