Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, , 6:20:57 to 6:26:29
Debate over whether grazing activities trigger land clearing definitions under the new EPBC Act guidance and the impact on continuing use provisions for farmers.
Topics: EPBC Act, Land management, Agricultural productivity
Speakers: Hon Matthew Canavan, Matt Lowe, Jessica Mitchell, Miss Victoria Anderson, Unknown Speaker
>> Well, I'm only asking here because you've invested millions of dollars here in this department uh on a project which we don't seem to understand involving international investor. uh some of them were concerned their their their goals and strategies might not be aligned with Australia's national interest. That doesn't seem to be factored in here. Um uh uh the I just wanted to quickly go back to the um EPA uh the um settling of the um uh what were they called? Senator SCARR, sorry, the guide. the guide in that guide it says that obviously there's a there's there's restrictions around what's defined as a clearing event. Uh that guide defines a clearing event to include uh removing native or non-native vegetation from land that changes any of its use structure or ecological function. This includes woody vegetation trees and shrubs and non-woody vegetation like ground cover like grasses. So uh are Australia's farmers now subject to this expanded uh EPBC regime when they uh when they remove grasses that does that count as land clearing?
>> So there's a I think there's a range of tests here Senator um in relation to I guess how farmers need to interpret the guide. The first is um the nature of the activity i.e. a clearing and whether it's um if you like a a exempt activity or not. Um the second test is whether that activity is likely to impact on a matter of national environmental significance. So that's the second test that a farmer I believe needs to be to satisfy themselves whether they're impacting or not and that I guess then determines whether they're subject to the regime um and would need and that would whether that would trigger the need for a referral,
>> right? But then later on the guide does say land clearing and I won't read it all out again. It's a similar definition but does say it uh it it covers non- woody vegetation like ground cover like ground cover like grasses and so the the the the significance here is if that is a clearing event the um the the the new regulations say uh that um uh the continuing use provision will only apply if uh land uh has been cleared in the last 15 years. So would the simple act of grazing uh where cows come and eat grasses uh would that account to be a clearing event under these under this guide?
>> Not as I understand it. um if there's grazing activity already occurring >> Um um our understanding is Senator and again just kind of conscious that we're commenting on a matter that is not that we're not the lead portfolio agency on but most activities on development developed land agricultural land would not need to be referred for assessment >> because their environmental impacts are low and below the threshold set by the national environmental law. But I'm just
yeah I'm trying to understand what a clearing event is because if a clearing event means a modification change uh of grasses surely grazing is doing that >> that's so that's clearing.
>> Well if there's grazing already
happening. Yeah. Uh, so there's Senator, hi. There's some um information on the National EPA's website um that if it's grazing within an existing grazing footprint, it's a low risk of significant impact and a detailed self self assessment would not be required.
>> I think we're talking across purposes. I'm trying to get to the the the trigger of the continuing use. >> Sorry, the continuing use provision. So not not necessarily whether something's a significant impact per se, >> but whether or not it it there's a there's a the big change that occurred. Those issues around a significant impact has always been there in the law, that hasn't changed. The change, one of the big significant changes in the arrangements a couple of years ago was was restricting the continuing use provision uh to land that has only been cleared in the last 15 years. But I'm a bit confused now reading that exactly what a clearing event is >> to trigger that continuing use. >> So land has to be cleared within the last 15 years to say it's it's continuing use. >> Well, I mean on my reading of that even grazing amounts to a clearing activity.
>> I don't think that's our understanding.
No, it see yeah it wouldn't be a colloquial understanding but the way this is drafted >> it classifies the change of a non-woody vegetation as grasses >> as a clearing event.
>> So we
>> whereas most people think clearing event is yep I go away and I I clear shrubs and mul and regrowth etc. >> Um but this is such a broad definition of what vegetation is that yeah simple cows running around eating grass is
clearing. I I understand Senator you'd like to get the definitive.
>> Well, maybe if you could take that on notice because I know other graies are a bit confused about this.
>> A guide developed by another department that we've been asked in detail about is just that's [clears throat] all. So, we would prefer to take it on notice and just make sure we're giving as accurate an answer as we can.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. Um Okay. Um moving on. Uh I might ask about the EU deforestation uh regulation. Is that that's due to come into effect now in December. Is that right?