HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-12-01 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Exceptional Tree Register) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Debate resumed.

Ms MICHAELS (Enfield) (12:15): I also rise to make a contribution to the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Exceptional Tree Register) Amendment Bill introduced by the member for Waite. I thank him for his efforts in bringing such an important issue to this house. I also want to comment that it is refreshing to have a new Minister for Planning dealing with this issue, and I must say that my comments are fairly well along the lines of the new Minister for Planning in terms of our approach to this bill.

I think it is a very important issue to have front and centre in protecting tree canopy in metropolitan Adelaide and South Australia more broadly, but particularly metropolitan Adelaide, where we have seen a significant reduction in tree canopy, particularly in certain council areas. However, my concerns are very similar to those of the Minister for Planning in terms of the definition of what an exceptional tree is and the burden that may put on local councils in respect of updating monthly an exceptional tree register and the time and cost involved in that when the definition of an exceptional tree is actually, in my view, fairly vague.

Some of the examples in there include trees that are of an outstanding horticultural value; a tree that is of an outstanding aesthetic significance; a tree that commemorates a particular occasion, including planting by a notable person or being associated with an important local, state or national event; and trees that can be considered outstanding examples of its species. These are all within the definition of the exceptional trees in the proposed bill, and I think that the breadth of that would make it very difficult for the State Planning Commission to come up with the original register with the input of local councils and for local councils to then have the obligation to update that on a monthly basis.

Our consultation with local council representatives indicates that they are concerned with the administrative burden of implementing that tree register and updating it. There is also concern with administering the bond system that is proposed by this bill. Obviously, we agree with the intention of trying to protect tree canopy, but this bond system I think would be overly burdensome on local councils to administer.

I think, from speaking with various stakeholders, it might not achieve the intention, in that some stakeholders have said to me they just would not apply for the development approval, or pay their bond, knowing they are going to lose their bond. That, of course, defeats the purpose of trying to protect tree canopy in this way, so on our side we likewise will oppose this bill, although we support the intent of it.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: We will go to the member for Chaffey.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:19): Thank you, sir, and congratulations on your retirement speech yesterday. I am sad that I did not contribute, but it was all inclusive, as I witnessed.

I would like to make a contribution to the commission to establish and maintain the exceptional tree register. The feeling is that it will impose significant and ongoing administrative function, and it is also unknown exactly what councils will do in implementing such a register.

If we look at the requirement that councils must provide a list of exceptional trees at least each month, as other members will talk about, what designates a significant tree? Obviously, living in a regional setting, living on a river or living on flood plains, or being surrounded by commercial trees or ancient forests, there is a significant piece of work that would need to be done, particularly in understanding what the significance of a tree register means.

Currently, I think there are a number of areas of duplication when it comes to tree registration and whether it is adhering to the Native Vegetation Act and whether there would be confusion under the current legislative controls by other regulatory requirements for trees. I would say that the bond provisions of the bill are impractical. They will impose significant financial cost burden on any development affecting an exceptional tree or adjacent to within 10 metres of an exceptional tree.

What are exceptional trees? What is the significance of exceptional trees? Are they a tree that is a native tree? Are they an introduced species? Are they a tree of significant age, or are they trees that have been planted by our forebears or our forefathers for a level of significance?

As an example, if I look in the Riverland to the area of Monash, there is the Lone Gum. It is the only river red gum, a 20-metre tree, which was still standing after much of the land was cleared. It gave shade to the teams of surveyors who camped while that area was being developed. Also, the Monash school uses that tree as their emblem. What we need to better understand is that urban canopy and preserving brilliant trees is great, but it does not just have to be in an urban setting.

As I have said, the area that I represent, being Chaffey, is one of the greatest electorates in South Australia and it has a number of areas with trees of significance. It also has ancient forests. So what is the role of looking at preserving trees of significance if it is just in an urban setting? Where is the significance of protecting or keeping that register of trees of significance?

I know that a flood plain I overlook from my home has trees that are 400 and 500 years old and they are significant trees, but how are those trees counted? How are they registered? We have to have a better understanding of exactly what the trees are there to do, why they are there and if they were planted for reasons. I think there needs to be a much clearer understanding, so that is why I think this bill will be impractical and impose further financial cost burden on any further development.

