Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

As I stated in my first reading speech, the purpose of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Public Health and Safety) Amendment Bill 2010 is to amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and afford some relief to the residents of Maclean in my electorate of Cowper from the presence of a large colony of flying foxes.

The amendment would deem the minister to have given consent to a licence application by the New South Wales state government for the relocation of the Maclean colony. It would not apply to any other colony or any other licence application.

It is a testament to the democratic processes of this parliament that I have been able to introduce this bill and now move the second reading. I recognise the importance of the agreement made between the coalition, the crossbenches and the government that facilitates a vote on private member’s business in this place.

For too long the people of Maclean have suffered due to the colony’s location. As I have noted, the Maclean High School, the nearby TAFE and the surrounding residential areas are particularly affected. There has been an invasion of thousands upon thousands of bats around the high school, which has some 1,100 students. These flying foxes defecate over the school, its students and its teachers. The smell is revolting and the colony is extremely noisy.

The residents and students of Maclean have needed action on this issue for some time. Dispersal of the bats is necessary given the disruption caused to the high school and the negative impact of the bats’ presence on the health, safety and education of students attending the school and the nearby TAFE. Unfortunately, the government prevented the issue from being debated during the last parliament. Due to the failure of the government to take action, the school has been forced to take drastic measures to protect the safety of the students and teachers. Bubblers and seats have been covered to avoid contamination. Classrooms have had their windows permanently closed, and air conditioning has been installed in some rooms because the windows cannot be opened. Car parks, walkways and disabled accesses are all going to be covered because of the flying foxes. And let us not forget the residents who live close by. Their homes have become virtually uninhabitable because of the stench and the problems that these flying foxes cause. A similar situation exists at the nearby TAFE.

This bill is not being introduced because I believe that the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is not working appropriately. It is being introduced because the government and the bureaucracy have failed to act in a timely manner under the act and ensure that the Maclean bat colony is relocated in a humane fashion. In fact, the bureaucrats, in their faraway ivory tower, have been acting against the best interests of the school, the TAFE and the surrounding residents. They have made it clear that coexistence was the only option—I repeat: the only option. As far as they were concerned, the health and safety of our children was nothing more than a minor distraction. For too long the pleas of the P and C, the staff and the students went unanswered. For too long the learning conditions at the school were intolerable. For too long the health of our children was placed at risk.

It seems incomprehensible that, when a substantial health risk to 1,100 students is clearly identified, the government would fail to act—would delay a much needed decision by a year. After I gave notice to parliament that I intended to introduce this bill, Maclean High School received notice that an application had been approved. It is a happy coincidence, I would say, that after a year of buck passing, after a year of delay, we finally achieved approval.

By passing this legislation, the parliament can ensure that dispersal will not be further delayed and that bats can be removed upon each application after the initial approval lapses. Maclean High School cannot go through this long and drawn out process again. We cannot afford another delay whilst thousands upon thousands of bats inhabit the school and place the health and safety of students at risk. It is completely outrageous that the government has allowed this situation to continue for so long without action. This bill will ensure that the students and staff of Maclean High School, the nearby TAFE and the surrounding areas get an outcome that is based on common sense and that protects their health and education environment.

I welcome the input I have received from non-government members and I congratulate them on their constructive approach. This bill is about protecting the students of Maclean High School into the future against bureaucrats who have no concern for their wellbeing. This bill is about ensuring that the interests of bats remain secondary to the interests of our kids. It is about ensuring the interests of our local community. I certainly welcome this bill, and I commend it to the House.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Listening to the honourable member for Cowper, my only response can be, ‘What absolute rubbish.’ The only thing the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Public Health and Safety) Bill 2010 is designed to protect is his political interests. This bill is not necessary. The referral was made to the federal department, and approval has already been granted. The department cannot approve anything that is not referred to it. My position, as I kept recommending to the state authorities, was that this is not just about the federal government but about both federal and state authorities—primarily state—getting their acts together and referring it. That took a long time, and I was surprised to see that.

I will take you through this issue. The honourable member for Cowper takes the cake in political opportunism—not a political opportunism designed to advance the needs and interests of the community but one designed solely to seek political advantage. You may be surprised to know that the honourable member for Cowper sought to make me, the member for Page—a neighbouring electorate—responsible, and even spent money writing to my constituents saying, ‘Janelle Saffin believes she is not responsible for the bat debacle because Maclean High School is not in the Page electorate.’ Surprise, surprise: Maclean High School is not in the Page electorate; it is in the honourable member for Cowper’s electorate.

