The Nature Conservation Council of New South Wales has commenced a world-first legal action to protect rivers and wetlands. Challenging the Border Rivers Water Sharing Plan in the Land & Environment Court, naming Water Minister Melinda Pavey & Treasurer Matthew Kean in his position as Environment Minister as respondents

Environmental Defenders Office, 6 October 2021:

A plan for sharing water in the northern Murray-Darling Basin is being challenged in court over climate change, in an Australian and world legal first.

Acting on behalf of the Nature Conservation Council of NSW, EDO lawyers will head to the NSW Land and Environment Court to challenge the validity of the Border Rivers Water Sharing Plan (WSP), arguing that the NSW Government failed to properly consider future climate change when making the plan.

The Border River catchment sits along the NSW/Queensland border and includes the Macintyre and Severn Rivers. The catchment is home to endangered species such as the eel-tailed catfish, Australian painted snipe and curlew sandpiper.

Both the NSW Water Minister Melinda Pavey, who approved the WSP and the NSW Treasurer Matt Kean, who as Environment Minister provided concurrence, are named as respondents in the Class 4 Judicial Review proceedings.....

Chris Gambian, CEO of the NSW Nature Conservation Council said:

“If we fail to keep our rivers alive as a first priority, it doesn’t really matter what our second priority is. We will have lost the fight.

“Climate change is not some abstract phenomenon that may occur in the distant future. River communities in NSW are bearing the brunt of that change every day, right now.

“Just 18 months ago, many towns in western NSW were entirely dependent of bores or truck deliveries for their water supplies.

“It is not just prudent for governments to factor in the impacts of climate change. It is a legal requirement that we are seeking to uphold by taking this action.”

EDO Managing Lawyer Dr Emma Carmody said:

“Our client alleges that under their own laws, NSW Government Ministers are required to properly consider climate change, including future climate change, when drawing up a water sharing plan. By relying on historical climate data for the catchment, we argue that they have failed to do this, including in relation to the calculation of the catchment-wide limit on extractions from the river.”

“The alleged unlawfulness arises not only due to the impacts of this failure on the Border Rivers itself, but on surrounding floodplains and downstream rivers and communities, notably the Barwon-Darling/Barka River, which receives some of its flows from the Border Rivers catchment.”

“Our client will further argue that the rights of children and future generations to enjoy and benefit from healthy, functioning river systems requires the Minister to properly consider climate change and its impacts on water availability and quality and to devise a water sharing plan that reflects the likelihood of a hotter, drier future.”

“Our client also alleges that setting drought reserves for basic landholder rights on the basis of lowest inflows up to July 2009 is unlawful, not only because it excludes the most recent and severe drought on record, but future climate change.”

“There is ample evidence which indicates that the rivers and floodplains of the northern Murray-Darling Basin are over-extracted. This is now being exacerbated by climate change, which is making it hotter and drier. We can’t afford to make decisions about our precious water resources which ignore this reality. Indeed, our client alleges that the law requires it.”

“Our client will ask the court to find that the Border Rivers Water Sharing Plan is invalid and must be replaced by a lawful plan.”