I want to talk a little more about the significance of trees in general and why we have large trees that are normally given a registration or given significance here in metropolitan Adelaide. I think South Australia is a beneficiary of all sorts of trees that have to be registered and protected, but also trees that are there not only to reduce the consumption of water and the consumption of energy but they are there for different reasons.

They are there in different climates, and different trees are in different areas of our state to help protect not only animals but humans from the heat and from the sun. That seems to be having a greater bearing on any constituents who might live nearby or be there in passing. Particularly on the banks of the River Murray many trees have been planted on nature strips and on the verges in our communities. Primarily that is done not only for beautification but also as a contribution to provide transpiration, to help keep the climate cooler and also to make it more livable.

I will not talk too much about the trees that I have planted over my lifetime as a farmer, as a primary producer, but I have planted a lot of native trees as a contribution back to the environment. I have also planted significant numbers of commercial trees, probably in the order of hundreds of thousands—whether they be citrus, whether they be stone fruit or whether they be for wind protection for those commercial plantings. We need to better understand that this bill will add a level of complexity, and I do not think that anyone is prepared to shoulder the burden of the register.

But what I will say is that many, many landholders, including my neighbours, my fellow farmers and horticulturalists, keep registers themselves. Whether they are commercial trees for horticulture properties or whether they are part of the native tree network that is adjacent to flood plains or river corridors or on the banks of the river, we need to better understand exactly what is currently there as a registered tree.

We know that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is there for the benefit of our natural environment. It is there for the benefit of those watering programs that will give life to the regeneration of many of the trees. Sadly, what we have just seen come through the Riverland in recent times was the massive storms. I do not see anyone taking note of the number of trees that have been blown over, thousands and thousands of trees that are significant.

We have undercutting on riverbanks, then we get high winds, and then all of a sudden those trees blow into the river. No-one is there taking the loss of those trees into account. But with high rivers we see regeneration. We are now seeing young red gum saplings starting to grow again. Sadly, we are not seeing some of those river flows getting back to that higher country where we can see trees of significance, particularly black box, that are needing that watering to substantiate the ongoing life of that tree. Through drought and through salinity impacts we are seeing a significant number of trees that are falling over, that are just wasting through no fault of anyone, bar a natural weather event.

The bill does give a level of complexity; I see it as being duplication. That is why here within government we will not be supporting it. But I do see that trees are life. Trees need to be accounted for, but we are currently experiencing more and more burden from those who are looking to put duplication into the system.

Mrs POWER (Elder) (12:29): I rise to speak on the member for Waite's bill to amend the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act (PDI Act) 2016. The bill seeks to amend the act by inserting a new definition of 'exceptional tree' requiring a register of exceptional trees to be established by the State Planning Commission, and setting up requirements and bond payments for any development that may affect an exceptional tree.

We know that since the introduction of significant tree controls in April 2000 there has been a continual debate between the rights of property owners to remove trees that they deem inappropriate and those who seek to preserve large trees in urban areas. As a result of that debate, the tree controls were amended on 17 November 2011, and we have seen definitions for regulated trees and significant trees. We have also seen the concept of maintenance pruning introduced, allowing up to 30 per cent of a regulated or significant tree crown to be pruned for specific reasons, as well as the introduction of a list of tree species that were exempt from tree controls, and a number of other changes.

I know that our Minister for Planning and the shadow minister for planning have raised concerns about this particular bill and some of the unintended consequences it might create in terms of the burden it imposes on others. What is of particular interest to me is that the State Planning Commission has noted the community concern regarding the loss of established trees from the Adelaide tree canopy during the consultation that occurred prior to the finalisation of the Planning and Design Code.

