In 2025 New South Wales is still dancing around the question of post-mining land rehabilitation

"I don’t think I'd even let my enemy drink from that because I think they would die such a horrible death."

[Assoc. Professor Ian Wright, Western Sydney University, 2024]

https://youtu.be/GL9hr5fClGo?si=Z1zsTlsKLoBvt55U

On 14 May 2024 the NSW Parliament Upper House Standing Committee on State Development established the Inquiry into the beneficial and productive post-mining land use, to inquire into and report on beneficial and productive post-mining land use.

Terms of reference can be found at:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/inquiries/3046/Terms%20of%20reference%20-%20Beneficial%20and%20productive%20post-mining%20land%20use%20-%20Updated%2012%20December%202024.pdf

There is no reporting date listed for this particular Inquiry.

After a 53 day submission period in which 78 submissions were received, the Inquiry held 5 hearings commencing on 5 August 2024 and ending on 17 December 2024. Videos of all 6 hearings can be found at:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLb7SKvfgKNwZpuRxxsmOhEvvnKeAXKzTk

Commencing on 2 July 2024 the Inquiry received 40 documents to assist in its deliberations.

In August 2024 the Standing Committee on State Development visited former mining sites in Lake Macquarie, Cessnock, Maitland and the Upper Hunter and held two public hearings (Muswellbrook & Singleton).

SOME BACKGROUND ON FORMER MINING SITES

ABC News, 16 February 2017:

More than 60,000 mines have been abandoned across Australia, according to a report that raises concerns about how land rehabilitation is managed as the mining boom ends.

Key points:

Australia Institute report finds lack of reliable data on Australia's mining activity

Research finds more than 60,000 abandoned mines across Australia

Only a handful of mines have ever been fully rehabilitated

Report raises concerns over how land rehabilitation is managed

The Australia Institute research, obtained exclusively by Lateline, said there were few reliable statistics on the state of Australia's mines and there was evidence that only a handful had ever been fully rehabilitated.

State government agencies were only able to name one example of a mine that had been fully rehabilitated and relinquished in the past 10 years — the New Wallsend coal mine in New South Wales.

Some of the abandoned mines date back to gold-rush days and the 60,000 figure includes thousands of mine "features", such as tailings dams and old mine shafts.

The Australia Institute said it was difficult to obtain basic statistics on the number of operating mines across the country, putting the figure between 460 and 2,944.

The Institute said it was even harder to get data on mines that had suspended operations or were undergoing rehabilitation.

"What is certain is [mine abandonment] is not a practice limited to distant history," the report said.

"As the owners of the largest mines come under financial pressure, close attention needs to be paid to the ongoing phenomenon of mine abandonment in Australia.".....

In New South Wales, approval has been granted for 45 massive coal pits, or voids, to be left after mining finishes. [my yellow highlighting]

Twelve of those voids are around Muswellbrook in the Upper Hunter and the biggest is at BHP Billiton's Mount Arthur mine.

It is 4.5 kilometres long and 1.5 kilometres wide. BHP would not provide details on its depth....

NORTHERN NSW BACKGROUND

North Coast Voices, "Deputy Leader of Opposition Business in the House of Representatives & MP for Cowper betrays the Clarence, 28 September 2011, excerpt:

....ongoing antimony contamination of water bodies and land protected by Environmental Planning Instruments is not unknown from previous mining ventures in northern NSW.

The Macleay Argus 2 September 2011:

HIGHER than average levels of heavy metals have been recorded in the Macleay River at Bellbrook after a dam overflowed at a gold and antimony mine near Armidale.

NSW Health and Kempsey Shire Council said higher than normal levels of metals including arsenic, zinc and copper had been detected in the waters of the Macleay River.

But both organisations said the concentration of the heavy metals was not high enough to warrant concern to people.

As a precaution NSW Health has contacted residents in the upper Macleay to inform them not to drink water from the river unless it has been processed through the Bellbrook water treatment plant.

Council has undertaken further testing to determine whether the contamination has spread beyond Bellbrook….

The Office of Heritage and Environment (OHE) reported the breach occurred on Tuesday when there was a release of material from a sediment erosion control dam at the Hillgrove antimony and gold mine.