“If this case is successful, it will likely mean that future Water Sharing Plans will have to take climate change into account, in particular in relation to the setting of catchment-wide extraction limits and environmental flow rules. This could mean more water for fragile ecosystems across the Murray-Darling Basin and in turn healthier river systems and greater water security for downstream communities. Our children and future generations deserve to enjoy and benefit from a healthy, functioning river system.”

`````````````````````````````````````````````

https://youtu.be/q6Fgkb0at0o

It is worth noting that Brett Walker QC, who acted as Commissioner during the twelve month long South Australian Royal Commission into the Murray Darling Basin Plan, has agreed to represent the Conservation Council of NSW.

It is also be noted that on 26 August 2021 the NSW Land and Environment Court in Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action Incorporated v Environment Protection Authority [2021] NSWLEC 92 ordered: The Environment Protection Authority, in accordance with s 9(1)(a) of the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991 (NSW), is to develop environmental quality objectives, guidelines and policies to ensure environment protection from climate change. Neither the Minister for Energy and the Environment Matthew Kean or the EPA appealed this judgment.

How to help the Conservation Council of New South Wales fund this legal challenge of the validity of the Border Rivers Water Sharing Plan (WSP):

https://legal-water-challenge.raisely.com/

BRIEF BACKGROUND ON WATER LICENCING AND WATER BUYBACKS IN THE MURRAY DARLING BASIN

https://youtu.be/rsdGZZSaUXw

 

WATER IS LIFE: policy failures at Australian federal and state level just keep rolling on

 

The Guardian, 3 August 2021:

The Barwon-Darling is the main tributary for the Darling and was the focus of allegations in 2017 of water theft and users taking more than their allocations. Photograph: Mark Evans/Getty Images

New South Wales has been found to have exceeded its water allocations for 2019-20 in the Barwon-Darling catchment, one of the main cotton-growing areas of the state, raising new questions about the effectiveness of the state’s water enforcement rules.

The Barwon-Darling is the main tributary for the Darling and was the focus of the 2017 Four Corners report which raised allegations of water theft, pumps being tampered with and water users taking more than their allocations.

It led to a number of reports, prosecutions and an overhaul by NSW of its compliance regime.

But in the first year of compliance reporting, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority found NSW had exceeded what are known as the sustainable diversion limits (SDLs) in three areas – the Barwon-Darling watercourse, the Upper Macquarie alluvium and the Lower Murrumbidgee deep groundwater catchments.

The state claimed there was a “reasonable excuse” for exceeding the limits, and that it was adhering to its draft water resource plans for all three.

The MDBA accepted that as a reasonable and valid explanation for two of the areas, but not for the Barwon Darling.

“The MDBA found that NSW did not operate in a manner fully consistent with the submitted water resource plan in the 2019–20 water year for the Barwon–Darling,” the report said.

All other states were found to be compliant.

The NSW independent MP Justin Field said this was another black mark against the NSW Nationals on water management.

“Communities will be furious that water management has been non-compliant over a period which included the end of the worst drought on record and the first flush event. To have extractions exceeding limits over such a critical period raises serious questions about who benefited from the failures to properly implement water sharing rules.

“These findings make it all the more important that downstream targets to protect the environment and communities are included as part of any floodplain harvesting licensing regulations in the Northern Basin, including in the Barwon-Darling.”

Read the full article here.

On 5 August 2021 the Australian Government's Office of the Inspector-General of Water Compliance (IGWC) became operational. Responsibility for enforcing compliance with the Basin Plan now resides with the IGWC.

Image:IGWC

The IGWC is described as an independent regulator and its Interim Inspector-General of Water Compliance is former NSW Police officer & former NSW Nationals Member for Dubbo from 2011-2019, Troy Grant (left).

As NSW Police Minister Mr. Grant did not always obey the road rules and in his two year and one month stint as NSW Deputy Premier he failed to impress. Between April 2011 and  2019 Grant was a minister nine times over - with three tenues lasting less than six months.

In 2019 he did not re-contest his seat at the state election and in 2020 he resigned from the National Party of Australia.

His appointment as Interim Inspector-General was not universally approved when announced in 2020:

 “They’re not even pretending anymore,” Nature Conservation Council Chief Executive Chris Gambian said.

“Troy Grant was in charge when some of the worst policy decisions that favour big irrigators at the expense of communities, farmers and nature downstream.

“Fresh from stinging criticism from ICAC about water management in NSW, the federal government has appointed the fox to be in charge of the hen house.

Emus of the Clarence Coast, NSW

 

Clarence Valley Independent, 26 May 2021:

The Lions Club of Clarence – Environmental [LCCE] is a rare breed of Lions club and, just like the threatened coastal emus it is campaigning to protect, its vital numbers are growing.

