Advisory committee cuts “insulting” say conservationists
By Tim Howard
Clarence Valley conservationists say they feel “insulted” after a Clarence Valley decision to cut the number of community advisory committees.
Many of them met to consider their response to a Clarence Valley Council decision in December that condensed three committees providing advice to council on the environment into one.
At the meeting convener Leonie Blain was unhappy with the way the restructure had come about.
“The members of the previous advisory committees feel insulted by the way the change has been handled by the new council,” Ms Blain said.
The decision was part of an overhaul of the council’s advisory committee structure, reducing the number of committees from 10 to four.
Previously the council received advice from community members in the Climate Change Committee, the Biodiversity Committee and the Coast and Estuary Committee on environmental matters
In December councillors voted to create one new body, the Environment and Sustainability Community Advisory Committee.
The decision was not unanimous at first with deputy Mayor Cr Greg Clancy concerned the new structure would discourage people with expertise in specific fields from taking part.
Cr Clancy moved to instead have two committees covering climate change and biodiversity, but this was defeated 6-3
Presented with a fait accompli he voted for the motion, which passed unanimously, but warned the council could lose input from some experts.
“I don’t know how we will get people with an interest in the environment, in those special areas, working together, because they’ve come from a whole range of different backgrounds, and it’s very sad that we’ve just got one broad Environment Committee,” he said.
“So how that’s going to work? Time will tell.”
The meeting last week at the Clarence Environment Centre in South Grafton could provide some answers.
Ms Blaine, who had been a member of the former Climate Change Committee, said the council had benefited from the expertise of members who had given their time to be on theses bodies.
“The previous advisory committees had operated in good faith, providing expert and well-considered advice on a broad range of matters,” she said.
“While only some were formally adopted by council, we felt that council’s operations benefited through the committees’ positive interactions with council staff.”
A key concern raised at the meeting was the scope of matters that would need to be covered by the new committee.
It’s scope would encompass council’s management and policies on biodiversity, sustainability, greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate change, particularly in the extensive estuary and floodplains of the Clarence River.
“The previous advisory committees had operated in good faith, providing expert and well-considered advice on a broad range of matters,” Ms Blain said.
“While only some were formally adopted by council, we felt that Council’s operations benefited through the committees’ positive interactions with council staff.”
Ms Blain, who had addressed council’s December meeting in a delegation to council advocating for the retention of both the biodiversity and climate change committees, said it was obvious the general manager was not listening to her address and was in conversation with another person.
“It was an obvious slight which was noticed by many of the people attending or watching the meeting,” Ms Blain said.
A member of the former Biodiversity Advisory Committee, Phil Redpath, who brought significant environmental regulatory and ecological experience to that committee, had written to all councillors.
His submission pointed out that the cost of holding advisory committee meetings was insignificant compared to the significant uncosted economic benefit made by experts volunteering their time to attend Advisory Committee meetings.
A member of the former Coast and Estuary Management Committee, Peter Maslen, said his queries to council about whether the future Clarence advisory committees would be asked to provide input to council during the development of the coastal management program (CMP) for the Clarence River’s estuary had gone unanswered.
“The Coast and Estuary Management Committee had provided valuable input on the CMP for the Clarence’s Open Coast,” he said.
“The Estuary CMP is still to be prepared. That CMP should have community input during its preparation – not just wait for the public exhibition period.”
Ms Blain said the meeting concluded with a decision to review the Terms of Reference for the new and fewer advisory committees, to understand whether those committees could operate as an effective voice for community input to council policies and operations.
For more local news, click here.