The honourable member for Cowper also sent a letter to all of us asking whether we would speak on this bill, and he said, ‘Maclean High School is in my electorate’—meaning his electorate of Cowper. Yet he spent an inordinate amount of time seeking to have me do his work. I am busy doing my work for my constituents in the electorate of Page. If I were the member for Cowper, I would be embarrassed if I had to ask a member of parliament in a neighbouring electorate to do the job that he could not do. It was absolute incompetence and ineptitude. I responded because the school community asked me to assist. At the time, I said to the local newspaper:

Luke has lost the plot because he was proven incompetent in getting a solution to a problem in his electorate. They are desperate actions of a desperate man. I’d be embarrassed if I had to get another MP to work out a solution in my electorate.

I went on like that—and I said ‘Luke’ there rather than ‘the honourable member for Cowper’ because I was quoting from the local newspaper.

Stepping back a bit, in 2008 I was asked by the school community if I could give assistance, and I said that I would. However, it was a state issue. The state had to apply for a licence so that they could deal with the bat problem. Everybody agreed that it needed a short-term solution, a medium-term solution and a long-term solution. That is the reality of living where bats are. My primary concern, as is everybody’s, is with the health and safety of the school community. I have made that an absolute priority, and I said that what had to be in place was a process for a licence at state level to deal with the multitude of problems around it and then a referral to the Commonwealth.

We are talking about a bill that was introduced by the Howard government and supported by the coalition. It was supported by the then opposition, the federal parliamentary Labor party, and it has bipartisan support. I take it that it has the support of the Independents as well. In 2001 there was an amendment to it that dealt with the particular bats that reside at Maclean High School, grey-headed flying foxes, so this is not a new bill. It dragged on and on and it got all messed up in political debate and the honourable member for Cowper sending out petitions in my electorate attacking me. It was said that I wanted to move the school, that I loved the bats and did not want to move them, blah, blah, blah.

I supported a whole range of solutions, with everybody sitting around the table, working this out together, and not dealing with it in a politically opportunistic way—and that is what I have done. I then spoke to the federal minister at least five times that I can remember. I spoke to his advisers; I spoke to officials. They kept waiting for an application. If an application does not come, approval cannot be given. Then there was a whole lot of rubbish spread around the electorate—and I hate to say it, but the honourable member for Cowper was part of it—saying that there would be no approval given. How would you know that? That is absolutely ridiculous. It was absolutely clear that the primary concern was the health and safety of the school community and they were waiting for the referral to come here.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hartsuyker interjecting

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is approved! It is approved, and it was always going to be approved. You just sought to seek advantage for yourself. How despicable, because during that time the school community had to put up with the bats. I have been in the school. You know what it is like; I know what it is like. You were just seeking to advantage yourself. You really took the cake in what you did instead of sitting around the table, working out a solution. What point was there in saying, ‘Oh, the bureaucrats will never approve it’? How can they approve anything when they do not have an application before them? That just served to put people off. It did not help anyone at all.

I kept saying, ‘Get the referral in.’ That referral just went in at the end of September—I think it was the 29th. Part of the process is a 20-day period where they have to sit and wait for it. That happened. The approval has been given. It had nothing to do with your bill. It had to do with the fact that the application actually went forward.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Surprise, surprise! You waited a year.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Nobody waited a year. They did not a wait a year to approve it. They approved it according to the process when the approval actually went forward.

Flying foxes have been in Maclean for many years, and the problem is one that is primarily a result of poor state planning and highlights the need to have better planning practices. The Commonwealth involvement is not formally triggered until a referral has been made. As I said, 29 September 2010 was the date that the application went in. Before that there there was no application so there was no opportunity to grant approval. The Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities has always been willing to consider the proposal through the process set out in the legislation—legislation that we all support and that was brought into being in this place by the then Howard coalition government.

Until the New South Wales Department of Education and Training actually applied under national environment law, the department simply had nothing to act on and could not get involved. When they did apply, the department acted immediately and made a decision based on the application and the requirements of the legislation. There were no delays in that decision, which was made within the 20-business-day statutory time frame required by national environment law. The Commonwealth department has been talking to the New South Wales education department for several years about ways to prevent or deter the flying foxes from setting up camp at the school and how to avoid having a significant impact on the flying foxes. That discussion has been going on for a number of years, and the state department also needs to take action. It is not a federal issue alone. It is one where a joint solution needs to be found.