"The mine is currently not operating but is in 'care and maintenance' mode," a spokeswoman said.

"The spill occurred after continued wet weather produced excess stormwater which exceeded the amount of water that could be stored in the dam resulting in the spill - when the mine is operating the stormwater would normally have been used for mineral processing."

NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Media Release 5 July 2010:

Straits (Hillgrove) Gold Pty Limited has been fined $50,000 and ordered to pay costs of $24,000 in the NSW Land and Environment Court today after being found guilty of polluting waters.

Straits pleaded guilty to the charge; pollution of water under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act.

The company 'Straits' conducts gold and antimony mining activities at the Hillgrove Mine, near Armidale in NSW.

In sentencing today, Justice Biscoe convicted and fined Straits $50,000 and ordered it to pay the prosecutor's legal costs of $24,000.

The court heard that in April 2009 a protective bund at the premises had been lowered to allow access for an electrical contractor. When a screening device used in the mine became blocked and 'slimes' discharged and spilled into the bunded area, it then overflowed the bund and discharged into the local environment.

The spill, of up to 3000 litres of 'slimes,' contained antimony, arsenic and lead and is toxic to some aquatic life.

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW), Director General, Lisa Corbyn said the penalty provided a timely reminder to companies that they must ensure measures are in place to contain pollution.

"This case highlights the potential for serious damage to occur and highlights the importance of companies having safeguards and operating procedures in place to control pollution at all times. Carelessness meant that simple containment structures which could have prevented the spill from leaving the mine site were not in place. Fortunately the environmental harm from this particular spill was low.

"Importantly, the company did report the spill to the DECCW Environment Line and cooperated with the DECCW officers throughout the investigation."

Anyone who sees pollution is urged to contact the Environment line on 131 555.

Bellingen Shire Council State of the Environment Report 2009-2010:

Urunga antimony processing site

A seriously contaminated site has been identified at Urunga, Portions 138 & 169 Parish of Newry. Contamination also affects adjacent Crown Land and a SEPP 14 wetland. The site was previously used for antimony ore processing, since abandoned without rehabilitation of the site. DECCW have undertaken an investigation of the site and researched remediation options.

General

Council maintains records of properties known to be affected by contamination. Council must consider the requirements of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 and State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land in assessing proposed changes to the use of land.

Antimony and arsenic dispersion in the Macleay River catchment, New South Wales: a study of the environmental geochemical consequences, February 2007:

A baseline geochemical study of stream sediments and waters of the Macleay River catchment in northeastern New South Wales indicates that although most of the catchment is unaffected by anthropogenic or natural inputs of heavy metals and metalloids, the Bakers Creek - trunk Macleay-floodplain system has been strongly affected by mining-derived Sb and As. The dispersion train from the Hillgrove Sb - Au mining area to the Pacific Ocean is over 300 km in length. Ore and mineralised altered rock from Hillgrove contains vein, breccia-hosted and disseminated stibnite, arsenopyrite, pyrite and traces of gold. Historic (pre-1970) mine-waste disposal practices have resulted in high to extreme contamination of stream sediments and waters by Sb and As for ∼50 km downstream, with high Au values in the sediments…..

Estimates of sediment migration rates and amounts of Sb and As transported in suspension and solution imply that the catchment contamination will be long-term (centuries to millennia) such that environmental effects need to be ascertained and management strategies implemented…

[Ashley, P. M.; Graham, B. P.; Tighe, M. K.; Wolfenden, B. J in Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, Volume 54, Number 1, February 2007 , pp. 83-103(21)]

North Coast Voices, "NSW North Coast antimony contamination makes it onto national television", 25 October 2011, excerpt:

The Sydney Morning Herald also addressed the issue of historic and recent contamination from the Hillgrove antimony mine:

A PLUME of toxic pollution from an old antimony mine appears to have killed fish for dozens of kilometres along the Macleay River in northern NSW.....

a study published by the CSIRO in 2009 described the waterways near the mothballed mine as ''highly contaminated'' and estimated about 7000 tonnes of waste had accumulated along the bed of the Macleay River.

Water tests have shown antimony levels at 250 times background levels, with high levels detected along the river to the coast at Urunga, where the mineral was once processed for export. 