In May 2021, the Conservation Council of SA released a report titled, 'A call to action: protecting Adelaide's tree canopy'. This report was partially funded by a grant from the commission, and the scope of the commission's open space and tree project includes:

a short-term review of a number of matters related to trees;

the release of tree guidelines prepared with Green Adelaide;

a longer term comprehensive review of all regulated tree legislative measures;

a review of the operation of the new Urban Tree Canopy Off-Set Scheme following 12 months of operation; and

as part of the preparation of the new 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide, a review of tree canopy targets and further investigation about how the planning and development system can further urban greening areas and achieve outcomes.

The commission is currently finalising its recommendations for consideration in regard to this, so it is premature to progress any legislative changes in relation to tree policy at this time until the commission has completed the project, which importantly involves significant engagement and consultation with a wide range of stakeholders.

I understand that one of the concerns with regard to this particular bill is that engagement and community consultation have not occurred. Personally, I am a big advocate for community engagement in all that we do, so that is a big concern for me. Nevertheless, whilst this particular legislation may be somewhat premature, we must act now to nurture and grow our existing trees and to continue to plant new trees. Without a doubt, this is an important area and, legislation and debate aside, now is the time to ensure that we continue to do all we can to increase our tree canopy.

I am so proud of the work we have done and continue to do as a government. We formed government in 2018, and one of our election commitments was to establish Green Adelaide. We have delivered on that, and we continue to do incredible work through the Green Adelaide Board. For those who might not be aware, Green Adelaide is a South Australian government-supported organisation that is working towards a vision of a cooler, greener, wilder and climate-resilient Adelaide that celebrates our unique culture.

Green Adelaide is a statutory board that was established in July 2020 by the Marshall Liberal government, and it was also strengthened as part of the 2019 South Australian natural resources management reform and the introduction of the Landscape South Australia Act in 2019. Its vision will be achieved through partnerships, education, influence and investment in Adelaide's people and the environment, and we know that this will help Adelaide to attract industry, investment, residents and visitors and, most importantly, continue to secure our future as a vibrant and livable city.

In my local area alone, as a government we are delivering a number of greening projects, partnering with local councils to increase tree canopy. We have projects funded by the state government and/or Green Adelaide occurring in St Marys and Edwardstown.

The electorate of Elder is quite diverse in terms of its tree canopy, so there are some suburbs that have a lot of trees and incredible street trees cooling the natural environment, but in other suburbs like St Marys and Edwardstown there is a real opportunity for us to increase the tree canopy for residents living there and by doing so not only cool the environment and provide homes for wild habitat but really increase the amenity for local residents living in those suburbs.

I am also absolutely thrilled that we are delivering the Pasadena biodiversity corridor in partnership with local council, and works are already underway. This project will passively irrigate the reserve by feeding stormwater through soakage trenches. This will promote growth of existing and new vegetation with amenity, canopy cover and cooling benefits for not only nearby residents but all visitors to the reserve. This is again just an incredible project happening here in my local area. I know whilst there are a number of great greening projects tackling climate change in Elder, there are even more across a number of other electorates in all of South Australia.

Regardless of the outcome of this bill, I wholeheartedly support its intent, which recognises the value of trees and the benefits and amenity that trees bring to our streets, to our neighbourhoods, to South Australia and, ultimately, to our climate. I think the member for Chaffey put it quite well when he said that trees are life.

I know I have had a number of meetings with local residents where they have shared with me their appreciation and love of local trees. I recall one meeting where we were talking about trees and one resident brought in a sound clip of the birds singing from a gum tree across from her home. It was so beautiful and I think it speaks volumes to how much people in my local area—and I know across the board—love our trees and are committed and want to see our government doing all that it can to support our existing trees, to plant new trees and nurture them. Certainly, that is exactly what the Marshall Liberal government is doing and we will continue to do so.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Morphett.

Ms Bedford: The member for Waite was on his feet, sir.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Apologies. I have called the member for Morphett and, of course, the member for Waite would understand that if he speaks he closes debate. My impression is that there are other members who are wanting to contribute.

The Hon. S.J.R. PATTERSON (Morphett—Minister for Trade and Investment) (12:37): Thank you, member for Waite. Certainly, I understand the member for Waite's interest in this matter and of course him wanting to stand up, but I just want to put here to parliament today the interest of the constituents of Morphett in trees, in tree canopies. It certainly is very important.