The P&C of Maclean High School have written to me and thanked me for my assistance and my role in making sure they understood that I was working to assist them to deal with the immediate problem and, equally, looking at having solutions over a long period of time—and that is what is necessary. I have been to the school site and I have spoken to the students. I asked the students: ‘What do you want me to do?’ They responded and I did that. There is a range of views among the students, but the primary one is, ‘We cannot live here when the flying foxes are here all the time.’ It is disturbing. It is very smelly. You have to have windows closed. There are thousands of them that come into the school environment. Some people are scared about health risks and about things that they do not know about health risks. Understandably, the parents are scared too, and it does need those solutions.

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Public Health and Safety) Amendment Bill 2010 not from the point of view of personality clashes, which inevitably happen when these issues arise, but more specifically because this is not the first time that the issue of flying foxes has created a massive problem within the community. I sympathise with the member for Cowper with regard to the problem that it is creating for schoolchildren in a school in his electorate. I sympathise with him because—

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Saffin interjecting

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I sat here, the member for Page, with due diligence, listening to what you had to say and without interrupting you. I would like you to convey the same courtesy to me.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry.

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have over the years had serious complaints from fruit growers who have experienced fruit bats for the first time in living memory in their areas. The bats are now so bad and have been pushed so far inland that they are now being seen in places like Gundagai, where bats have never been an issue in the past. Part of the root cause that the member for Page alluded to is the absolute disgraceful lack of planning in New South Wales where they have allowed development to occur in the natural environmental areas for these bats. The bats have been pushed inland. It does not take away the serious problem that it creates for the community and it certainly does not take away from the very serious issue that has been raised by the member for Cowper. If nothing else, his decision to bring this to the parliament is going to send a very compelling message to the community that the governments of the day not only should listen to complaints of a very serious nature centred on these animals but really should take some action on it. There is a serious issue centred on the possibility of health problems associated with these bats, be it all miniscule.

No responsibility has been taken by governments at any level for the additional costs associated with these animals destroying fruit crops, in particular stone fruit crops, that have never been destroyed before. Not only has it put an additional cost on the New South Wales Department of Education to install air-conditioners so that people do not have to smell and be subjected to the unpleasantries associated with these animals but, more importantly, it has put an additional cost on people going about their normal bona fide businesses trying to grow fruit. There is a widespread problem associated with these creatures. When I was a member of the Greiner government, I know from my, I think it was, six-year fight with the New South Wales department against the process of shutting down national parks to the community that there is a tendency for those people who have some environmental credentials to ignore the reality of the numbers of these animals that are coming into the community—up to 50,000 colonies—and the absolute problems that they bring to these communities.

The department uses the argument that they are protected. I am not sure what levels the environmental protection centred on animals such as these flying foxes has reached, but people have to also consider the unintended consequences of these animals coming in and creating problems in places likes schools. It is about time the state government and the federal government got their heads together, identified the problems and did something positive as an example of what can be done when uncontrolled housing development pushes these animals out of their natural habitat into areas where they have never been seen before, creating undue angst in the community and, most importantly, potential health risks for children in particular. (Time expired)

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I well understand the concerns raised by the member for Cowper, the member for Page and the member for Hume on this matter. Whilst I have not been out to their electorates and seen the problems, I have no doubt that what they have brought to the House by way of their explanation and description of the problem is very real and very much a concern to their local communities. This Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Public Health and Safety) Amendment Bill 2010, however, is wrong both in its content and its intent and, quite frankly, it is unnecessary. I will speak to each of these issues separately.

By way of background, the grey-headed flying fox is listed as a threatened species under the EPBC Act and the New South Wales Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. It would not be listed if there was not a concern about the numbers of flying bats in Australia. Because it is listed, the government quite rightly has an obligation to ensure that any provisions relating to the EPBC Act are properly dealt with and handled. Having listed it under those two acts, the question is: has the government followed due process in dealing with the matter raised by the member for Cowper? My view is that it certainly has.

