- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Assembly
- 25 October 2006
Western Sydney Parklands Bill
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 6 of 48
| Next Item »
Page: 3430
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 19 October 2006.
Mr CHRIS HARTCHER (Gosford) [1.03 p.m.]: First, I thank the Minister for Planning for the courtesy he extended to me in arranging a briefing by officers of his staff and the Department of Planning on this bill and other legislation before the House, such as the Environmental Planning Legislation Amendment Bill. I thank those officers for their comprehensive briefing. Second, I indicate that the Coalition has long supported, as have all parties, the development of Western Sydney Parklands. I recall that the Askin Government in the original 1968 plan for Sydney envisaged the establishment of appropriate parklands in Western Sydney. Like so many plans, it was largely a concept and needed a good deal of work to develop. When I was Minister for the Environment from 1992 to 1995, the Coalition established what was then known as the Urban Parks Agency. Its special brief was to establish a number of regional parks in Western Sydney.
That program was taken over by the Carr Government when it took office in 1995, but the Carr Government ended the role of the Urban Parks Agency and established regional parks within the national parks system. The Coalition did not believe that was a good idea because many parks cannot be appropriately regarded as national parks. They do not have a nature conservation angle; they have a community facility and recreation angle. I am pleased that has been reflected in this bill. That is the position the Minister has essentially taken by establishing a system of regional parks in Western Sydney which will service the community. The parks do not necessarily have a primary focus of protecting the environment, although that is obviously one of the objectives. The parks are for community use and enjoyment. I was curious as to why the program was the responsibility of the Minister for Planning. Traditionally Centennial Park and Bicentennial Park have come under the jurisdiction of the Minister for the Environment. It has been explained to me by the Minister's staff that the parks are part of the Western Sydney Regional Development Program, which is administered by the Minister for Planning.
The Coalition is very supportive of the parks system in Western Sydney. We hope that it will be expanded. There are issues about parkland in the Australian Defence Industries [ADI] site of which I am sure the Minister is only too well aware, and he has commented in the media on Federal-owned land at Penrith. Similarly, the old air force site, which is close to the ADI site, needs to have its future determined. The future of all these sites can only be determined in conjunction with the landowner, which is the Federal Department of Defence. Western Sydney, with over one million people, needs an enormous amount of recreational land. One can only be pleased about this large parkland system. It is to the credit of the Government and all previous governments going back to the Askin Government that Western Sydney has this magnificent system of parks. I am sure that everyone in Western Sydney is pleased about the progression of the parks system and the establishment of the trust.
As to the five nominees the Minister is entitled to appoint, I envisage that he will seek to appoint at least one community representative. That has been the tradition in relation to Centennial Park. Although it is an honour to serve on those boards, that is not the sole purpose of members. Board members have to deal with huge administrative tasks. They have to administer a great deal of land, large budgets and staff and deal with conflicting pressures from groups in our society who want the parks to be used in various ways. The boards have to make hard decisions and they need skilled members to make them. As to the other four nominees, I hope the Minister appoints people with professional competence. However, I hope he acknowledges that Western Sydney needs a representative who will ensure that the views of the community are heard at the trust level.
The Coalition does not oppose the legislation. The Western Sydney Regional Park will remain reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act, even though the new trust will have the care, control and management of it. I am unsure as to why it remains under the National Parks and Wildlife Act and not consolidated in the existing parks system. I presume the Minister has reasons for doing so. Although the decision does not detract from the public use or enjoyment of the park, it does impose an administrative restriction on the trust. The trust must deal with this park under a separate Act of Parliament and under different requirements. As any organisation knows, that will impose difficulties on management.
Parliament often passes legislation and, a couple of years later, amending legislation is introduced because implementing the schemes involved has proved too costly and inconvenient and it has not achieved any purpose. However, that is a matter for another day. It is pleasing that the trust will be established and that it is required to establish a plan of management. These plans of management are important. The trust has the power to divide the park into precincts and that will allow various interests to be accommodated and to have dedicated use of certain areas for activities such as walking dogs, horse riding, sporting events, concerts and so on. These activities must be identified in the plan. The park system is large enough to cater effectively for a wide variety of uses.
One of the great successes of Centennial Park, even though it is not large, is that it can cater for a wide variety of activities in eastern Sydney, including horse riding, dog exercise and concerts. That has made the park the wonderful place it is and a vital aspect of life in eastern Sydney. This great park system offers the promise that it will play a similarly vital role in Western Sydney and, hopefully, the people of the area will make full use of it. I also hope that any problems that do arise are not political in nature but the result of the ordinary pressures of use that need to be addressed from time to time. Parts of the park are close to good transport links. The future of Western Sydney Parklands is still open given the three big open sites in the area—the Royal Australian Air Force site, the site at Penrith and the ADI site. Western Sydney now has a great opportunity to enjoy a park system that will rival Centennial Park and Bicentennial Park.