The nature-focussed group, the first of its kind in Australia, has gathered 1,318 signatures on its petition to reduce the speed limit on Brooms Head Road from 100kph to 80kph, particularly where emus regularly cross. In October last year, volunteers completed the group’s first major project, planting 250 trees and shrubs on a Shark Creek property that was devastated by bushfires in September and October of 2019. “The endangered coastal emu, phascogale, brolga, and an amazing amount of birdlife visit the [78 acres] property, which is about 80 percent wetland and dedicated to the Wildlife Land Trust,” LCCE spokesperson Barbara Linley said at the time.

Last week, around 100 people attended the launch of Clarence Distillery’s new Three Emu Vodka at the Yamba Surf Life Saving Club. “Earlier this year the distillery’s co-owner, Alison [Sloley] spoke to me about a new line and supporting the endangered coastal emu,” Ms. Linley said at the function. “Alison suggested that our group runs a silent auction to raise more funds for the emus and that for this night $5 per bottle goes to the emu campaign. “I also want to thank NSW Save Our Species, Clarence Valley Council, and Yaegl, the traditional owners…..

Students Win Landmark Climate Case. In Global First, Judge Determines That Federal Environment Minister Has Duty Of Care To Protect Young People From Climate Change

 

The group of teenagers took the federal government to court on behalf of "young Australians everywhere".

(ABC News Brendan Esposito)

Final Media Release

STUDENTS WIN LANDMARK CLIMATE CASE. IN GLOBAL FIRST, MINISTER HAS DUTY OF CARE TO PROTECT YOUNG PEOPLE FROM CLIMATE CHANGE

SYDNEY MAY 27, 2021: Eight high school students have welcomed today’s landmark judgment in the Federal Court of Australia that found the Federal Environment Minister has a duty of care not to cause them harm from climate change.

The students brought the class action against Minister Sussan Ley in September 2020, asking the court to recognise the Minister has a duty to protect young people around Australia from foreseeable future climate change harms.

The students alleged that approving a major extension to the Vickery coal mine in northern New South Wales would breach the Minister’s duty. An injunction was not ordered but there will be further submissions on what the duty means for the Minister’s decision and the mine.

“I am thrilled by today’s judgement,” says Ava Princi, 17, one of the students.

“I’m thrilled because this is a global first. We understand it is the first time a Court of law,anywhere in the world, has ordered a government to specifically protect young people from the catastrophic harms of climate change.

“My future - and the future of all young people - depends on Australia joining the world in taking decisive climate action.”

“But this case is not over. While the Court stopped short of preventing the Minister from approving the Vickery mine extension today, it has ordered parties to come together to find a way forward. We are still optimistic that the climate harms from this mine will not happen.”

In Sharma and others v Minister for the Environment the Court accepted evidence brought by independent experts that carbon emissions released from mining and burning fossil fuels will contribute to wide-ranging harms to young people.

The judgment means the Environment Minister should not make decisions that harm young people, however the judge stopped short of preventing the Minister from approving the Vickery Extension Project.

The judge called upon the parties to confer on orders over the future of the proposed project.

“I feel elated by this decision,” says Laura Kirwan, 17, another student behind the class action.

“This is a victory for young people everywhere. The case was about young people stepping up and demanding more from the adults whose actions are determining our future wellbeing. Our voices are powerful and I hope this case inspires more young people to push for stronger, fasterand deeper cuts to carbon emissions.

“Our futures depend on it.”

ENDS

Avi Prince, 17 years of age,  media statement here.

The National Water Reform Draft Report has been released - now is the time for concerned Australians to speak up and loudly

If there is one thing that Australians know well by now, it is that state and federal governments frequently take from major reports only those points and recommendations which fit with their own political world view and/or those that can be easily distorted to meet the expectations of their party's financial backers - thus ensuring that little positive change occurs .

Water is the basis of life, without it communities perish and nations go into decline. That is one of the hard facts facing Australia as the impacts of climate change start to bite.

It is time for people to stand up in defence of this country's river and ground water systems and make sure governments understand that the environmental, economic and cultural vandalism they have supported in the past will no longer be tolerated in the present or the future. 

Australian Government, Productivity Commission:

National Water Reform Draft report 

This draft report was released on 11 February 2021. This draft report assesses the progress of the Australian, State and Territory governments towards achieving the objectives and outcomes of the National Water Initiative (NWI), and provides practical advice on future directions for national water reform. 

You are invited to examine the draft report and to make a written submission or brief comment by Wednesday 24 March 2021. 

 Make a submission or Make a brief comment 

The final report is expected to be handed to the Australian Government by the end of June 2021.

Download the draft report

• National Water Reform 2020 - Draft report (PDF - 2256 Kb)
• National Water Reform 2020 - Draft report (Word - 2897 Kb)

The Conversation, 11 February 2021:

Most Australians know all too well how precious water is. Sydney just experienced a severe drought, while towns across New South Wales and Queensland ran out of drinking water. Under climate change, the situation will become more dire, and more common. 

It wasn’t meant to be this way. In 2004, federal, state and territory governments signed up to the National Water Initiative. It was meant to secure Australia’s water supplies through better governance and plans for sustainable use across industry, environment and the community. 

But a report by the Productivity Commission released today says the policy must be updated. It found the National Water Initiative is not fit for the challenges of climate change, a growing population and our changing perceptions of how we value water. 

The report’s findings matter to all Australians, whether you live in a city or a drought-ravaged town. If governments don’t manage water better, on our behalf, then entire communities may disappear. Agriculture will suffer and nature will continue to degrade. It’s time for a change.

The report acknowledges progress in national water reform, and says Australia’s allocation of water resources has improved. But the commission makes clear there’s still much to be done, including: 

• making water infrastructure projects a critical part of the National Water Initiative 

• explicitly recognising how climate change threatens water-sharing agreement between states, users, towns, agriculture and the environment 

• more meaningful recognition of Indigenous rights to water delivering adequate drinking water quality to all Australians, including those in regional and remote communities, especially during drought 

• all states committing to drought management plans.

Read the full article here.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 17 February 2021:

A new national water reform report is inundated with positivity. But a closer look leaves you with a sinking feeling.

A glance at the draft report on national water reform from the Productivity Commission reminds me of the repeated judgment from old Mr Grace, the doddering owner of the department store in Are You Being Served? as he headed for the door: "You've all done very well!"

Its review of the progress of the National Water Initiative signed by the federal and state governments in 2004 - encompassing agreements on the Murray-Darling Basin - is terribly polite and relentlessly upbeat.

Apparently, governments have made "good progress" in having "largely achieved" their reform commitments. All that remains is just the need for a teensy-weensy bit of "policy renewal".

This mild-mannered stuff and congratulatory tone bear no resemblance to my memories of meetings of angry farmers railing against stupid greenies and other city slickers; of their insistence that the immediate needs of irrigators and irrigation towns along the river take priority over the river system's ultimate survival; of state governments' insistence on favouring their own irrigators over those in states further down the river; of federal and state National Party ministers happy to slip farmers a quiet favour, turning a blind eye to blatant infringements of the rules; of federal Labor ministers who, even with no seats to lose in the region, were unwilling to make themselves unpopular by standing up for the rivers' future.

I remember that the Howard government spent billions helping individual farmers make their irrigation systems more resistant to evaporation and seepage when all the benefits went to the farmer and none to the river system.

I remember all the infighting between government water agencies, and the mass fish kills during the recent drought in NSW and Queensland, for which the managers of the system accepted no responsibility.

Fortunately, reporters are adept at ignoring all the happy flannel up the front of government reports and finding the carefully hidden bad bits. And we have the assistance of water experts, including Professor Quentin Grafton, of the Australian National University, whose summary of the report in The Conversation is headed: "Our national water policy is outdated, unfair and not fit for climate challenges."

"If governments don't manage water better ... entire communities may disappear. Agriculture will suffer and nature will continue to degrade," he says.

The report's proposal to make "water infrastructure developments" a much larger part of the National Water Initiative is a critical way to keep governments honest. For years, state and federal governments have used taxpayers' dollars to pay for farming water infrastructure that largely benefits big corporate irrigators, Grafton says.

Last year the Morrison government announced a further $2 billion for its Building 21st Century Water Infrastructure project. Such megaprojects, he says, perpetuate the myth that Australia - the driest inhabited continent on Earth - can be "drought-proofed".

When governments signed the original initiative in 2004, they agreed to ensure investments in infrastructure would be both economically viable and ecologically sustainable. But many projects appear to be neither.

The report notes, for example, that building the Dungowan Dam in NSW means "any infrastructure that improves reliability for one user will affect water availability for others". The "prospect of 'new' water is illusory". Projects that aren't economically viable or ecologically sustainable can "burden taxpayers with ongoing costs, discourage efficient water use" and create long-lived impacts on communities and the environment", the report warns.

Equally disturbing is that billions of dollars for water infrastructure are presently targeted primarily at the agriculture and mining industries, while communities in desperate need of clean drinking water miss out, Grafton says.