I go to the question of whether the government has acted responsibly and appropriately in this respect and why this bill is unnecessary. The government cannot, as the member for Page has quite rightly pointed out, deal with a matter until it receives an application. The role of lodging applications rests with the local authorities, be they the local government or the state government. In this case, the New South Wales Department of Education on 20 September lodged an application with the New South Wales Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities about their concern over flying foxes. The department, quite rightly and quite properly, not only assessed that application but also did so within the 20-day statutory time limit required of it. In fact, it then went on to grant the necessary approvals required in respect of the application. There were some conditions to that approval process, but those conditions are quite reasonable under the act. So the department, every step of the way, has dealt with this process appropriately. Whether others have not is another matter and should not be a reason for the legislation to be amended or any criticism to be made of the department.

Nor was the decision made by the department in any way associated with or tied to this bill. It was made entirely separate of this bill that has been brought before the House and was made in accordance with an application that was lodged with it. So, given that the matter has now been dealt with by the department, approval has been granted and a process is available to the local community to deal with the problem, it would seem to me that it is totally unnecessary to follow through with this bill. I am sure that the ultimate objective of the member for Cowper in this matter is to deal with the problem in his local community, and I believe that a course of action has now been put in place which should enable that to happen.

In respect of the question of bringing a bill to parliament to change the EPBC Act being wrong, I say this: all of us at different times would perhaps have concerns about the way matters are dealt with in our local communities and dealt with by this parliament. To suggest that each time we have a particular issue the solution rests with changing the legislation that overrides the matter in question is simply not the right way to deal with the matter. What it effectively does is undermine the integrity of the very legislation that is being questioned—in this case, the EPBC Act. It would do the same with any other act. The resolution to these matters is to go through the appropriate channels, as has been done in this case, not to substantially change the very legislation which is there for good reason—and that is, to ensure that decisions cannot be made on an ad hoc basis which go totally against the intent of the act. (Time expired)

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this morning to support the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Public Health and Safety) Amendment Bill 2010, put forward by my colleague the member for Cowper. This amendment bill put forward by the member for Cowper would deem the environment minister to have given consent to the licence application by the New South Wales state government for the relocation of the Maclean flying fox colony, which has located itself in the grounds of the Maclean High School, the TAFE and a nearby residential area in northern New South Wales. Whilst I acknowledge that it would not apply to any other colony or to any other licence application, this issue is obviously is not limited to the community of Maclean. In my electorate of Maranoa, flying foxes have been a major problem for orchardists on the Granite Belt in Stanthorpe in Southern Queensland, which is not very far as the crow might fly from the Maclean school. I have spoken about this issue in the House before, after receiving calls from desperate orchardists, some of whom told stories about staying up throughout the night in order to protect their incomes from the very hungry flying foxes which have decimated much of the fruit in the orchards. As we enter another fruit season, this is as we speak a very serious issue right now.

The Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities is well aware of this issue in my electorate, because I met with him in October last year when he was the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. He said it was primarily a responsibility of the Queensland government, and of course I acknowledge it is. However, this bill, if passed, will hopefully send a message to the Queensland state Labor government that the welfare of humans should be a priority over the welfare of bats. In Queensland they are putting the welfare of the bats ahead of the welfare of humans, and I will touch on that in a moment.

Before damage mitigation permits were revoked by the city-centric Queensland Labor government, the flying foxes did not pose a problem because the DMPs allowed for the scout bat, which is the bat that looks for a new roosting place for the colony, to be terminated—quickly and humanely. But since the DMPs were revoked by the state Labor government, which was obviously pandering to the Greens and the Green agenda, there has been no deterrent as effective as this method. A working group in Queensland has been set up but I am not sure that there has been much progress yet. Alternative deterrent methods such as netting the orchard have been trialled in Queensland, but these are either expensive or not suitable for particular types of orchard, particularly those on slopes. I have also heard that the bats are getting through the netting. They actually climb under the netting and then get trapped, panic and begin to exhaust themselves in a desperate attempt to escape, sometimes starving to death. Of course, the orchardist who finds the creatures is not allowed to put them out of their misery. They then die an inhumane and unnecessary death.