Ms DIANE BEAMER (Mulgoa—Minister for Western Sydney, Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Commerce) [1.13 p.m.]: It is with great pleasure that I support the bill. One of my priorities as Minister for Western Sydney was to be involved in bringing Western Sydney Parklands to fruition. The announcement of the parklands in 2004 by the former Premier was a proud event, a watershed for the region and the realisation of a long-held vision. Successive governments have obtained the land so that it could be available for the future, and this bill enshrines Western Sydney Parklands in legislation.
The bill ensures a legacy not only for us and our children but also for our children's children. Western Sydney is one of the most diverse regions in Australia and has an output of $70 billion in gross regional product. It is the third-largest regional economy in Australia and home to about 1.8 million people. However, for a long time Western Sydney was been seen as the poor cousin to the eastern suburbs with regard to open space and recreation lands. The bill helps to change that by providing a 27-kilometre corridor of open space. The parklands are almost 25 times the size of Centennial Park. It will give the families of Western Sydney parklands that will be the envy of the rest of Sydney, and they are the parklands they deserve.
Western Sydney Parklands will not simply be dormant open space. They will eventually cater for a wide range of recreational uses, both passive and active, and conservation. Stage 1 of the park development includes cycleways and walkways, picnic grounds and playgrounds with appropriate amenities, a camping site for school groups and a landscaped gateway at Prospect. Anyone who has visited Harrow Park at the weekend will understand the popularity of the parkland, and that will continue to develop over the decades. The bill will ensure the viability of the parklands through the establishment of the Western Sydney Parklands Trust. The trust will have several important functions, including the development of the diverse uses planned for the parklands. These could include sporting and recreation activities, conservation of natural and cultural heritage and community events and fundraising. These activities will contribute to the viability and vibrancy of the parklands. The trust will also be responsible for the plan of management, which will identify key issues and priorities in the parklands and address proposals designed to generate income.
The bill enshrines the lungs of Western Sydney in legislation and ensures their long-term viability. It goes some way to addressing the long-term disparity between open space in Western Sydney and in the eastern suburbs. It is also landmark legislation for the region and a wonderful legacy for the future. I am pleased that the Opposition's supports the bill and I commend it to the House.
Mr STEVEN PRINGLE (Hawkesbury) [1.16 p.m.]: I also commend this long-overdue bill. It is a great achievement that we have been able to bring together such a wide range of parklands and put them to good use. As other speakers have said, this area is the heart and lungs of Sydney. The poor air quality in many parts of Sydney underlines the importance of the parklands system, and I would like the Government to extend it to the Rouse Hill area, which is also part of Western Sydney. I commend the Minister for his recent commitment to protect a further 140 hectares, which will be added to Rouse Hill Regional Park. That park protects one of Australia's oldest farmsteads, Rouse Hill House. The Government has gone to a lot of trouble to reroute Windsor Road so that the old Rouse Hill Public School and Rouse Hill House will be linked to create a contiguous historic area.
The next step in the establishment of Western Sydney Parklands is the purchase of the areas that have been rezoned for parkland adjacent to the Rouse Hill Regional Park. That is particularly important because another 60,000 house lots will be progressively released in that area. Being able to extend Western Sydney Parklands makes a great deal of sense and, because of the rapid completion of Windsor Road, access is easy. Rouse Hill Regional Park, which I visit on many weekends with my children, is well utilised and in need of augmentation. I commend the Government and ask that Western Sydney Parklands be extended to include Rouse Hill so that we have contiguous parklands covering north-west Sydney, the area towards Penrith and the remainder of Western Sydney Parklands.
Mr FRANK SARTOR (Rockdale—Minister for Planning, Minister for Redfern Waterloo, Minister for Science and Medical Research, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Cancer)) [1.18 p.m.], in reply: I take this opportunity to thank the honourable members who have contributed to the debate. I particularly thank the honourable member for Gosford for his constructive and sensible contribution. For his edification, the reason this parklands falls under the control of the Minister for Planning is that the land was accumulated for the parklands through the Sydney Regional Development Fund, which is an instrument of the Minister for Planning. Indeed, 589 hectares of privately owned land within the parklands boundary will be acquired over time by the fund and transferred to the park.