Luckily, the report isn't so house trained as to avoid mentioning the gorilla the Morrison government prefers not to notice. There's a lot about the consequences of climate change. It says droughts will likely become more intense and frequent and, in many places, water will become scarce.

In Grafton's summary, the report says planning provisions were inadequate to deal with both the millennium drought and the recent drought in Eastern Australia. The 2012 Murray-Darling Basin Plan, for instance, took no account of climate change when determining how much water to take from waterways.

The present federal government actually dismantled the National Water Commission in 2015, so we no longer have a resourced, well-informed agency to "mark the homework" and make sure the reforms were being implemented as agreed, Grafton says.

In 2007, the worst year of the millennium drought - and the year John Howard feared he'd lose the election if he didn't match Labor's promise to introduce an emissions trading scheme - Howard remarked that "in a protracted drought, and with the prospect of long-term climate change, we need radical and permanent change".

Professor Grafton says we're still waiting for that change. "If Australia is to be prosperous and liveable into the future, governments must urgently implement water reform."

IUCN report finds climate change is a threat to 69 per cent of Australia's 16 World Heritage sites, including the Great Barrier Reef, more than double the global trend of 33 per cent

 

ABC News, 4 December 2020:

Mark Graham takes hope from pockets of Gondwana rainforests regenerating after the bushfires.(Supplied: Drew Hopper)

Ecologist Mark Graham has studied Australia's Gondwana rainforests for decades and, after years of drought and bushfires, says things have never looked so dire.

"To bear witness to the loss of some of these ecosystems . . . it's a very upsetting thing to observe," he said.

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature [IUCN] this week rated Gondwana rainforests a "significant concern". In 2017 the same report rated the forests as "good, with some concern".

The IUCN is the official advisor on nature to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee.

The report also found climate change was a threat to 69 per cent of Australia's 16 World Heritage sites, including the Great Barrier Reef, more than double the global trend of 33 per cent.

Nightcap National Park, in northern NSW, is one of the Gondwana rainforests devastated by fire a year ago.(Supplied: Darcy Grant)

Burnt rainforests 'still suffering'

The Gondwana subtropical rainforests stretch from the Hunter region in NSW to south-east Queensland and were entered on the World Heritage List in 1986, with extensions in 1994.

The 41 national parks and reserves ranging from 10 hectares to 102,712 hectares contain more than 200 rare or threatened plant species and have been compared with the Galapagos Islands in terms of global importance.

Mark Graham said more than a year after major bushfires, some parts of the rainforests were still suffering.

"There are definitely [some of] these really ancient forests that have burnt, and a year or more on there's very little, if any, life in them," he said.

"Thankfully, in some of our fire grounds, there is recovery occurring."

'Other threats increasing'

Mr Graham said the real concern now was more fires that might further reduce the size of the rainforests.

The IUCN report points out that while management has so far been effective in addressing challenges, further management responses will be required to address increasing threats, particularly those posed by bushfires as well as invasive species, pathogens, and climate change.

"There is wide recognition that considerable conservation actions will be required," the report says

"However, there is the lingering prospect that the catastrophe is a clear sign of the impact of climate change on weather patterns, and that these changes will not be reversed easily."…….

The Sydney Morning Herald, 6 December 2020:

The 3 billion animals estimated to have been killed, injured or seen their habitat destroyed by the summer fires is now understood to have included 143 million mammals, 181 million birds, 51 million frogs and 2.46 billion reptiles.

The toll includes an estimated 40 million possums and gliders caught in the path of fires; more than 36 million antechinuses, dunnarts, and other insectivorous marsupials; 5.5 million bettongs, bandicoots, quokkas, and potoroos; 5 million kangaroos and wallabies; 1.1 million wombats and 114,000 echidnas.

It is believed 60,000 koalas were killed, injured or lost habitat, with the worst losses on Kangaroo Island where 40,000 were killed or harmed in some way.

About 11,000 koalas were hit in Victoria and 8000 in NSW according to a new report into the impact of the fires on native wildlife, which confirms an earlier overall estimate but provides far more detail about the losses.

Professor Chris Dickman of the University of Sydney, who oversaw the research on behalf of the Worldwide Fund for Nature Australia, said the impact on reptiles was so high because they live in such great densities in some of the worst affected areas, with small lizards such as skinks reaching densities of 1800 per hectare.

Researchers mapped the path of the 15,000 fires over 11.46 million hectares of the total 19 million hectares that burnt over the summer, and married it with existing data about animal densities in the areas hit.

They did not directly estimate numbers of animals killed because research about how different animals may survive fires is limited, and the factors that contribute to impact are varied. For example some species can flee faster and others are more resilient at surviving later in a burnt landscape.....

