The state’s native veg regime is being dragged back to court – with green groups hoping for a repeat of March’s embarrassing admission by government it had not properly signed off on new land clearing codes.
That action ended in government reinstalling the code hours later, reassuring farmers they would not be prosecuted for legal works during the invalid law period.
The team leading the new legal case against government has rejected any suggestion this fresh court action is an expensive public show.
NSW Farmers say it’s a waste of taxpayers’ money.
The NSW Environmental Defender’s Office, representing the Nature Conservation Council, will argue new freedom of information documents show Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton did not properly consider the impacts to biodiversity when agreeing to the native vegetation code.
Related reading
The Minister’s office said Ms Upton remained 100 per cent in support of the code.
Farmers across the state have been using the new rules since they came into play in August last year – tentatively at first – but more broadly as Local Land Services build the funds, manpower, and know-how to roll it out.
Farm groups maintain there is room for improvement, while Opposition says LLS is not resourced well enough to be effective.
NSW Farmers Native vegetation working group chair Mitchell Clapham said the action initiated by Nature NSW and the EDO was a waste of taxpayers’ money.
“I can’t comment on the legal specifics of their case but as I understand, after the last one in March, the ministers dotted their i’s and crossed their t’s pretty well before they set it back up,” Mr Clapham said.
“It just seems to be a gross waste of taxpayer money for the EDO tobe doing this.”
EDO NSW chief executive David Morris said the two points it would be contesting were initially presented to the Land and Environment court back in March, when it was found Primary Industries Minister Niall Blair failed to obtain concurrence of Ms Upton before making the codes.
The code was deemed invalid but reinstalled later that day.
Mr Blair moved quickly to assure farmers that anyone who had acted under the old clearing code would be considered to have acted lawfully.
The EDO’s case that Ms Upton “failed to properly, genuinely, and realistically consider her decision to agree to the codes being made” and “failed to properly consider the principles of ecologically sustainable development” required further support from FOI documents to initiate these new proceedings.
“Neither us or our client takes it lightly that we are bringing this legal action,” Mr Morris said.
“Earlier this year we argued a case on three grounds. The first one was a process matter and it was ultimately successful. The second and third weren't considered by the court – and that is what this is based on.
“This is not show. It’s about having looked at the decisions that were made by government and deciding that it is not the role of the Environment Minister to be a rubber stamp.”
According to media reports, tensions between Mr Blair and Ms Upton on the first legal challenge erupted in February in front of the Premier, Mr Blair allegedly yelling ‘Why didn’t you get it bloody signed off in time’.
When asked if he was confident of another win, Mr Morris said the Office only moved forward with cases it felt it had the evidence to secure a result.
“If (Ms Upton) concedes, or we are found right, it is an important win in strengthening democracy,” he said.
“A win in the eyes of our clients would be to see the laws strengthened to prevent further biodiversity loss in NSW.”