This time last year I presented a petition from orchardists on the Granite Belt which called on the Labor government to intervene and put pressure on their Labor counterparts in Queensland to immediately reinstate damage mitigation permits until a reliable, proven and affordable non-lethal alternative could be implemented to protect orchards from flying foxes. Essentially, what this petition requested is that their state government put humans ahead of flying foxes. I believe firmly that human health should be put ahead of the welfare of bats, and I am not just talking about the livelihood of orchardists on the Granite Belt or about the Maclean High School. I am talking about the health of those people who work in the equine industry. Flying fox bats are reservoirs for an enormous range of diseases, some of which are extremely deadly. Flying foxes are responsible for the hendra virus, which when transmitted via horses to humans has a mortality rate higher than 65 per cent. In horses the mortality rate is 100 per cent, because they have to be euthanased. Tragically, five people have died from contracting the hendra virus from horses. The Australian Animal Health Laboratory is working on a vaccine for the virus. But imagine the risk posed to humans by nearby large colonies of flying foxes such as those at Maclean High School or roosting near the Granite Belt orchards, which are certainly not their natural, native habitat. We already know that the lyssavirus, which is found in flying foxes, can be transferred to humans via a scratch or bite. (Time expired)

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If there was ever a bill brought to this House that was a total beat-up it is this legislation that the member for Cowper has put before the parliament today. I grew up on the North Coast of New South Wales not far from Maclean, and I understand the issues concerning fruit bats in the area. I am very familiar with this particular issue, which relates to the colony of bats that have been spilling over into the grounds of the Maclean High School. I am aware of the community concern, just as I am aware of the beat-up that the member for Cowper has been promulgating in the media. I think he really needs to look at what it is that a member of parliament does and to accept that his role is one of responsibility.

This Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Public Health and Safety) Amendment Bill 2010 is not needed, as the minister’s delegation decided on 28 October that New South Wales could—I repeat, could—proceed with the dispersal of the grey headed flying fox from the Maclean High School without further assessment if it was undertaken in a particular manner. The decision includes conditions to ensure that there is no significant impact on the species. I think that is quite clear. Action has already been taken—very decisive action—to deal with the problem whilst at the same time not causing any problems for the grey headed flying fox. There are some potential problems this bill could lead to—problems which the member for Cowper, if he thought through them properly, would understand—in that the bill, were it to be adopted, would lead to a circumvention of the normal environmental assessment process as set out in the EPBC Act.

We can always argue that there are problems with the EPBC Act and that in this particular case it should be circumvented. If you do it once, however, you create a precedent and then every single time there is an issue there is an argument to circumvent it. It sets a precedent that could totally undermine the Commonwealth’s environmental protection legislation scheme. That is a much broader and much bigger issue. The member for Cowper has brought this particular bill to the House in order to play politics. He has done it to gain a few extra votes back in the electorate, to get him some coverage in the newspaper and to get him time on TV. He is prepared to do this rather than look at what the bill could lead to.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hartsuyker interjecting

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Cowper calls out that we are putting bats first. No; that is not the point. The issue is that action has already been taken to deal with the problem and that the member for Cowper has brought something to this House that is not needed.

The EPBC Act provides additional protection for threatened species, such as the grey headed flying fox, when such species are listed as protected. The grey headed flying fox was listed in 2001 because it was a threatened species. Despite the current problem, however, action has been put in place, and I absolutely reject the allegation in the media that the Maclean flying fox decision was approved because of this bill. That is total rubbish. Action had been taken beforehand; the decision had no bearing on the outcome of the department’s decision to approach dispersal activities at Maclean High School.

The member for Cowper is good at playing politics but he is not good at looking at the big issue. He is not big on details. He is not big on understanding what it is all about. The member for Cowper is just playing politics with this issue rather than looking at resolving it through the proper processes that are in place and rather than noting the fact that action has already been taken to deal with this issue. (Time expired)

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member for Shortland would have many of the attributes that she accuses the member for Cowper of possessing. Given her longevity in this place, she obviously does pay attention to what local people want her to do, and this is exactly what the honourable member for Cowper is doing in this legislation.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He is effectively being a good local representative. He is someone who is speaking on behalf of his community. He is not prepared to remain silent when indeed he should speak out—and I note his approval of my praise of him.

I am a very strong supporter of our environment but what we need, of course, is flexibility. Flying fox colonies are obviously very important as far as our environment is concerned but so often we have some kind of clash amongst a civilisation, the community and the environment and if a way can be found forward which does not damage the environment but which enhances the quality of life for the community then that is very much a balanced approach. This is in fact what is being suggested in this bill by the honourable member for Cowper.

