Ms TRISH DOYLE (Blue Mountains) (16:14): In 2016 I spoke about a National Parks and Wildlife bill in this House. There are many things that need to be changed and many things that need to be restated on the record, but this is how I began my contribution:

It gives me great pleasure to stand in this place and speak about New South Wales national parks because our national parks are a standing legacy of the environmental record of Labor in New South Wales. New South Wales would be unrecognisable today without the huge estate of national parks gifted to the people of this State by former Labor governments and former Minister for the Environment Bob Debus.

It is really important to acknowledge that Bob Debus has continued his work in this space. It is important to acknowledge him as a former member for Blue Mountains and a former Minister for everything in this place. But his work as Minister for the Environment is his most lasting and enduring legacy. Bob Carr and Bob Debus spent a great deal of the late 1900s and early 2000s ensuring large areas of bushland and wilderness throughout our State were invested in, protected, and made accessible to the people of New South Wales. Over 350 new national parks were declared by Bob Carr and Bob Debus in that time, and between 1995 and 2011 Labor added more than three million hectares to the National Parks estate. As mentioned before by the former member for Marrickville, when Bob Debus was the Minister for the Environment he gazetted more national parks in one day than the former Coalition Government gazetted in its entire term of office.

I note that the current Minister for Energy and Environment is trying to fix that. No other political party has created more national parks than has the Labor Party. We created the largest collection of national parks in the country and we will protect them. No other political party's representative in this place can make that claim. The Liberals resent our achievements in environmental conservation and The Greens look on from the crossbench. That is why it is so important to elect Labor governments, and that needs to be said in this place because only Labor can use the mechanisms of Executive government to protect the environment. Labor's record on the environment is lasting and enduring. Labor knows that a government must balance the strength of the economy with protections for our environment and Labor members know that, as politicians, we must bring the people along with us on these issues.

I also said about the 2016 bill—and I will say it again about today's bill—that what is disconcerting about it is the powers it will vest in the Minister. Each time we see a new bill or amendment, we need to remember that the people expect us to improve our national parks instead of eroding them or degrading them through commercialisation, restricted access, recreational hunting or whatever other proposal the Government has in the pipeline. Feedback from some of those who work in conservation and who have worked hard with many different governments over many decades is worth mentioning. One stakeholder said, "We actually thought there was a reasonable job done by the Minister and there have been a number of deals worked over with a number of different members. We thought what was happening was going to be confined to the Gardens of Stone, but no. We say no to zip lines. We say no to two-storey cafes nestled into the pagodas. We say no to glamour camping."

It is worth noting that quite a number of stakeholders, although they hold the Minister in high regard, are very disappointed with the lack of consultation. I am told that the State advisory committee was not consulted; nor were others. They were just told, "This is the bill you are getting." I turn now to another comment I made in 2016 in a private member's statement because it goes to the heart of what we are able to do by way of protection in our national parks, which is to look after the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the staff in that service. In 2016 I said:

I address the impact on my electorate of cuts to National Parks and Wildlife Service rangers and field officers. The Blue Mountains electorate is predominantly a World Heritage listed national park, with a small sliver of built-up areas running through the middle. The national park plays a crucial role in the local economy and the day-to-day lives of my constituents.

I was very alarmed back in those days to learn from staff about the significant staffing cuts that had absolutely gutted the organisation. They gutted the National Parks and Wildlife Service of its expertise and its capacity to actually do its job. At that stage I had been contacted—and I have been ever since—by National Parks and Wildlife Service staff, who all wish to remain anonymous, of course, but who detailed to me with horror the extent of the ramifications of the cuts. I refer people to my private member's statement in 2016, in which I outlined the concern of staff that park infrastructure would be degraded without supervision during the weekends and that park rangers' time would be spent repairing that damage during the week. I also mentioned that there was a huge push by this Government to diminish the status, expertise and qualifications required to attain the position of ranger and to dumb down that profession by removing the need for higher education qualifications for those highly specialised roles. One very senior National Parks officer said to me that he felt gutted to think that the Government was doing that at a time of climate change and environmental degradation of the planet, which was just deplorable.

I turn now to briefly comment on a couple of the aspects of the bill that Labor supports, which already have been outlined in this place by my colleague. We support protecting assets of intergenerational significance, including providing the method to extend that protection to Aboriginal cultural heritage sites, which is important; and we support the establishment of the Gardens of Stone as a State conservation area. Let us not forget that Labor started this some years ago by protecting Mount Airlie. The Minister is aware that the Opposition opposes the bill in its current form. It is fantastic to see the conservation area of the Gardens of Stone looked after but, as one of the stakeholders pointed out, we cannot commercialise to the point where it is no longer national park, wilderness and quiet, which is what people seek. I must note that people are a little alarmed by the provision of the power for the Minister to approve a project that is inconsistent with the plan of management for visitor infrastructure and conservation actions of a class prescribed in the regulations. My colleague the member for Port Stephens outlined that.

Other concerns that have been raised with me include the establishment of an open-ended charitable entity, which will enable tax-deductible donations to be made to national parks. In part that is modelled on the United States foundation. As one of my stakeholders and a conservationist who is well loved and cherished in that space said, "Why do we need a parallel charity as a slush fund and one that has no transparency?" The Blue Mountains Conservation Society says that opening up national parks to donations is a revenue-raising initiative and it will allow governments, potentially, to reduce public funding. That is their biggest worry. I note the concerns raised by Stuart Little of the Public Service Association when he pointed out that additional national parks and conservation areas have been declared in western New South Wales and not one additional staff member has been appointed to manage them. [Extension of time]

Is it any wonder that those who work in a service that we cherish and who we thank every time we are in this place are worried about what some of those changes could mean? I look forward to the Minister addressing that in his reply speech. He is well aware that there is a range of other concerns about the possible damage to national parks that they wish to work with him on. Perhaps the best feedback I received—and it is feedback that is laced with love—was that I was asked to stand up and say, "Please, do not drag your credentials into the dirt. Work with us and consult with us."

I cannot finish without thanking some of the stakeholders that have worked with me, especially when I was a casual adviser to Bob Debus and then to the Hon. Phil Koperberg, and all of the years in between. I note the concerns of my constituency, particularly the Blue Mountains Conservation Society, about the proposal to inundate 65 kilometres of the world heritage protected Blue Mountains National Park as part of the proposed project to raise the Warragamba Dam wall, without solving the problems of flooding in western Sydney. We are going to risk the world heritage status of the Blue Mountains National Park, which has the highest level of protection given to precious natural areas. That proposal is equivalent to dredging the corals of the Great Barrier Reef. If we are going to risk that and then support a government that congratulates itself for providing a conservation area, then we need to ask serious questions.

I will finish by acknowledging some fantastic people and groups that the Minister would also know. I acknowledge the Gardens of Stone Alliance, which has prepared many fantastic proposals and its members were pleased to see their hard work and conversations with the Minister acknowledged through the Gardens of Stone. They are a little concerned about elements of that. I acknowledge the Nature Conservation Council and also my fabulous Blue Mountains Conservation Society, of which I am a member. I particularly acknowledge the Colong Foundation for Wilderness and Keith Muir. I will remind the Minister that he owes Keith a phone call to explain the next steps and how he is going to peel back the concerns the foundation has outlined.