The honourable member spoke about the trust membership and the appointment of a community representative. The board will comprise not only the directors general of the Department of Planning and the Department of Environment and Conservation, but also a range of people with a mix of skills and, ideally, community representation. I will turn my mind to that when legislation has been enacted. As is the case with many large sites within the general parklands area, the Government will not necessarily vest the land into the trust; it will be left as it stands. In this case, that will afford it the protection of the National Parks and Wildlife Act.
The Minister for Western Sydney raised a number of issues. I wish to place on record that the Minister has worked tirelessly to support the creation of these parklands, and their extension and improvement over time. She plays a large role in ensuring that Western Sydney is adequately catered for with regard to open space. I thank the honourable member for Hawkesbury for his contribution. The Government has made its commitment to Rouse Hill and the parklands area. Through the Growth Centres Commission, the Government has also greatly expanded the amount of regional open space in the north-west sector compared with what was previously proposed in the draft plan. The final State policy covering that area significantly expands that regional open space by many hundreds of hectares.
The Government is also dealing with the inclusion in the legislation of the former Premier's commitment as per Sydney Regional Environmental Plan 31. Creating parklands of 5,200 hectares is a very big undertaking. I want to have the trust up and running, I want to see a plan of management prepared, and I want all the complex issues that will take decades to unfold to be addressed. Over time, of course, we will always look for further opportunities to ensure that the people of Western Sydney have the best possible access to regional open space.
I wish to respond to a number of issues that have been raised with my office and me since the introduction of the bill. I have been asked why there is a need to include in the bill corporation set-up powers. The power conferred by clause 21 for the trust to form or acquire interests in private corporations is necessary because unless the power is expressly conferred on a statutory body it can be concluded that the power is absent. It is feasible that in the future the trust may propose to form a partnership with a private sector entity. For example, the trust may choose to participate in a commercial venture and may need to form a private corporation for certain tourist and entertainment undertakings. In that scenario it is important that the trust have a clear power to do so, otherwise a private sector partner may be reluctant to enter into arrangements with the trust. In this way potential liabilities for a project can be limited to the subsidiary corporation.
The standard statutory provision, clause 21, provides that a subsidiary corporation does not represent the Crown. That also limits exposure of the State of New South Wales to liability arising out of a venture. Members of both Houses need to acknowledge that the Western Sydney Parklands Trust will perform a wide range of functions, including the conservation of the natural and cultural environment of the parklands. The ability to set up a subsidiary enables the Western Sydney Parklands Trust to distinguish its non-commercial functions from its commercial functions.
I have been asked why a carbon credit enabling clause is needed. There are two aspects to clause 17 relating to carbon sequestration activities. The first enables carbon sequestration rights to be granted over land owned by the trust. A carbon sequestration right is an interest in land. Under the Conveyancing Act, it is a profit a prendre. Under the requirements of the New South Wales Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme it is possible that the term of such rights could be at least 100 years. It is arguable that the general power of the trust under clause 16 to deal with land would extend to the creation of carbon sequestration rights over trust land. However, noting that easements and rights of way are expressly mentioned, the clause makes it very clear that the trust may propose to grant carbon sequestration rights.
It is also appropriate that constraints be placed on the trust's power to create those rights, which can potentially tie up the land concerned for over 100 years, possibly making it unavailable for other uses. It is for that reason that clause 17 of the bill requires the Minister's consent to such schemes. The second aspect enables the trust to become an accredited abatement certificate provider. This relates to carbon sequestration activities under the New South Wales Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme or a similar scheme. As an accredited abatement certificate provider, the trust could create, register and trade carbon credits, or abatement certificates. The trust could sell carbon credits to electricity retailers under the New South Wales Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme.
The general functions of the trust conferred by clause 12 would not extend to a power to participate in the New South Wales Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme in relation to carbon sequestration activities. That involves creating and trading in carbon credits, an activity which is not referable to functions in relation to the parklands as such. It may involve significant potential liability and insurance cover. Again, it is appropriate that the trust only engage in this commercial activity with the Minister's consent. Members of both Houses must note that clause 17 is merely an enabling clause. The trust will not be under any obligation to participate in carbon sequestration activities. Further, it may be the case that the trust grants carbon sequestration rights over parcels of land to a third party because the scale of the carbon sequestration pool that may make participating in the New South Wales Greenhouse Gas Abatement Scheme commercially viable may not be able to be achieved by the trust itself.
As the Minister for Western Sydney said, the bill enshrines the lungs of Western Sydney in legislation, ensuring their long-term viability. It goes some way towards addressing the long-term disparity in open space between Western Sydney and other parts of Sydney. It represents a landmark for the region and a wonderful legacy for our children's children. This is a great initiative that will signal great progress for the people of Western Sydney. I commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:44:47 : Update this page