NSW Nationals MP Chris Gulaptis boasts of his betrayal of his electorate

Clarence Valley Independent, 20 October 2020:

Koalas will have more protection but farmers and foresters won’t be saddled with unreasonable red tape following the introduction of a much improved State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) into State Parliament last Thursday (October 15), according to Clarence Nationals MP Chris Gulaptis.

“The Local Land Services Amendment Bill 2020” is a vast improvement on what was proposed initially and a win not just for the Nationals, but also for farmers, the timber industry and indeed koalas,” Mr Gulaptis said.

“I was prepared to walk away from the Government over the original Liberal Party plan, but this is a terrific compromise secured by the Nationals in NSW Government, in which rural industries are protected but property developers will be banned from disturbing koala habitat.

“As I said before, the red tape stops at the farm gate and that is how it should be,” Mr Gulaptis concluded.

This is a précis the final 16 October 2020 version of the amended NSW SEPP, State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019:

• Retains its new commencement date of 1 March 2020;

• Doesn’t apply to - (b) land dedicated under the Forestry Act 2012 as State forest or a flora reserve. An exemption also contained in the previous 3 September 2020 version of this SEPP;

• Only applies to 83 named local government areas out of a total of 128 local government areas and to - (a) in the koala management area specified in Schedule 1 opposite the local government area, or (b) if more than 1 koala management area is specified, in each of those koala management areas. Clauses also included in the previous version of this SEPP;

• Only applies to land classified as core koala habitat which is over 1 hectare in size. This applied to land in the previous version of the SEPP as well;

• Doesn’t apply to any land on which a development application has already been lodged, as was the case under the previous version of this SEPP;

• Tightens the definition of core koala habitat so that a higher level of proof is required at this clause - (a) an area of land which has been assessed by a suitably qualified and experienced person in accordance with the Guideline as being highly suitable koala habitat and where koalas are recorded as being present at the time of assessment of the land as highly suitable koala habitat;

• Made more land exempt from its provisions - (c) land on which biodiversity certification has been conferred, and is in force, under Part 8 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016;

• Allows larger buildings or buildings on a different part of a post-bushfire residential lot by repealing - (b) the replacement dwelling house is within the existing building footprint;

• Removes this provision protecting koala habitat identified by a particular form of mapping - (i) is not identified on the Koala Development Application Map.

It should be noted that at no time did the 3 September 2020 version of this SEPP ever apply to agricultural land broadly. The existing rules for routine farming activity and rural land clearing did not change and, if farmers had koala habitat on their land they could still apply and get approval to clear koala habitat under existing land clearing laws.

Provisions in Local Land Services Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020 have little or nothing to do with protecting koalas or farmers with koalas on their land - despite the Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis attempting to marry the Koala Habitation Protection SEPP and this Land Services amendment in the public's mind.

What the Local Land Services Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020 actually does is remove all local government areas from the protection of State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019 with the exception of just five local government areas - Ballina, Coffs Harbour City, Kempsey, Lismore and Port Stephens.

The NSW Nationals wanted the bill to go forward using the Koala Habitat Protection SEPP as the excuse masking its real intent - to establish as law those clauses that (i) allow the commercial logging of native trees to continue unimpeded on private land by circumventing a government review of the private forestry system and (ii) to allow future clearing of native timber on farmland without the need for authorisation under other state legislation, including the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 .

On 20 October 2020 the NSW Parliament’s Legislation Review Committee stated in part of the impending legislation of which Gulaptis now so proudly boasts:

The [Land Services] Bill seeks to remove several requirements for land owners to obtain development consent under Parts 4 and 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the EPA Act). In doing so, the Committee notes that the Bill would remove local councils' ability to assess development applications, engage with relevant neighbour and community stakeholders, and make recommendations regarding the proposed development changes. It may thereby impact on the rights of these stakeholders to participate in such processes and be consulted about issues that may affect them…... [my yellow highlighting]

Chris Gulaptis is boasting of bad law and misrepresenting exactly what is contained in the new legislation to residents and voters in his electorate.

This former surveyor, property developer and mining operations consultant voted for the extinction of a unique species, the Australian Koala, and for virtually unconstrained land clearance which will see many more native species at threat of extinction in New South Wales.