❓ A parliamentary question probes the Minister for Environment and Heritage on the protection of two-tiered forests, specifically regarding a perceived discriminatory decision by the previous government and the scientific justification for excluding them from high conservation value assessments. The Minister's response deflects by claiming ambiguity in the question and clarifying the scope of the high conservation value review.
AnsweredQoN 1296Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
TWO-TIERED FORESTS, CONSERVATION VALUES
(1) Does the minister intend to revisit the decision made under the previous Government to discriminate against the conservation values of two-tiered forests? (2) If yes, how does the minister intend to protect their conservation values? (3) If no to (1), what scientific justification can the minister provide for excluding two-tiered forests from protection under high conservation value assessment? Hon TOM STEPHENS
(1) Does the minister intend to revisit the decision made under the previous Government to discriminate against the conservation values of two-tiered forests? (2) If yes, how does the minister intend to protect their conservation values? (3) If no to (1), what scientific justification can the minister provide for excluding two-tiered forests from protection under high conservation value assessment? Hon TOM STEPHENS
AnswerView source ↗
(1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(2) If yes, how does the minister intend to protect their conservation values? (3) If no to (1), what scientific justification can the minister provide for excluding two-tiered forests from protection under high conservation value assessment? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(3) If no to (1), what scientific justification can the minister provide for excluding two-tiered forests from protection under high conservation value assessment? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(2) If yes, how does the minister intend to protect their conservation values? (3) If no to (1), what scientific justification can the minister provide for excluding two-tiered forests from protection under high conservation value assessment? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(3) If no to (1), what scientific justification can the minister provide for excluding two-tiered forests from protection under high conservation value assessment? Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: (1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(1) It is unclear which decision of the previous Government is referred to by the member. If the question is: does this Government intend to re-examine the nationally agreed definition of old-growth forest, the answer is no. (2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(2) Not applicable. (3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
(3) The purpose of the high conservation value review was to assess nominated areas to ensure that no high conservation areas had been missed by this Government’s forest policy. The review was not intended as an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire forest for new reserves.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.