• Notice of Motion – Threatened Species Children’s Art Competition

    THREATENED SPECIES CHILDREN’S ART COMPETITION 2017

    On Threatened Species Day 2017, I was privileged to host the Threatened Species Day Children’s Art Competition. This is an amazing event which has grown by 250% since last year. It is exciting to see the connection children have with individual animals and their right to a free life in this world. Interestingly, ever piece of art I saw showed animals in the natural habitat, free from the bars of zoos and cages of captivity. To commend the event and congratulate the winners and organisers I gave a Notice of Motion to the House which was unanimously agreed to.

    Children have an inspiring connection with animals and this is a trait that must be nurtured into adulthood so that we can have a better life for ALL.

    1. That this House commends Forestmedia Network Incorporated for facilitating the 2017 Threatened Species Children’s Art Competition, which helps children unleash their artistic creativity while learning about the extinction crisis facing our native plants and animals; and which aims to encourage the next generation of environmental leaders.
    2. That this House acknowledges that with more than 1,000 species now threatened in New South Wales alone, environmental leaders have never been more needed.
    3. That this House congratulates the organisers of the event held on Threatened Species Day at Parliament House: Lorraine Bower, Susie Russell, Lindie Ward, Penny Walton, Stephanie Knox, Jenny Ellyard, Jenny Symons and Bri gid Dowsett.
    4. That this House thanks the Hon. Gabrielle Upton, MP, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Heritage , and Minister for Local Government, and Dr Mehreen Faruqi, MLC, for their attendance and contributions to the discussion.
    5. That this House notes:
      1. entries to the 2017 competition have grown by 250 per cent, with more than 1,600 children entering, involving 68 schools and 14 other programs;
      2. the quality of the artistic work was inspiring and it is a testament to the future environmental leaders concerns for the future of our unique threatened species of flora and fauna—a future where they may never be able to see their chosen species in the wild, or see it at all;
      3. two exhibitions are being held—one at Surry Hills from 9 to 23 September 2017 and one in the open space at the Botanic Garden from 15 to 29 September 2017; and
      4. that the following schools and children’s programs participated in the competition: Alma Public, Beecroft Public, Ben Venue Public, Blue Mountains Steiner, Booligal Public, Broadwater Public, Brighton Le Sands Public, Burraneer Bay Public, Canley Vale Public, Capa Marks Point Public, Castle Cove Public, Cessnock West Public, Corndale Public, Jerrabomberra Public, John Colet School Belrose, Lawson Public, Lane Cove West Public, Largs Public, Larnook Public, Maribyrnong Primary, Middle Dural Public, Molong Central, Mother Teresa School, Mount Keira Demonstration School, Mullion Creek Public, Murray Farm Public, Murwillumbah public, Neville Bonner Primary; North Wagga Public, Ocean Shores Public, Oxley Park Public, Parramatta North Public, Paxton Public, Peterborough School [SSP], Plunkett Street School, Point Clare Public; Quakers Hill Public, RED inc—In school support, Roseville College, Sherwood Grange Public, St Clair Public, St Mark’s Catholic Primary, St Joseph’s Catholic Primary, St Patrick’s Primary, Sydney Children’s Hospital School, Sylvania Heights Public, Tamworth Public, Telopea Park Public, Tambelin Independent School, The Channon Public, Thomas Acres Public, Waitara Public, Weethalle Public, Westdale Public, West Ryde Public, Young Public, Ultimo children’s program, King George V children’s program The Rocks, Pyrmont children’s program, Crown Street children’s program, Redfern children’s program, Woolloomooloo children’s program, Girls and Boys Brigade holiday program Surry Hills, Girls and Boys Brigade after school program Surry Hills, Naidoc Festival, Art Box Workshops, Class Artz at Woollahra, Clovelly, Paddington, Kensington, Waverley and Randwick school s, Young Artists, and Art Zone- Lake Macquarie City Art Gallery.
    6. That the House thanks the following supporting organisations and individuals for their considerable contribution to the event and subsequent exhibitions: the Animal Justice Party; the City of Sydney Matching Grants program; Sophie Daniel, Team Leader, Community and Education Programs—Botanic Garden, and Mary Bell, Education Coordinator, School Programs—Botanic Garden ; Bren Weatherstone and the ACT Chapter of the Australian Association of Environmental Educators; Victoria Johnstone, Creative Director, Surry Hills Festival; Cassie Tilbrook, Gillian Elliott and the Surry Hills Neighbourhood Centre; Trish, Robyn, Georgia and the Byles Creek Valley Association; Donna Upton and the Capertee Valley Association; Jill; Helen and STEP Inc; Taronga Zoo; Featherdale Wildlife Park; Hoyts; the National Parks Association NSW; the Wilderness Society Sydney; Nature Conservation Trust; WIRES; Humane Society International; Nature Conservation Council NSW; Australian Forests and Climate Alliance; Animals Australia; North Coast Environment Council; South East Coast Regional Council; Nambucca Valley Conservation Association; and Caldera Environment Centre.
    7. That this House congratulates all the entrants in the competition and makes special note of the 2017 award winners:
      1. Kevin Yeh, (6)—first place in the category of five – to seven -year- olds;
      2. Emily Nees, (6)— second place in the category of five – to seven -year- olds;
      3. Amelia Gutwenger, (6)— highly commended in the category of five – to seven -year- olds;
      4. Jasper Hartmann, (8)—first place in the category of eight – to 10-year- olds;
      5. Anneliese Gutwenger, (10)—second place in the category of eight – to 10-year- olds;
      6. Jaccob Trevisan, (10)— highly commended in the category of eight – to 10-year- olds;
      7. Natalie Barclay, (9)— highly commended in the category of eight – to 10-year- olds;
      8. Claire Camilleri, (11)—first place in the category of 11 – to 12-year- olds;
      9. Sarah Chen, (11)—second place i n the category of 11 – to 12-year- olds;
      10. Sonia Pillai, (11)— highly commended in the category of 11 – to 12-year- olds;
      11. Michelle Ciu, (9)—first place in the category of Most Unusual Entry;
      12. Mahli Barnes, (9)—second place in the category of Most Unusual Entry;
      13. Buraneer Bay [Skeleton]—First place in the category of Group Work;
      14. Art Box Workshops [Lepidopteras] —second place in the category of Group Work [equal];
      15. Oxley Art Group [Fragile Beauty]—second place in the category of Group Work [equal];
      16. Art Box Workshops [Rosenberg’s Goanna]— highly commended in the category of Group Work;
      17. Forrest Public School [Golden Sun Moths]— highly commended in the category of Group Work;
      18. Jake Fergusen, (11)—first place in the category of Best Written Explanation;
      19. Alyssa Sim, (8)—second place in the category of Best Written Explanation; and
      20. Kieren Kelly, (9)— highly commended in the category of Written Expression.
  • When will the Minister responsible for Animal Welfare understanding animal suffering?