Yamba Community Action Network Inc to give evidence at NSW parliamentary committee hearing re Planning System and the Impacts of Climate Change on the Environment and Communities, Monday 17 June 2024. Live link via NSW Parliament website

YambaCAN protest banner

News release, 13 June 2024:

 

YAMBA CAN WILL PROVIDE EVIDENCE IN PARLIAMENT HOUSE ON MONDAY 17 JUNE 2024

The Portfolio Committee No. 7 – Planning and Environment has invited two representatives of Yamba CAN to give evidence at its next hearing for the inquiry into the planning system and the impacts of climate change on the environment and communities.

Date: Monday, 17 June 2024

Appearance time: 11.00 – 11.30 am

Location: Jubilee Room, NSW Parliament House

Yamba CAN welcomes the invitation and has replied to the Committee informing that our two representatives attending Parliament House shall be Lynne Cairns and Helen Tyas Tunggal.

Portfolio7 Committee hearings can be viewed live via the government’s website

To watch live, use this link https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Pages/webcasts.aspx .

Video recordings of previous hearings can be found on the NSW Parliament's YouTube channel here. [Portfolio Committee No. 7 - Planning and Environment: Planning system and the impacts of climate change on the environment and communities - YouTube]

Chairperson

Yamba Community Action Network Inc (Yamba CAN Inc)

Yamba CAN announces NSW Upper House Portfolio Committee No.7 visiting West Yamba floodplain urban development site 8:30am Friday 31 May 2024

 

Now is the time to help make a difference!

Portfolio Committee 7 are coming to Yamba

24 May 2024

Members of NSW Parliament’s Portfolio Committee 7 (Planning and Environment) are visiting Yamba to undertake site visits in relation to the Parliamentary Inquiry into the “Planning system and the impacts of climate change on the environment and communities.”

When is the Committee coming to Yamba: Friday 31 May 2024

Time: 8.30am

The Committee will be travelling down Carrs Drive. There are strict protocols in relation to observers remaining at a distance from the Committee visiting sites.

Yamba CAN Inc would like as many people as possible to stand on either side of Carrs Drive, near the access to Harold Tory Drive and O’Grady’s Lane.

We will have our banners and signs that observers can hold up when the Committee will be driving past in a bus.

Please ensure personal safety in relation to traffic movement.

Please be on site at about 8.20am ready to hold a sign.

The Portfolio Committee 7 Inquiry details and submissions can be seen at:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=2987

Please see attached the NR Times and CV Independent articles this week.

Please spread the word to others to attend and please outline that there are strict protocols.

Secretary

Yamba Community Action Network Inc (Yamba CAN Inc)

Follow us on Facebook

*********

Note:

Portfolio Committee No. 7 – Planning and Environment was established on 10 May 2023 in the 58th Parliament to inquire into and report on any matters relevant to the public administration of:

Climate Change, Energy, the Environment, Heritage, Planning and Public Spaces 

[https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/listofcommittees/Pages/committees.aspx]

Click on articles below to enlarge

Clarence Valley Independent 22 May 2024
 

Northern Rivers Times 23 May 2024

On 25 July 2022 the NSW Legislative Council announced the “Inquiry into current and potential impacts of gold, silver, lead and zinc mining on human health, land, air and water quality in New South Wales”

 

On 25 July 2022 the NSW Legislative Council announced the “Inquiry into current and potential impacts of gold, silver, lead and zinc mining on human health, land, air and water quality in New South Wales”

Triggered by community concerns wherever gold, silver, lead or zinc mining exploration is occurring or active mines are established and, the ongoing NSW Environmental Protection Agency investigation of Newcrest’s Cadia Holdings Pty Ltd mine near Orange, the NSW Parliament Legislative Council has acted.

Portfolio Committee No. 2 – Health was established on 10 May 2023 in the 58th Parliament to inquire into and report on any matters relevant to the public administration of:

Health, Regional Health, the Illawarra and the South Coast, Water, Housing, Homelessness, Mental Health, Youth, the North Coast.