There is no doubt that the quality of life of the residents of Maclean has been seriously disadvantaged by the presence of this flying fox colony. I can understand the frustration experienced by the residents of Maclean, and expressed in this House by the member for Cowper, with respect to what appeared to be the intransigence of the New South Wales government when the minister appeared to be dragging the chain and failing to take a decision in the interests of the community. I think that in any civilised society it really is important to obtain a balance.

The infestation by the flying fox colony of the town of Maclean was a problem. The grey headed flying fox is a protected species under the act and it requires approvals from the New South Wales government and the federal minister to remove them from an area. I am advised by the member for Cowper that this large colony of flying foxes is very close to the high school in Maclean, the TAFE and to areas where people reside. The defecation stench and noise of the colony are preventing the school from functioning appropriately and are making residences uninhabitable. The colony is threatening the health and wellbeing of the students and staff at the Maclean High School, the TAFE and residents of the surrounding area. The bill does not have any financial impact and would assist substantially in restoring the quality of life of residents of the Maclean area.

It is extremely disturbing when honourable members criticise colleagues such as the honourable member for Cowper for being a good local member. The residents of Cowper have been fortunate to have enjoyed the representation of the member for Cowper for many years. One of the reasons why the member for Cowper continues to receive the support of local people at every election is because he is doing what local members should do. He should be prepared to stand up and be counted and to articulate when problems exist. He was prepared to raise this matter through the medium of a private member’s bill in the Australian parliament so that residents of the electorate of Cowper can have confidence that, when they make an appointment to go and see their local member because they have a problem, the local member is prepared to do whatever is necessary to alleviate their difficulties. For him to raise through this private member’s bill this difficulty being experienced by the residents of Maclean here in the people’s house, the House of Representatives, does great credit to the member for Cowper. I am sure that he will continue to be the member for that electorate for many years, keeping up the good work evidenced in this private member’s bill.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am speaking against the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Public Health and Safety) Amendment Bill 2010, as I believe it to be unnecessary. I understand that the member for Cowper has been concerned for some time about the fruit bats around his area, in particular in Maclean, and that he had asked for some assistance from the state government of New South Wales to move this particular colony somewhere else—to relocate and reorganise them in some other way. And I can see why he is worried, why he wants the change, why this issue would have become an issue within his electorate and why people would be concerned. Bats can be a bit intrusive into one’s life in northern New South Wales and in Queensland. They can really affect your lifestyle.

However, I understand that this bill is not needed, as the minister’s delegate decided on 28 October 2010 that New South Wales could proceed with dispersal of grey headed flying foxes from the Maclean High School without further assessment if it was undertaken in a particular manner. The decision includes conditions to ensure that there is no significant impact on the species.

I am aware that fruit bats can become a problem in residential areas. I believe that the Maclean High School grounds are close to the Maclean Rainforest Reserve, which is an area regularly used as a maternity camp and transit stop for migrating grey headed and black flying foxes. These colonies can at times number up to 20,000 individuals. So I can see the difficulties. However, this is a typical example of natural wildlife coming into conflict with human habitation. Settling here has obviously been the pattern of the fruit bats for thousands of years. We come along in the last shower, to put it one way, and build a school close by and expect the fruit bats to respect that. That is not possible; life does not work like that.

It makes me wonder sometimes how much work has been done on the environmental impact, from all sides, of city and suburban developments in some of these areas. These would need to be done to ensure a safe and healthy environment for our children. There are issues here. Obviously, someone messed up in the planning some time ago. These animals have obviously been around for some time. The reserve in the middle of this area is probably the only area that fits in with the migration of these fruit bats as they travel to and fro.

There are probably four solutions to this problem: move the school out of the range of the fruit bats’ natural habitat; move the bats, but they will probably return at some point in the future; move the reserve—cut it down—and replant it in a similar place somewhere else, although I do not know how practical that is; or work out ways to coexist, like not growing fruit trees in gardens around the urban area and using other ways to remove the food sources of the fruit bats so that they shift and move on. We have seen what happens on occasions when nature runs into conflict with humans in other areas. We see that when we travel at different times of the year on our roads, with wildlife coming into conflict with our transport systems. Then there is farming and, in my state of Tasmania, forestry. Wildlife can come into contact with our lifestyles, our transport systems and our economic processes. We have to find ways to live together. We need to look after this.

Up until recently, the fruit bats had been winning. However, I understand that the bats are not present this school year and there may be an option to sort out a strategy coming into winter when the bats are absent or without young. I wish people well on that. I hope that the problem can be solved. (Time expired)

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.