    The Minister for Primary Industries clearly doesn’t have any concerns about the pain and suffering caused to introduced animals such as foxes and wild dogs when baited with 1080 poison. His ministerial responsibilities include the welfare of all animals, and that includes so called ‘pest’  animals. Instead of addressing the question about options for non-lethal and humane controls, Minister Blair decided to attack me for the hypocrisy of once eating fish and wearing leather and wool (not true).

    The Hon. MARK PEARSON: During question time on 5 April the Minister stated support for the widespread use of 1080 poison to kill introduced animals such as wild dogs and foxes. Given that the welfare of all animals in New South Wales is his ministerial responsibility, irrespective of the category status imposed by humans, will the Minister advise whether his department has considered humane or non-lethal alternatives to 1080 baiting?

    If not, does the Minister accept the scientific evidence that so-called “pest” species are capable of experiencing pain and suffering, and the ingestion of 1080 poison causes immense suffering to baited animals irrespective of which animals they are?

    The Hon. NIAL L BLAIR: I stand by the comments I made in relation to pest animals and 1080 poison. I know my department, along with other agencies, looks at alternatives to poisoning for some of these pest animals. For example, a good bullet in the head would be appropriate for a wild dog that attacked poor defenceless lambs or left some of the sheep they attacked with their guts hanging out and suffering. As I have said previously, 1080 is licensed for use by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority. It is a Federal issue.

    The member should not think for one second that he can enter this Chamber and have me start feeling sorry for introduced species that inflict pain and suffering upon livestock and, importantly, to many native animals. Native animals, including birds, suffer attack by feral dogs, foxes and feral cats. I will not change my mind. The member is wasting parliamentary question time. The 1080 poison is registered for use. The producers and agencies must stay within the protocols of that registration. The agencies that make those decisions do not report to me. That is my answer.