The composition of Portfolio No.2 Committee is:

Chair: Cohn, Amanda (GRNS, LC Member)

Deputy Chair: Carter, Susan (LIB, LC Member)

Members: Buttigieg, Mark (ALP, LC Member)

Donnelly, Greg (ALP, LC Member)

Faehrmann, Cate (GRNS, LC Member)

Suvaal, Emily (ALP, LC Member)

Taylor, Bronnie (NAT, LC Member)

On Tuesday 25 July 2023 this Standing Committee created a Select Committee to inquire into and report on the current and potential impacts of gold, silver, lead and zinc mining on human health, land, air and water quality in New South Wales.

Submissions to the inquiry will close on 5 September 2023 and the select committee reports on its findings by 21 November 2023.

Submissions can be lodged via the inquiry webpage at:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=2976#tab-submissions

The Inquiry’s terms of reference can be read abd downloaded at:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/inquiries/2976/Terms%20of%20reference.pdf

This Upper House inquiry is of more than passing interest to Northern Rivers communities given that by 2022 the NSW Government had granted 18 Mineral Mining Leases (MLs) and Gold Leases (GLs) and over 35 Mineral Exploration Licences (ELs) in the Clarence electorate, along with 6 new exploration leases [Clarence Catchment Alliance, retrieved 26.07.23].

A perspective on one of the serious flaws to be found in the NSW Perrottet Coalition Government's new NSW Reconstruction Authority Act

A perspective on one of the serious flaws in the NSW Perrottet Government's new NSW Reconstruction Authority Act which was offered in a last ditch effort to get at least one meaningful amendment to the Bill through the Upper House....

 

NSW Parliament, Legislative Council Hansard, 17 November 2022:

Mr JUSTIN FIELD (16:23): I move Independent amendment No. 1 on sheet c2022-241:

No. 1Disaster prevention areas

Page 18, clause 41(2)(c), line 2. Omit "potential". Insert instead "imminent".

The amendment goes to the issue of the extraordinary powers in the bill to override the planning Act in New South Wales. To be really clear for members who may not have taken notice of the extraordinary powers that the bill confers on the planning Minister, the bill entirely switches off the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. In fact, there appears to be no limit on the sort of development that could be approved at the stroke of a pen by the Minister. There seems to be no limit on the extent of the proposal, including a proposal that would otherwise be State significant infrastructure requiring very detailed planning and assessment, and there seems to be no limit on where that development could occur in New South Wales.

Under proposed section 68, the planning Minister is authorised to undertake a development without the need for an approval under the Act. This applies under certain circumstances, but those circumstances are my concern. The authorisation may be given "in relation to a declared project, reconstruction area or disaster prevention area". This is a critical point. If you take note of the specifics in the bill, a disaster prevention area could be incredibly broad. There is no requirement for exceptional circumstances. There is no requirement for a disaster to be underway or even likely to be underway in a particular area. If the authority, via the Minister and the Premier, decides that an area is a disaster prevention area, that in and of itself empowers the Minister to authorise the undertaking of a particular development.

In the second reading debate, I raised the example of the Warragamba Dam. I do not for a moment expect that the planning Minister will just authorise the construction of the Warragamba Dam using the provisions of this bill but, to be clear, there is no prevention in the bill. The bill would allow for such a significant development to be undertaken should the Minister, with the concurrence of the Premier, declare the area around the dam to be a disaster prevention area.

Rather than such an extreme example, let us consider a levee around a particular town. Questions around levees are often incredibly controversial. They are raised from time to time and they are highly politicised. Often they must go through extraordinary degrees of community consultation and planning before they are even considered. But, particularly on councils, you will hear some voices arguing strongly for a levee to be increased or a levee to be added. You will hear others warning that there will be incredible downstream impacts as a result that might impact businesses or homes or the environment. I can envisage that these sorts of powers to authorise a development with no restriction could be used to circumvent normal political disputes.

It would be better to resolve the disputes and design such infrastructure, if we were going to proceed with it, in a considered and methodical way using the planning system and all its provisions for consultation in order to go through the potential impacts. But here we have the power to simply declare a disaster prevention area. It is important for people to note just how broad this is. The Minister may make a declaration for such a prevention area if they are satisfied that part of the State is likely to be directly or indirectly affected by disaster. We have had, in the past four years, enough experience to know that any part of New South Wales is likely to be directly or indirectly affected by disaster. We have seen it happen, and we know it is only going to get worse. In my mind, there is no constraint about where this could apply.

