Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The Greens' position on this is well known. I have introduced a private member's bill into this place that would have the effect of removing cattle from the park, which is now subject, of course, to the result of this vote. Because the minister has acted, we do not need to proceed with that, because we are giving effect to the fundamental principle that this is a park, not a paddock. Our views on this are well known and I am not going to repeat them all, but I do want to spend some time on the issue that—aside from the contribution by the member for McMillan—has been the underlying principle of almost every contribution here in this chamber and of the Victorian government, which is the idea that grazing in a national park with internationally recognised sensitive and endangered areas is somehow going to reduce the fire risk and that somehow a trial is needed to prove that.

After the fires in 2003 in the Bogong High Plains, there was the opportunity to conduct exactly that assessment. After those fires, scientists went in and conducted one of the most comprehensive studies of fire behaviour and its connection with grazing. They looked at over 419 points. They took over 4,000 twig measurements. They did a very comprehensive survey of the impact of those fires in the areas where there had been grazing in the park and those where there had not been. And what did they find? They found that there was no statistically significant difference between the areas where there was grazing and the areas where there was not.

See this speech in context