Vegetation Management (Clearing for Relevant Purposes) Amendment Bill 2018

Supported the general intent but criticised the bill for not going far enough, arguing the LNP's own proposals for high-value agriculture and fodder harvesting were more workable and reduced red tape for landholders.

“This bill does not go far enough when it comes to high-value agriculture. The private member's bill seeks to create an obligation on the chief executive to issue an information notice where an application for clearing as assessed under section 22A of the Vegetation Management Act 1999 has been rejected.”— 2020-02-04View Hansard

Strongly supported the bill as a KAP initiative, arguing it would give landowners a right of appeal when clearing applications are rejected and allow high-value grazing as a relevant purpose for clearing.

“This bill is also about giving landowners the right of appeal under section 22A of the act where the application has been rejected and drags on without even the chief executive making a decision.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

As the bill's sponsor, argued it contains moderate amendments to allow grazing activities as a relevant purpose for clearing and to require the government to provide formal feedback when clearing applications are rejected.

“These amendments are really just getting rid of these silly anomalies that are in the act. By doing that, the industry has a vast array of activities it can conduct.”— 2019-04-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing it would abolish the strong vegetation management framework and strip accountability and transparency measures that protect Queensland's natural environment and biodiversity.

“The amendments put forward in this private member's bill will look only to abolish the strong framework already in place and, if anything, strip any accountability and transparency measures that are there to protect our greatest asset, our natural environment and biodiversity.”— 2020-02-04View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing that appeal mechanisms already exist under the Judicial Review Act and that only three refusals had occurred in six years outside high-value agriculture applications.

“We also need to consider that, since 2013, there have been only three refusals for applications for clearing for relevant purposes outside of clearing for high-value agriculture, which does not exist anymore—three refusals in about six years.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

As Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy, stated the government does not support the bill, noting the committee recommended against it and that existing review rights under the Judicial Review Act are adequate.

“This private member's bill should not be supported and I will outline the reasons for that, despite the very eloquent reasoning by the member for Traeger.”— 2019-04-02View Hansard

As the bill's sponsor, argued the bill was a modest compromise that acknowledged Labor's vegetation management laws while seeking fairness for landholders, including allowing grazing on land already approved for high-value agriculture and providing information notices for rejected clearing applications.

“I tried to set the bar very low with the amendments we have brought to the House. It is very disappointing to hear during the course of the debate comments to the effect that we are trying to turn things back.”— 2020-02-04View Hansard

Supported the bill as a first step in restoring the balance for primary producers, arguing that the right of appeal is a basic right and that the government's vegetation management laws have attacked farmers.

“I will not be opposing this bill because it is the first small step in restoring the balance. It is a step in acknowledging that Queensland primary producers are not environmental vandals and it is a step in acknowledging that Queensland primary producers deserve to be treated with respect.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Supported the bill as addressing gaps in the legislative framework that constrain primary producers from clearing land for legitimate purposes, arguing graziers need options for cultivating and sourcing feed.

“In order to develop a more profitable and competitive domestic international agriculture industry in Queensland, graziers must have a range of options for cultivating and sourcing feed.”— 2019-04-02View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing the need for further legislative amendment had not been established and citing the history of excessive land clearing rates under the Newman-Nicholls government.

“The need for further legislative amendment as proposed by the Vegetation Management (Clearing for Relevant Purposes) Amendment Bill 2018 has not been established and, therefore, I do not support the bill.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Supported the bill as a committee member, arguing that a right of appeal should be a basic right and that both the LGAQ and AgForce supported the amendment.

“As I said before, a right of appeal should be a basic right.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing it attempts to insert unnecessary provisions and that existing appeal mechanisms are adequate, with a refusal rate of only 0.3 per cent.

“The Vegetation Management (Clearing for Relevant Purposes) Amendment Bill 2018 attempts to insert unnecessary provisions into the Vegetation Management Act. The need for further legislative change has not been established by those opposite.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Supported the bill as a commonsense proposal for transparency in decision-making, criticising Labor's vegetation management laws as ideologically driven rather than science-based.

“This amendment bill is a commonsense proposal that seeks to create an obligation on the chief executive to issue an information notice where an application for clearing, as assessed under section 22A of the act, has been rejected.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing the case had not been made given the extremely low refusal rate and the existing appeal rights under the Judicial Review Act, and that the government had a mandate to protect the environment.

“Since 2013, only three refusals have been made relating to other relevant purposes at a rate of 0.5 refusals per year—three refusals, 0.5 refusals per year. That is a rate of 0.3 per cent, not even one per cent.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Supported the bill as a committee member, arguing it would provide farmers with the transparency they deserve and restore balance after Labor's draconian vegetation management changes.

“The amendment under debate tonight will make a positive difference to our agricultural industry in Queensland. I strongly encourage everyone in the House today to support its passing to allow our farmers the transparency they deserve.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Supported the bill, arguing that Labor's vegetation management laws are damaging to primary producers and that the bill would compel accountability and transparency in departmental decision-making.

“It will compel the chief executive to issue an information notice where the application has been rejected based on section 22A. In doing so, it creates a rare opportunity for the scrutiny of those decisions.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Supported the bill as making commonsense changes to improve transparency and accountability, criticising Labor's consultation on vegetation management as disingenuous.

“This bill aims to improve transparency and accountability in relation to unfair and restrictive laws. It makes commonsense changes and the LNP will not oppose the bill.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Strongly supported the bill, arguing that farmers are too scared to apply for clearing permits due to the cost and lack of transparency, and that the amendments to allow mulga harvesting during drought are critical.

“There are farmers out there who are too scared to apply for these permits at the moment because they are too scared to spend $400,000 or half a million dollars to go through the process and have it drawn out by the department and not hear what is going on with their application.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard

Supported the bill, arguing that Labor's vegetation management laws have aggravated drought conditions by restricting mulga harvesting and imposing costly bureaucratic processes on farmers.

“Labor's vegetation management laws have proved to be a brutal, unprovoked attack on farmers, their families and the farming communities right across Queensland including in my electorate.”— 2019-11-26View Hansard