The second aspect requires that the authority has recommended making such a declaration. I can envisage that it might arrive at that conclusion because the Minister is satisfied the declaration is necessary to help prevent or mitigate against potential disasters for a community. Not only is it broad in its scope as to where it could apply, the only test is whether the Minister considers that such a development could help prevent or mitigate potential disasters for a community. We have heard the Government make arguments like that for Warragamba Dam. We have heard certain representatives and communities make those sorts of arguments for levees around their towns. We hear those arguments when it comes to clearing of vegetation for fire mitigation, no matter how misguided and not supported by the science that is.

There is a very low test, no threshold, no oversight, no transparency and a very broad remit for an area to be declared a disaster prevention area. Once that is done, the Minister has the power to switch off the New South Wales planning Act entirely and approve a development. That might seem extraordinary, but I have tested it with the Government. The Government has acknowledged that it is true. That is the extent of the powers in the bill, but the Government says, "We don't intend to use it." I would love for the Parliamentary Secretary to clearly put on the record in his response to this amendment that the Government does not intend to use it that way. I agree that the Government would not intend to use it in some of those ways, but I ask this fundamental question: Should emergency powers be used to do preventative work at all? In fact, that is an important consideration. I raised it in my speech to the amendment regarding the climate adaptation plans.

If it is a good idea for the prevention of risk in the instance of a potential disaster, let us do it now. Let us do it in a collaborative and coordinated way. Let us engage the planning system in the way that is intended, which is to raise issues, highlight potential impacts and then mitigate or avoid them where possible. One would expect that that is how it would be done. I have been told by the Government that is not what it intends with disaster prevention areas. The Government described the situation in Lismore with the potential requirement to clear the drains and said that it would have been able to act in advance of that. I do not buy that. There are other provisions in this bill and other elements of the law that would not allow that but, if that is the case, my amendment is clear and simple. Instead of requiring the Minister to be satisfied that the declaration is necessary to help prevent or mitigate against potential disasters for a community, let us omit the word ''potential" and insert instead ''imminent".

There has been sufficient time to understand the potential risks associated with flood and fire impacts in recent years and to give time for an authority, once established, to act at that level to implement projects that could help mitigate risks. But giving it carte blanche with a broad definition "some potential disaster somewhere that it might be likely to directly or indirectly affect", would be open to abuse. This reasonable amendment will bring the bill into line with what the Government says is its intention in the first place. I commend the amendment to the Committee. [my yellow highlighting]

Ministers and Members of the NSW Perrottert Coalition Government abandoning ship at March 2023 state election:

And the list is getting longer the closer New South Wales comes to the March 2023 state election.......

Perrottet Government ministers and backbenchers who have announced they will resign at the March 2023 NSW state election

• Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Cities, Minister for Active Transport & MLA for Pittwater Rob Stokes – in parliament 16 years;

• Speaker of the House & MLA for Davidson Jonathan O'Dea – in parliament 16 years;

• Minister for Customer Service and Digital Government, Minister for Small Business, Minister for Fair Trading & MLA for Ryde Victor Dominello – in parliament almost 14.6 years;

• Minister for Corrections, Minister for Veterans, Minister for Western Sydney & MLA for Parramatta Geoffrey Lee – in parliament 12 years;

• Transport Minister David Elliott – in parliament 12 years;

• Lib MLA for South Coast Shelly Hancock – in parliament 20 years;

• Lib MLA for for Riverstone Kevin Conolly – in parliament 12 years;

• Lib MLA for Vaucluse Gabrielle Upton – in parliament 12 years;

• Nats MLA for Clarence Chris Gulaptis – in parliament 12 years;

• Nats MLA for Myall Lakes Stephen Bromhead – in parliament 12 years;

• Nats MLA for Oxley Melinda Pavey – in parliament 8 years.

Minister for Health & MLA for Wakehurst Brad Hazzard is rumoured to be considering retirement. Hazzard has been in parliament since March 1991. Retirement confirmed by reports in mainstream media later on morning of 25 October.

Earlier this year Lib MLC Catherine Cusack resigned on a matter of principle after 19 years in parliament and Lib MLC Don Harwin resigned for unstated reasons after 23 years in parliament.

