Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to place on record the concerns of many residents in the Bellingen community regarding a Bellingen Shire Council proposal to remove three large camphor laurel trees from Church St, Bellingen. The council proposes to remove trees which are over 100 years old. It is doing this with the assistance of a $1.4 million Australian government grant as part of an upgrade to the main streets of Bellingen, Dorrigo and Urunga. Whilst the camphor laurel is technically regarded as a toxic weed, the reality is that these mature trees define the character of Church Street and add to the ambience of the town. The removal of any of these trees will change the local streetscape and destroy a natural piece of community infrastructure. The trees provide shade for the retail shopping strip and, whilst replacement trees can be planted, it will be difficult to replicate the benefits of 100-year-old trees on the streetscape.

Recently I met with a number of concerned residents about this issue. The meeting was organised by local resident Ziggy Konigseder. The residents believe that the council has not genuinely consulted with the community about the removal of the trees. They believe that the council has not been transparent in this process, although the plans were on public display, and there is a great deal of community angst that the loss of these trees will mean a substantial loss of character. Certainly it is my belief and the belief of many others that the old trees can be accommodated within the plan for the upgrade of the street, and that removing those trees would be a retrograde step.

The council maintains that it must proceed with the tree removal in order to meet the Commonwealth’s funding deadline of completing the works by 30 June this year. It also disputes that many in the community do not want the trees removed. Based on the number of representations I receive in relation to these trees, there is very strong community opposition to the proposal to remove them. The community feels that a better outcome could be achieved, and a better result would be to retain the existing trees and to work those existing trees into the proposed upgrade. At a time when government funding is scarce and the Gillard government is introducing new taxes to fund the flood recovery, it is hard to understand that taxpayers’ money is being used on a project that so many people in the community are opposed to.

The council is being very stubborn on this matter and is refusing to back down. It is resisting calls from the community to retain the trees. It is a very important community issue. These trees should be retained, and that would be a better outcome.