- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Assembly
- 23 February 2005
Crown Land Enclosure Permit Rentals
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 23 of 76
| Next Item »
Page: 14086
Mr IAN ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [11.56 a.m.]: I raise a subject that has probably elicited the greatest response I have had from landholders in my electorate for at least the past 10, perhaps 20, years. The subject has greatly affected all landholders, whether they have small holdings of 10 hectares or larger ones of 3,000 or 4,000 hectares. In correspondence from the former Department of Land and Water Conservation [DLWC] landholders were told they must either pay a massive increase in rental for Crown lands that are enclosed within their freehold or leasehold boundaries or take up an offer to purchase the lands. If they are not prepared to do so, they will be required to fence off the lands.
I will paint a verbal picture of those lands. When the lands across the State were surveyed, every independent block had to have ingress and egress access. Over the years, with the amalgamation of blocks, the subdivision of lands and the development of roads and lanes, many of the ingresses and egresses were not necessary. Further, although the surveyors did an excellent job, because of the shape of a block or its proximity to a creek, river or hill, it was impractical to include some parcels of land in adjoining land. Therefore, those parcels of land were left as island blocks that belonged to the Crown. Members would appreciate that any land in New South Wales that has never had title issued on it belongs to the Crown; the Crown has sole responsibility for it.
Traditionally, over the years, those lands have been rented by the landholder whose land encompasses it. If a landholder decides he or she cannot afford to pay the new rental charges or cannot afford to purchase the land they will be forced to put a fence around it. If the landholder owns a paddock of 200 hectares with a patch of 5 hectares of Crown land in the middle, he will be required to fence it off. In such cases, who will control the noxious weeds and feral animals? Who will protect the habitation and the environment? What will prevent the Crown from calling for tenders in the local paper for an independent lessee? What would prevent the Crown in the future from converting the land to freehold land and selling it off? An independent lessee would require access to the land. A landholder who owns 200 hectares may suddenly find that land in the middle of his paddock, Crown land that he has rented for years, will be occupied by a person who wants to use it on weekends or to run a few goats.
Will the Crown accept full responsibility for its lands once they are fenced out? Who will be responsible for fire maintenance and control on those blocks of land? I have a letter from a well-known farmer in the Murringo district, near Young, about an issue that the honourable member for Blacktown understands very well. The farmer said he has nine road enclosures on his property and that it will cost him in the vicinity of $40,000 to buy and close them. No doubt that figure does not include legal charges or any other unforeseen costs. He said he would be prepared to purchase them but cannot afford those sorts of ridiculous costs.
It is rubbish for the Government to state that it will cost just $350 a year to administer each road. Every year the Government sends out a notice for the rent. Does it cost $350 each year to send out such a notice? Why does the Government need that money? Is it just another money-grabbing exercise? Will the Government have a management plan under the new catchment management authorities and who will be responsible for that plan? Every landholder will be required to develop a catchment management authority land plan. I look forward to the Government implementing plans for each of these blocks—blocks ranging from two or three square metres through to 30 or 40 hectares.
As New South Wales is the fastest growing landholder, that is what this Government will do. This is nothing more than a money grab by a government that will go down in the history of this State as the hungriest and poorest manager of State funds. This Government, which has received more income from taxes, charges, levies and GST than any other government in the history of this State, is now saying that it needs this money as it has budgetary problems. If the Government wants co-operation from landholders it has to be fair. It must recognise that it cannot manage the lands that it has, let alone the lands that farmers will be forced to fence in. [Time expired.]
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:31:35 : Update this page