I will just say, too, a little bit about the bill itself in terms of establishing and maintaining a register of exceptional trees. These are based on a number of criteria: whether they have outstanding horticultural value; if they are a rare species; if they are in a unique location; or they are of outstanding age, height, circumference or canopy spread. There are other matters that go onto that, but it is worth talking about height and circumference spread because that is how, at the moment, trees are classified.

Back in April 2000, this was worked into defining significant and regulated trees. Regulated trees are those that, one metre above the ground, have a circumference of two metres, and significant trees are those that, one metre above the ground, have a circumference of three metres. Of course, that does protect those trees, but we know with developments, with bushfire risk, that while those are well intentioned, there is also that counterbalance in terms of people wanting to develop their own land, people wanting to keep their house safe, so these tree controls have been refined over time.

But, of course, since they were last amended back in November 2011 to try to give some balance, there is still this continuing move towards development. Certainly, in my electorate of Morphett, there is some significant development going on. If I just talk about the suburbs themselves, we have the coastal areas, and then moving inland further to those coastal areas of Somerton Park, Glenelg, newly to come in, Glenelg North, which are very established suburbs and have heritage controls, from a planning perspective, which are very important to the people living there in terms of being developed.

But you will see in other parts of the electorate, whether that is Morphettville, Glengowrie, Park Holme or Plympton Park, these are fantastic places to live. They are very close to the ocean and also quite a short drive into the city. There is great amenity as well, from all the built infrastructure in there, and so there is a lot of development going on.

With this development, where previously you would have your classic quarter-acre block with a house on it, a driveway and two cars, with a front yard where quite often there would be a substantial garden with trees there to protect and give shade to the house, and then of course the back garden where there would be fruit trees and other trees and significant areas for kids to play, that has been utilised by this urban infill to convert those into two or three residences on that one block.

Of course, the densification to achieve that certainly does substantially reduce the amount of open space on each block that is available for trees to grow. Quite often, as you go around, you will see these old houses. When they are demolished, not only is the house demolished but every single bit of vegetation on the property is demolished as well; it is just basically brought back to bare earth to be developed. Any trees that might have been growing for decades are brought down. While there are trees put on these new developments, those trees are young, they are not mature and they have many years of growing ahead of them, but in their place you certainly lose that canopy.

That is certainly the intent of the member for Waite—by listing these exceptional trees, it does protect that canopy. I would say the Marshall government certainly is very mindful of that. As a government, we are committed to increasing Adelaide's urban tree canopy and greening our cities across metropolitan Adelaide.

The other point to note is that these tree controls are not only of significant regulated controls, and they do apply across metropolitan Adelaide, but they also take in some parts of the Adelaide Hills and the Mount Barker council areas. The proposed bill that we have before us from the member for Waite has the bill provisions applying to having an exceptional tree register statewide, so not just the metropolitan areas but into the regions. We heard the member for Chaffey speak about the eucalypts in his area, his old urban forest as well, so that will be taken into account.

If I move back to the urban canopy and why it is so important, prior to coming into parliament I was the Mayor of Holdfast Bay. As a council, Holdfast Bay was part of a number of councils that set up what was called Resilient South, which looked at practical action and how we can adapt to climate change.

I think the environment minister in this place now has been doing fantastic work in the overall environment space. You will hear him talk about practical action. Practical action is adapting to climate change because we know that in terms of South Australia's ability to influence the big climate change effects that are happening, countries such as the US with their massive population, China trying to lift their billion people out of poverty, India trying to lift their over a billion people out of poverty, they are big emitters, they are interacting and having a big impact on climate change. So, yes, we need to do our part, be a leader in this role, which we are, but also, from an adaption point of view, look to adapt.

To understand how we need to adapt and what we need to adapt, one of the things that was done with Resilient South was to do what they call urban heat island mapping to see where the urban heat spots are in our community. We did this on one of those hot days, a 39º day, just to see what the spread of heat was across the councils of Holdfast Bay, Marion and then more widely out to Onkaparinga and Mitcham.

