News that the Queensland Parliament’s Agriculture and Environment Committee is set to recommend scrapping the Palaszczuk government’s reverse onus of proof rule in its vegetation management laws, has been dismissed by lobby group AgForce.
According to The Australian, the controversial plank is likely to be dumped in the wake of the committee report to be handed down in Parliament today.
AgForce has been a vociferous opponent of the amendments proposed by the government, and general president Grant Maudsley still believes the proposed legislation needs to be scrapped altogether, “not just tinkered with”.
“This is the compromise you have when you are not really compromising,” he said.
“It was always part of Labor’s political strategy to drop this part of the Bill so they could say they are listening.
“We would hope Peter Wellington and Billy Gordon won’t be fooled and taken in by these silly political tricks.”
In Wednesday’s article, Mr Wellington said he would make up his mind after he had read the committee’s report and considered amendments.
“I’ve tried to be consistent in my decisions in the parliament and unless someone presents me with a convincing case and overriding evidence as to why I should change my mind I will remain consistent,” he told The Australian.
Queensland Law Society president Bill Potts said that if the government should dump the “reverse onus of proof’’ provision in the proposed land clearing legislation it was a win for all Queensland rural landholders.
The Society opposed the change to onus of proof – which meant the holder of any land on which trees were illegally cleared would be held responsible until they could prove it was done by someone else – did not accord with natural justice.
“This would be a victory for common sense, for farmers, for rural landholders and for democracy,’’ Mr Potts said.
“Queensland Law Society has a long-standing commitment to evidence-based policy, and there is simply no evidence to support the radical changes to the usual onus of proof requirements.
“Any decision to axe the provision would be proof that determined Queenslanders who want to protect their natural right to justice can be heard in the Parliament.”
Mr Potts also paid tribute to AgForce and the Queensland Farmer’s Federation for the hard work they had done to protect the interests and the rights of their members.
Opposition Natural Resources Minister Andrew Cripps said the news was unsurprising, considering the amendments had been almost universally condemned as totally unnecessary.
“The government members of the committee had the opportunity to see through their colleagues’ scare campaign and see that the rules of the previous government were sensible and balanced, when they undertook their consultation process around the state.
“They would have heard that people were shocked that they were being treated worse than criminals, and how worried they were about property values and succession plans.”
Mr Cripps expected the non-government members would recommend the Bill not be passed and the government members will recommend that it is.
“I don’t know the government’s intentions but technically the first opportunity to debate it is early August, from the 16th to the 18th.
“They don’t usually debate something if they don’t think they’ve got Billy (Gordon) on board though.”