Ms TRISH DOYLE (Blue Mountains) (18:27): I contribute to debate on the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment (Reservations) Bill 2022. My electorate of Blue Mountains sits within a World Heritage‑listed national park. I have spoken in this place before about the significance of that. There is a list of criteria for a place to be considered worthy of being welcomed into the UNESCO World Heritage family. It must be of outstanding universal value and be found to display superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance. I want all members to really understand that; I know my colleague the member for Port Stephens does.

It is easy to come to the Mountains for a day or two and take in the Three Sisters, do a bit of shopping in Leura Mall and maybe enjoy some lunch in a cafe in Mount Victoria, Blackheath or Katoomba. There is a lot to enjoy socially, especially if you are in the neighbourhood when one of our big local events is happening, like Winter Magic, the Rhododendron Festival or Springwood Foundation Day. We really are blessed in the mountains to have such a vibrant and diverse community, but today I emphasise the preciousness of the natural environment in which we live. I believe the acknowledgement of that needs to be front and centre of any decisions we make, be they related to development or the planning and building of infrastructure. The Blue Mountains much be treated with absolute sensitivity and care.

That brings me to what I want to focus on in the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment (Reservations) Bill 2022. The bill states that the land identified as "land to be revoked" in the Blue Mountains National Park will be "about 23 hectares". I want it to be acknowledged that this is not a sliver, as has been suggested by senior Transport for NSW bureaucrats; it is a sizeable chunk. I imagine the argument put forth will be that it is necessary to forge ahead with the Great Western Highway duplication project west of Katoomba. I also imagine that it will be pointed out that the piece of land to be revoked, whilst it is national park, does not sit within the World Heritage‑listed section. The suggestion might be, therefore, that it is not such a big deal. I think it is still a big deal, and so do many in the community of the Blue Mountains—the Blue Mountains Conservation Society especially.

Labor is not opposing the bill, with the expectation that the New South Wales Government will do the right thing and that the land revoked will be replaced, like for like, with land of equal area and equal or greater environmental value. I note that the bill amends the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 to revoke more than 54 hectares from national parks and reserves for priority transport projects; that national park land revocations occur regularly and are only considered as a last resort when no other practical options are available; and that there is a requirement that the lost land will be compensated. The Minister must be satisfied that appropriate compensation has been secured before the land can be revoked. I note that the Minister is in the Chamber; we will hold him to this, and so will the State.

Whilst the party I represent is not opposing the bill, as the local member for an area that will be on the receiving end of the actions that result from the bill, I want my concerns and the concerns of my community on the record. I want to know that there are protections in place for the remainder of our national park, World Heritage listed or otherwise. It seems that what is deemed as progress that meets human need always wins out in the end, often by way of large infrastructure projects like highways. I understand this to a degree, but we must all realise that the days of this kind of thinking are numbered.

I worry for my electorate because so much of the focus on getting the Great Western Highway upgraded is not at all about what is best for protecting and preserving the natural environment in the Blue Mountains. While I acknowledge the growing need for a more efficient traverse across the mountains and more practicable solutions to ease local traffic congestion, I am yet to be convinced that one of the core motivations in progressing the highway upgrades is respect for environmental sensitivities. This is starkly illustrated by the New South Wales Government's decision to opt for a review of environmental factors in the area where the land in the Blue Mountains is earmarked for revocation, rather than a full environmental impact statement.

I highlight this because it makes me question whether we really know enough about the land in the Blue Mountains that is set to be revoked. Do we know that there are no vulnerable species living there? Do we know the full impacts on things like groundwater run‑off and nearby swamps? We are essentially being asked to trust in the process of taking something away and giving something back, but I would feel more inclined to trust in this if I had any trust in the Government. Let us not forget that Blue Mountains National Park has already lost millions of hectares and wildlife from the 2019‑20 bushfires and from the impacts of several major flooding incidents.

I would also like to understand what assurances, if any, will be in place to protect the surrounding national park and World Heritage national park as this highway project ploughs ahead. I want to know that a precedent of sorts is not being set here. I want to know that, if this piece of our park must be revoked, it will not pave the way for further revocations at a later date because another project has been deemed more important than the unique environment in which we live. Our national parks are essential to us all, both locally and globally. They support broader conservation and anchor ecosystems. They are home to Indigenous cultural heritage, and they provide habitat for wildlife and plant life.

It is important to mention at this point the work of Bob Debus, AM, the former member for Blue Mountains and Minister for everything in this place. His work as Minister for the Environment has left an enduring legacy. Along with Bob Carr, throughout the 1990s and early 2000s he ensured that large areas of bushland and wilderness throughout New South Wales were invested in, protected and made accessible to the people of this State. Over 350 new national parks were declared by Bob Debus and Bob Carr, and between 1995 and 2011 Labor added more than three million hectares to the national park estate, gazetting more national parks in one day than the former Coalition Government gazetted in its entire term of office. That legacy must be protected.

We all have a duty to protect our national parks. We are responsible for the ways in which we move through those spaces as individuals, and we should all have a platform to speak up and shout loudly when we believe that our national parks are not being cared for as they should be or if we sense impending harm. That is what I am contributing to this debate. My Labor colleagues and the Labor Party do not oppose the bill, but my Blue Mountains community and I—and I dare say the millions of visitors who come to our region every year—will be watching closely to ensure that what is removed from our park is replaced. We will be watching to make sure that this revocation of land does not herald any further destruction of the places that sit within this World Heritage place.