Yet another petition to the NSW Parliament was debated last week - resulting in yet another petition to parliament being casually dismissed by the Perrottet Coalition Government

Petitions

NATIVE FOREST LOGGING

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The House will now consider the electronic petition signed by 20,000 or more

persons that is listed on the Business Paper. It is about native forest logging and was lodged by the member for South Coast. Before I call the member for South Coast, I again welcome to the public gallery and the Cooper Gallery those who have joined us for the debate. I am aware that there are strongly held views on the matter we are about to discuss. Parliamentary debate allows that those with opposing views are able to express them freely without interference. I therefore ask that those in the gallery refrain from clapping or distracting debate in any way, including verbally or visually.

The question is that the House take note of the petition.

[NSW Parliament, Legislative Assembly, Hansard, 13 October 2022]

The Echo, 14 October 2022:

Yesterday in Sydney the public gallery in the NSW lower house of parliament was packed with citizens hoping to hear their representatives support the community’s calls for an end to the logging of our public native forests.

The debate was forced by the success of a petition with over 21,000 signatures that calls for a rapid transition out of logging our native forests.

Tens of thousands of people

Greens spokesperson for the environment and agriculture Sue Higginson MLC said that tens of thousands of people from across the state have come together to call for an end to public native forest logging. ‘The time has come and the case has been made that our public forests are worth more to us standing.

‘The government has made no plans to transition out of this destructive industry and into sustainable plantations in the full knowledge that communities and workers will be left behind by their policies.’

Ms Higginson said that much public native forest estate has been impacted by drought, fires and floods. ‘We need to change our perception of native forests to recognise them as a vitally important line of defence against both the climate and the extinction crisis, but this senseless government is determined to destroy them.

The petition

The parliamentary petition calls on the NSW parliament to:

• Transition NSW’s native forestry industry towards sustainable plantations by 2024.

• Immediately place a moratorium on public native forest logging until the regulatory framework is introduced.

• Urgently protect high-conservation value forests through gazettal in the National Parks estate.

• And ban biomass fuel, made from native forest timber.

North East Forests campaigner Sean O’Shannessy.
Photo supplied.

‘The response to the petition from the Minister for Agriculture Dugald Saunders was bitterly disappointing.
Tens of thousands of people are calling for our forests to be protected and the minister has completely dismissed what’s best for communities and the environment,’ said Ms Higginson…..

‘Clarence MP Chris Gulaptis heckled his Liberal Party colleague Shelly Hancock as she introduced and spoke for the petition on behalf of her constituents.’

Mr O’Shannessy said the is a rapidly dawning realisation among all rational participants in the public discussion of the future management of native forests, that logging is not going have a place there.

‘Sustainable plantations will supply our timber needs and our forests will be protected in properly managed reserves. We can not afford to keep subsidising the destruction of our carbon sinks, water catchments and koalas homes,’ said Mr O’Shannessy.

The Government’s idea of ‘sustainable’

Ms Higginson said that the Government claims that sustainable native forest management includes cutting down critical habitat for threatened species, including koala habitat, clear felling areas of our forests and cutting down hollow-bearing trees which are essential for the survival of forest-dependent threatened species like gliders, owls and bats.

‘Bizarrely, the Government claims that cutting down our forests is good for the climate crisis in complete contradiction to scientific consensus. Old trees sequester more carbon than young trees, which on its own should be enough for us to be doing everything we can to protect them.

‘The end of public native forest logging is inevitable and we are so close to finally seeing the transition out of this industrial scale destruction.

‘Parliament could do this tomorrow if the government would stop blocking this important reform and develop a plan that delivers economic security for communities and protects our precious forests,’ said Ms Higginson.

For interested North Coast Voices readers the 39 minute ‘take note’ debate of this petition can be found at:

https://api.parliament.nsw.gov.au/api/hansard/search/daily/pdf/HANSARD-1323879322-128218. Commencing at Page 58.

Below are some debate excerpts and it should be noted that all misconceptions, misinformation, unfounded beliefs and downright political lies voiced are actually found in remarks made by the Nationals MLA for Dubbo and Minister for Agriculture & Minister for Western New South Wales Dugald Saunders, as well as in remarks by Nationals MLA for Clarence Chris Gulaptis who retires from parliament at the March 2023 state election. Yellow highlights of some of the largest whoppers are my own.