    It is one thing to say that members should be concerned about animal welfare that is governed by the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979, it is another matter to suggest that these introduced pest animals are in the same class. They inflict damage upon the economy and environment of this State. I am not going to apologise for one second for the fact that our agencies and farmers are using 1080 to eradicate those pests. The damage they do far outweighs any other consideration. My answer stands and I will not apologise for it. As long as those responsible for the control of the pest animals adhere to the requirements and protocols attached to the products I will help producers to gain access to 1080 poison that eliminates feral animals.

    I have stood with farmers while Local Land Services handed out chicken heads injected with 1080 for use on their properties to control foxes. I will accept criticism that I am not doing enough in this space and I will go back to the agencies and say, “Let’s do more”, but I will never say in this Chamber that we should do less. I do not accept the member’s hypocritical view. We joke in this place about media reports concerning the member, but he walks in here with leather on his feet, wool in his suit and fish in his belly and attempts to impose his ideology on us. The member has been caught out as a hypocrite. The question is hypocritical. The member should stand up for our native animals. If the member spent more time on that area I might take the question seriously.

    The Hon. MARK PEARSON: I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister elucidate upon his answer as to what is the research that the department is doing into humane and non-lethal methods for “pest” control?

    The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: As I have previously stated, the department looks at other methods for control of these animals, including a bullet in the head or chest of some of the feral animals.

  • Notice of Motion-Dolphin Swim Australia

    DOLPHIN SWIM AUSTRALIA

    Accordingly, I move:

    (1) That this House commends Dolphin Swim Australia for being the first permitted wild dolphin swim in New South Wales and the first swim system of its kind worldwide.

    (2) That this House notes that Dolphin Swim Australia:

    (a) was given a permit to operate a wild dolphin swim encounter in the offshore waters of Port Stephens Great Lakes Marine Park in January 2010 and is now in its seventh season;

    (b) was subject to an independently monitored and Government-approved research program initially conducted over three years by cetacean expert, Dr Carol Scarpaci, of Victoria University, New Zealand;

    (c) conducts the operation whereby dolphins lead the way and can choose to interact or not without disruption to travelling or behavioural patterns;

    (d) utilises specific “approach patterns” to dolphins, ensuring there is no separation of the pod or disruption during feeding or resting; and

    (e) ensures dolphins are not habituated to the swimming activities.

    Motion agreed to.

  • Adjournment Speech-The concept of Wild Law

    WILD LAW

    Wild law, also known as Earth jurisprudence, extends the Western understanding of governance which focuses solely on human interests to include the concept of governing for the benefit of the whole Earth and its inhabitants. Wild law is Earth-centric rather than anthropocentric. Animals, plants, waterways and ecosystems have intrinsic rights to exist and flourish.

    New Zealand, Bolivia and India are leading the way in formulating wild law that protects the right of natural systems in perpetuity.

    Wild law is based on humankind’s most primeval understanding that we share our environment with all living beings, giving and taking in balance. The ancient lore of the Aboriginal peoples ensured that more than 1,000 generations thrived on this island continent without degrading natural ecosystems. However, within 250 years of European colonisation our environment has become severely damaged. Many plants and animals are at the brink of extinction, forests and grasslands are depleted, waterways have been poisoned and our reefs and mangroves are dying. Animal agriculture has polluted our groundwater, eroded our precious soils and destroyed vast tracts of native habitat.

    The Western view of the environment sees an expendable resource for profit and pillage. For the sake of future generations, government must incorporate wild law into our regulatory framework.

    How do we go about enshrining Earth jurisprudence into our laws?

    The modern originator of wild law, academic lawyer, Cormac Cullinan, in his “A Manifesto for Earth Justice” proposed that ecosystems be given legal personhood with enforceable legal rights. There is precedence for giving non-humans legal personhood, with corporations being given legal rights to promote commerce and trade. If corporate personhood is required for healthy economies, then why not legal personhood for the protection of natural systems that ensure the very survival of the planet? Wild law is in the early stages of evolution as modern legal doctrine. The framework is little more than a philosophical basis for developing legislation, policies and environmental protection, but there are encouraging recent developments.