It was really quite startling to see. Near the coast you could see that it was starting to warm up but still reasonably cool, then moving into those mid suburbs, if I talk about my electorate, Glengowrie and Morphettville, and then moving across to that South Road region where there is quite a large amount of concrete and bitumen, you could see the startling changes in urban heat, upwards of 3º to 4º difference between the coast and these big urbanised concrete areas.

The coast being cooler, some of that is due to the coastal winds but a lot of it is because it has urban canopy and established canopy because, of course, those suburbs may be more established and so those trees have had decades to grow. That is certainly something that the Marshall government is committed to increasing.

One of the ways we are doing that is with Green Adelaide, to prepare a five-year regional landscape plan. Since 2019, as a government we have put significant funds towards this. It is administered by Green Adelaide and known as Greener Neighbourhoods Grants. We have committed $1.6 million that has been distributed across projects in this program. This has resulted in 8,500 trees being planted.

We are also making sure that we are supporting those street trees as well. The rainwater that is going down into stormwater, we want to be able to use some of that rainwater to irrigate these trees, so this program has also led to 200 additional stormwater inlets being established to irrigate those street trees. That is a fantastic initiative that we have got going across Adelaide. It is certainly paying dividends by creating biodiversity corridors in some areas of my electorate.

Along Sturt Creek, we have Willoughby Avenue Reserve, which is in Glengowrie, and that has the biggest tree in Marion, a fig tree with a magnificent canopy. That is certainly important. There are also beautiful eucalypts there. At sunset or at sunrise, as you walk around you can hear the birds chirping away. Trees really bring people closer to nature. As a government, we certainly want to drive and commit towards greening our streets, greening our neighbourhoods and I am confident the plan we have set in place will do so.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (12:47): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and what an ornament to this place you are!

An honourable member: Doily!

Mr PEDERICK: Chuck him out, sir. I rise to speak to the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Exceptional Tree Register) Amendment Bill introduced by the member for Waite. Certainly, as a regional member and as one serving on the Natural Resources Committee, I am very well aware of the benefits that trees, scrub out in the regions and also shelter belts, whether they be in regional areas or in urban areas, have on the community. I want to talk a bit about what we are leaving for the next parliament. As part of the Natural Resources Committee is the investigation into the Native Vegetation Act and the management of native vegetation, which can be a vexed argument.

I remember when land clearing was coming to an end in South Australia—I am talking about farming land, obviously—in the late seventies. When the word got out that there was no more land able to be cleared for farming after a certain date, the dozers and chains went 24 hours a day.

In most cases they got it right—in most cases. Sometimes, and you get this in Mallee country, they might have gone a little bit high on a sandhill but that has all been fixed up with plantings of veldt grass, lucerne and other plants that can stabilise the soil. Sadly, in other cases, there were opportunities to clear really good, flat, productive land. Some of that was done but then, for whatever reason, some landowners let it go past the time, when you could not clear the regrowth, so that absolutely great grain-growing and wheat-producing land was lost to production.

I note that there are many different views on how much vegetation is out there. Some people have the view that it is only the corridors up and down the roads. However, you only have to get up in a light plane or even in a commercial plane and fly over the state, and certainly fly over Adelaide, to see how many trees and sheltered areas there are, especially in the broad area of Parklands that we have here and the parks being put in place by the environment minister, David Speirs, and our government.

Vegetation does produce a great deal of amenity, especially in the urban or heavily built-up areas in our regional towns, where obviously there is a lot of concrete and bitumen, and it is great to allay what can turn into heat islands with trees and shrubs. What happens now with new developments, which is a much better proposal than what happened with old developments in regional towns and planning right across the board through Adelaide as well, is they have to have 12 per cent of green space, and that has to be put in place to alleviate the impact of cutting up that land.

We certainly need development, as we are seeing in the regions where you can barely buy or rent a property because they are just not available, because people are coming to the regions and finding out how good they are. A lot of that has happened because of the impacts of COVID-19.