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS (Clarence) (16:12): I speak in response to the petition tabled by the member for South Coast. I acknowledge the petitioners in the gallery for their efforts in obtaining 20,000 signatures, because it is an effort. I know that and I understand why they are present today. But I am really disappointed with the contribution by the member for Ballina, because it is misleading. One of the problems when we talk about native forestry in this country, and in this State in particular, is that a lot of the proposals that have been raised are based on a range of misconceptions, misinformation and unfounded beliefs.

When it comes to which side of the House manages forests better, this side manages forests better. That was shown when Bob Carr declared State forests national parks back in the eighties, because they were managed so well by what is now ForestCorp. They are managed well. It is like your garden: You cannot let your garden be overgrown with weeds; you have to manage it. Unfortunately, that is what the problem is. We let our national parks overgrow and when the bushfires came through, five billion native species were killed in 7.2 million hectares of national park. That is what happens in a national park when they do not have the resources to manage it.

Mr Jamie Parker: You're in government. Why don't you manage it?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Because the resources would have to come out of Health or Education.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Balmain will come to order.

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: They would come out of Health or Education. The forests are managed in a responsible way, and we see that. Do we want native timbers from Borneo and attack the—

Mr Jamie Parker: We're about plantations.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Clarence will direct his comments through the Chair.

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: We have plantation timbers and we also have native forests. The reason the forests were created in the first instance was to provide a resource for the inhabitants to build their houses and to construct this city. Parliament House is constructed from timber from our forests. That was the whole purpose of them, and still is. We want affordable housing, but where is the construction material going to come from? Members opposite talk about affordable housing, but how will it be provided if we do not cut down trees? Forestry Corporation plants four million seedlings every year to replace the trees it cuts. If that is not carbon sequestration, what is? It is a joke when members do not look at the evidence and the facts.

Mr Jamie Parker: We have looked at the evidence, mate, don't worry.

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Yes, look at the evidence. Five billion native species were killed in a hot fire because those national parks did not have the resources to be managed effectively.

Mr Jamie Parker: Well, give them the resources. You're in the Government.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Yes, and we will take them from Education and Health, because that is what you are saying.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Clarence will direct his comments through the Chair.

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Yes, I will. The fact of the matter is that the Government's resources are finite; they are not unlimited. We cannot use a credit card and spend wherever we want to. State forests are managed effectively. They produce revenue that goes back into managing the forests and looking after feral animals and noxious weeds. Where is that revenue going to come from?

Mr Jamie Parker: It makes a loss.

Mr CHRISTOPHER GULAPTIS: Do our national parks make a profit? No, they do not. Of course they do not. Native forestry is heavily regulated to ensure that there is long-term ecological sustainability, and robust science consistently demonstrates that those regulations are effective. The proposal to create public native forests would have substantial negative impacts on the State's economy and finances. We must remember that the forestry sector is worth around $2.8 billion. It directly supports almost 20,000 jobs, 40 per cent of which are in regional New South Wales. I call on the Labor Party and members opposite to stop vilifying the timber industry and support the productive and sustainable approach that the Coalition Government has put in place to manage this incredible resource that has been used as a building material since Jesus was a boy. It is a terrific sustainable product, so why do they vilify it?

Ms JANELLE SAFFIN (Lismore) (16:18): I make a contribution to debate on the petition, which has some 21,000 signatures. I take umbrage at what the member for Clarence said. I am not vilifying the industry, but I want to be part of the debate because I have been involved in it in my area for some 40 years. The issue has been so divisive so many times, so we must resolve it in such a way that we get a sustainable industry. That is the objective that most people are going for. That is the objective of the people who signed this petition. Somehow we have got to get there. I understand that it is important. So many people in the Lismore electorate and beyond are passionate about this issue.

My electorate has huge environmental movements, including the North East Forest Alliance, whose members are here today. The Nature Conservation Council was also here this week. Local constituents have written to me in support of the petition. Local forestry and timber industry workers, as well as the unions, have also spoken to me about the petition. I understand the passion and the emotion in it. As I said, I have lived it for a long time. From what is happening in my area and on the South Coast—based on what I heard from the member for South Coast—and what I have heard in this debate, I can say that we are at the vortex of the issue. At the heart of it is the desire to have our forests protected from fire, flood and pestilence, and to have habitats for animals and rare plants that are free of weeds and predators, or at least minimally affected.