    Australia was once a progressive nation. We were at the forefront of the growth of international human rights and the establishment of the United Nations. In the development of wild law, we are nowhere to be seen.

    Bolivia is world leader in wild law, drawing upon their indigenous concept of Pachamama, which means Mother Earth, in the adoption of their 2009 constitution:

    Pachamama is a living dynamic system made up of the undivided community of all living beings.

    The Bolivian Constitution gives natural systems the right to live, biodiversity, clean water and air. In a landmark agreement between the New Zealand Government and the Iwi people, the Whanganui River was granted legal personhood. The river and tributaries become a single entity—Te Awa Tupua—with legal rights and interests overseen by guardians, including an Iwi elder. Following on from the New Zealand agreement, the High Court in India granted legal personhood to the Ganges and Yamuna Rivers, appointing three State officials as guardians. The judges wrote, “Ganga and Yamuna provide spiritual and physical sustenance.”

    Wild law is the modern practice of an ancient knowledge that seeks to prevent us from wreaking our own destruction.

    Will we act in time?

    Our survival depends upon it.

  • Adjournment Speech on Rewilding our shared environment

    The Animal Justice Party supports the acquisition of land to protect, conserve and expand wilderness, including the rewilding of land once used for animal agriculture. Over the past 200 years we have lost 75 per cent of our rainforests, nearly 50 per cent of all forests and 99 per cent of south-eastern Australia’s temperate grasslands. The remaining ecosystems are under constant threat of clearing and in desperate need of protection. It is a national shame and a disgrace. We need to start looking at ways to bring back life into areas that have been stripped of biodiversity. In Australia ecologists focus on rehabilitating landscapes by killing animals that are deemed to threaten biodiversity. We have poisoned, shot and bludgeoned to death millions of foxes, rabbits, pigs, goats, cats, horses, camels, dingoes and kangaroos over the past hundred years, all in the name of conservation. Our landscapes continue to degrade, and it is clear that we must do things differently.

    In the United States and Europe the concept of rewilding with animals is seen as part of the solution. Rewilding is a critical step in restoring self-regulating ecosystems. Rewilding acknowledges that natural processes are complex and that the interplay between flora and fauna allows nature to evolve to take care of itself. Species are introduced or reintroduced based on the role they can play in an environment. After initial support, they are left to create the balance required. The reintroduction of apex predators such as wolves is one example of successful environmental repair. In Yellowstone National Park grey wolves had been hunted to extinction, and by the 1990s ecologists were concerned about the damage caused by large herds of elk. Once wolves were re‑established in the park, their predation on the elk reduced the damage caused to vegetation. The elk broke into smaller groups, foraged less and moved more frequently, allowing grasslands to recover. Scavenger species began to thrive again, with ravens, eagles, coyotes, lynx and bears feeding on wolf‑kill remains. Insects that fed off the rotting carcasses became the food of smaller birds and rodents.

    It is time to trial the benefits of rewilding in the Australian landscape. Just as in Yellowstone, we have taken our apex predators out of the ecosystem. The mass killing of dingoes changed the environment, and at the same time we introduced species such as foxes and cats. Smaller native predator species such as quolls and goannas struggled with habitat loss. Quolls once numbered in the hundreds of thousands and are now a threatened species. It was not until quoll numbers plummeted that rabbits were able to gain an ecological toehold. A recent trial reintroducing dingoes into Sturt National Park has shown early evidence that dingoes suppress cat and fox populations, with smaller mammals and marsupials surviving in increasing numbers.

    Returning apex predators to the environment is only one part of the equation. Their relationships within ecosystems are critical. Research and evidence-based trials must be undertaken, and we should be open‑minded about what constitutes an apex predator. We cannot go back in time. Foxes, dogs and cats are now native animals; they have been born here for many generations and now fill an ecological niche. Given the massive habitat loss and change in landscapes, we must accept that our ecosystems are evolving and adapting. Rewilding is about allowing evolution and adaptation to occur while reducing destructive human activities. One bulldozer in one day can take out an ecosystem that has evolved for millennia, yet we demonise the fox and the cat. Thousands of hectares of degraded sheep paddocks are more of a threat to biodiversity than a thousand dingoes or foxes. It is well past time to protect and expand our wilderness, for the sake of all the species that share this fragile, ancient land.

Page 2 of 712345...Last »