So trees are important but, as we saw with the fires a couple of years ago and with bushfires generally, they become a tunnel of fire when they light up. We have seen some terrible bushfires in the last few years up in the Hills at Cudlee Creek and Harrogate, at the top end of my electorate, and this was raised at public meetings I attended because there are some quite significant trees, some beautiful eucalypts along these roads. Before the Cudlee Creek fire, a lot of people had only recently—and when I say recently, it might have been in the last 10 or 15 years—moved into the Hills. It is not their fault, but they did not realise what could happen and how late is too late.

If your bushfire survival plan is to leave your property, and if the road is a tunnel of fire, I would suggest that you should be staying home and making the best of what is there. It is good to see people taking up the mantle of farm fire units and having units at their home. They can be as simple as a 1,000-litre shuttle hooked up to a Honda pump, or another pump, and you instantly have a fire unit for not a huge expense.

It is a vexed question and I do not know if anyone will ever have the right answer. It is certainly a vexed question as far as trees along roadsides are concerned. An issue I have brought before the Natural Resources Committee is the clearance you are allowed, especially when transporting equipment in regional areas. Farming equipment has become bigger, longer and wider and you just cannot get that up some roads because the native vegetation clearance rules are that strict—I believe only a metre back from the guide post.

A lot of times, when you have really wide equipment that could be, in the old language, 40-feet or 60-feet air seeder bars, cultivators. It is quite wide equipment and it is a struggle to get up the road. I note that a lot of people are designing the equipment so that it stretches longer but you can still get the width when you unfold it.

As the member for Chaffey said, in farming it is very nice to put back in places where you might need shelter belts. We put in several kilometres of shelter belts back in the early nineties, and it is fantastic to have them in place, and that was direct seeding to scarify the seeds and get them in. Back in the 1970s, I remember that the last paddock that was cleared on our place my father used to always cultivate over the last few stumps. For whatever reason, they never got picked up, so the scrub regenerated a little bit, but it was never too much and so dad would crop over it.

When he had a bit of illness, the farm was put out to sharefarmers and they went around this little patch of scrub and now it has turned into a beautiful shelter belt so, in a strange way, it is fantastic that it happened. It is certainly a good idea to protect trees, but we also need to have reality around planning and management. We need to let the processes go through on what the planning department are doing with the consultation with regard to the management of significant trees, and that would take into account what the member for Waite is trying to do here with another category of exceptional tree.

You also get some undue outcomes with significant trees. We have seen that in recent times, where trees, mainly in the Hills, have, sadly, crashed down on cars and inadvertently killed people. It is a very difficult thing to get the right management and get the whole community safety management right as well. I can also reflect on the saga of the Burnside Shopping Centre tree. What a saga! There would have been well north of $1 million invested to protect the tree that, at the end of the day, never made the grade.

I am very interested in the continuation of the debate, but on this side we are keen to see the planning processes take place, to acknowledge the significance of trees but also the way we cohabitate as a population to get the right outcomes for all.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI (Unley—Minister for Innovation and Skills) (12:57): I thank the member for Waite for bringing this debate to the parliament—the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (Exceptional Tree Register) Amendment Bill 2021—because I think trees are a bit like motherhood: we all support trees and we all support motherhood. Like many things in this place, regardless of what political party you come from, I think we want the same outcome, and the debate is about how you achieve that.

We heard today that the Labor Party does not support this bill and the government is not supporting this bill. It does not mean that we do not support the intent of the bill. I think there is no doubt I learned very early in my fledgling political career that there are people on the other side of the chamber with different political views who you can do business with.

Many of you would know about the success of a coalition between the left and the right in the Prospect council and David Pisoni and Russell Wortley from 1991 to 1993, when I moved a motion that there be an investigation into where we could place trees on the southern end of Main North Road, going into Medindie, in front of all the car yards.

We picked a very strategic time to put up the motion, when we knew we had the numbers, when some of the old farts, who were opposed to this sort of stuff, were away from council. We got the numbers and we got it up. To this day, you can see those trees in front of the car yards and they are now nearly 30 years old. There is no doubt that it is a legacy of Wortley and Pisoni coming together for the greater good of the people of Prospect.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Unley, you have 30 seconds. We will ring the bell.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: It is a shared responsibility between the community, local councils and government, and we are all working together to get those outcomes.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT