Page 1303 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 5 April 2011

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


enhancement of our urban forest—a report that she has worked on over the last year and which I am now very pleased to table for the information of members.

The commissioner, as she does with everything, has gone into this particular task, this undertaking, with great vigour and great rigour. She has put enormous effort into the process. She has consulted widely. I do acknowledge the effort and the role of Dr Cooper in relation to this. I also acknowledge and thank all of those individuals and organisations that made submissions, that were involved in meetings and discussions and that contributed to the final outcome.

Members are aware of the genesis of this particular inquiry by Dr Cooper. The government for some time had been grappling with the difficult and increasingly pressing issue of how best to maintain, protect and, indeed, enhance our urban forest. We are aware that many of our street and parkland trees are ageing. They are ageing simultaneously. I guess the nub of the issue is that there were a couple of phases of major tree planting within the territory. There was an initial phase 90 or so years ago which continued for some time and then there were subsequent waves as different areas of the territory were developed. Whole urban or suburban areas were planted at once. Of course, as the trees aged—different species age at different rates; an old eucalypt, for instance, is younger than some old species of exotics, such as oaks—we do have coming together an ageing of both our exotic and eucalypt or native forests throughout the territory.

Through our early work in developing an urban tree program, it became very clear to the government that the community was very determined to engage in the issue of trees. They were particularly concerned initially in relation to a discussion and proposals that were being developed as to how best to replace trees, say, within individual streets—whether it was to be done on an individual basis, a street-by-street basis or, indeed, a suburb-by-suburb basis, and the implications of that.

It is certainly the case that Canberrans are very aware of the importance of our landscape. They take particular pride and have a proprietorial interest in trees within their own street, most particularly the tree in their front yard.

Some of the issues that the government faced initially in relation to this were around how to identify trees that were not just in decline, dead or dying, but trees that looked quite robust but nevertheless potentially represented a hazard. It was the case that trees that had been assessed by tree experts as being hazardous, not being sound in form and being removed, created great angst and anxiety within some streets, within some communities and, indeed, with individuals.

It was through issues around communication, consultation and how best to engage with the community that the government was ultimately moved to invite the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment to undertake this particular report.

It is not just an issue in the context of the importance to each of us individually of trees within our own street, or associated with our own homes or suburbs. It is also about the nature of Canberra, within the landscape, and even issues as pragmatic as


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video