We all want a sustainable logging industry, wherever it takes place. I have recently read that under Premier McGowan—and I would hardly call him a radical Premier of any kind—Western Australia is moving to end native forestry logging. I note that Victoria is doing the same under its more progressive Premier Andrews. Those desires and objectives speak to management, and that has been the problem that I have seen for so many years.

We know that before European colonisation the forests, which were extensive, were managed. Of course, Indigenous nations practised cultural burning, which, thank goodness, so many are embracing now because they see the value in it. One thing that the member for South Coast said that really struck me was that this petition was a message to the Government and all members that we must take heed, and we certainly do.

I draw the attention of the House to the Legislative Council inquiry into the long-term sustainability and future of the timber and forest products industry. I read the report only recently.….

The committee's findings and recommendations are telling about the state of the industry and what is going on under Forestry Corporation. There were 11 findings, and I draw attention to finding 2, 3 and 5. Finding 2 states:

In the last decade, there has been no increase in additional hardwood and softwood timber plantations.

Finding 3 states:

The lack of expansion of timber plantations by the NSW Government has significantly contributed to the current timber crisis which has only been further exacerbated by recent events, including the 2019/20 bushfires.

We heard about those from the member for South Coast. Finding 5 states:

The reduction in harvestable areas of public native forests and failure to expand native hardwood plantations has resulted in the loss of wood supply …..

Recommendation 1 states:

That the NSW Government identify and implement as a priority a long term funded strategy for the expansion of both softwood and hardwood timber plantations in New South Wales.

We can all agree that has to happen. Recommendation 2 states:

That the NSW Government establish further state-owned timber plantations

Recommendation 4 states:

That the NSW Government provide long term support to workers in the timber and forest products industry transitioning away from native forestry to other parts of the sector with access to worker transition services, training and retraining support, relocation support, and counselling.

They are some of the results from the inquiry.

Mr DUGALD SAUNDERS(Dubbo—Minister for Agriculture, and Minister for Western New South Wales) (16:33): I thank the member for South Coast for tabling this petition. I have listened to the debate with great interest. I will clarify a few misconceptions. First, logging does not occur in State forests; selective harvesting occurs in State forests. The Environment Protection Authority is in charge of activating the regulations around that, and it does so regularly. The sawlog part of a tree is not used for biomass production; it is the roots, the bark and the other parts that cannot be used for anything apart from chipping, burning or pulping. It is about turning that waste into energy rather than leaving it to become a bushfire concern. That is the point.

As far as State forests, as the member for Oxley mentioned, only a tiny percentage of State forests are used for timber harvesting. We are talking about 1 per cent of the State forest that is harvested—that is, about 0.1 per cent of the broader forested landscape. It is a tiny amount, it is a managed amount, and it is not done in a way with disregard for the environment. That is the point.

Ever since I have been the Minister in this space, I have said that I hold Forestry Corporation to the highest level of compliance. That is absolutely what we need to do. On this side of the House, we all agree that there is no room for things to be done incorrectly. But to suggest that timber and State forests do not work hand in hand and do not support communities is just incorrect. It is also worth mentioning that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recognises that managing forests for sustainable timber production is one of the best ways to mitigate climate change. Removing trees, allowing more sunshine through the canopy and growing new trees actually sequesters great amounts of carbon, and we have a fantastic renewable, organic and regenerative resource that we love as humans.

State forests also support things like native-based tourism. State forests are already doing that. We are expanding the mountain biking, the horseriding, the picnicking and the walking trails. They are all managed because we have State forests that are managed to support those activities. I am interested to see what Labor does around forests as a policy matter, because we have complete support from a number of workers up and down the coast and inland who are saying they want support for native forestry. On this side of the House, we absolutely provide that support. It is worth $2.8 billion and thousands of jobs. We have their back, but we also appreciate the petition.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I thank the guests in the public gallery, who were visiting today to listen to the debate. I also extend thanks to those members of the public who have been listening online.

Petition noted.