If you register as a "user" of this site, you can leave comments on its content. You cannot create content unless you are a member of the HCEC.
How this site worksUser loginThe HCECNavigationNews from the HCECReceive news, including upcoming events, things you can do and progress made, direct to your email inbox: create an account here, then subscribe here. Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 0 guests online.
|
Revealed: Biodiversity "pay to kill" scheme set to end public consultationMedia Release 9th July, 2006 Revealed: Biodiversity “pay-to-kill” scheme set to end public consultation A Bill introduced into NSW parliament last month is set to radically transform biodiversity impact assessment in NSW, and ultimately exclude the public from participating in it. The Hunter Community Environment Centre has access to confidential documents related to the Threatened Species Amendment (Biodiversity Banking) Bill 2006, and has released an assessment roundly attacking it. The Centre claims that the Bill will entrench the worst mistakes of the current “offsetting” culture, and will bypass public opposition to biodiversity destruction by removing the mechanisms by which the public are engaging in it. The Bill establishes a biodiversity offsetting and trading scheme termed “Biobanking.” The scheme would allow property developers and public authorities to destroy sensitive areas of bushland, providing they first purchase “biodiversity credits” – or give money to the state Government. HCEC spokesperson, Georgina Woods, said, “We are convinced that this scheme cannot and will not protect biodiversity in NSW: The proposed Biobanking Bill seeks to enshrine in legislation the very worst aspects of the “trade-off” mentality, allowing developers to pay the Government money to escape having to assess for or protect threatened species and other biodiversity values. No public consultation will occur, and threatened species conservation will be reduced to a lowest-common-denominator “pay-to-kill” policy. “The NSW Government has abandoned any semblance of care for threatened species: They seem to believe that they can abuse and ignore biodiversity, and we are completely fed up.” “If the State Government continues down this path, a new era of conflict and opposition over biodiversity protection and planning will begin,” Ms. Woods concluded. |
SearchUpcoming eventsPopular contentToday's:All time:Random Quote"Think of the climate as a small boat on a rather choppy ocean. Under normal circumstances the boat will rock to and fro, and there is a finite risk that the boat could be overturned by a rogue wave. But now one of the passengers has decided to stand up and is deliberately rocking the boat ever more violently. Someone suggests that this is likely to increase the chances of the boat capsizing. Another passenger then proposes that with his knowledge of chaotic dynamics he can counterbalance the first passenger and indeed, counter the natural rocking caused by the waves. But to do so he needs a huge array of sensors and enormous computational reasources to be ready to react efficiently but still wouldn't be able to guarantee absolute stability, and indeed, since the system is untested it might make things worse. So is the answer to a known and increasing human influence on climate an ever more elaborate system to control the climate? Or should the person rocking the boat just sit down?" |