Senator ALLISON (10:29 PM) —I seek leave to now incorporate the balance of my speech in Hansard .

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

The stories abound in this article of the struggle to solve this intractable problem. 6 million hectares are said to be vulnerable to salination if no action is taken. In NSW it is 5 million, 600,000 in SA, 74,000 in Qld and there are no figures for the other states. Two weeks ago I travelled to Wodonga, Albury and up into NSW to Holbrook and surrounding areas. I was shown some of the work of the Landcare movement and some of its failures too.

Hundreds of thousands of trees in this region are dying. This remnant vegetation is showing the telltale signs of dieback. Dead branches sticking up beyond the straggly foliage. I am told that these trees have only a few years left. The reasons for their dieback are complex. They are attacked by insects because there are not the native birds to keep the insects under control. These trees have been isolated from one another which affects the nesting habits of some of our birds. Miners take hold in such trees and exclude other birds.

I am told by a biologist that the only way to save these trees is to fence them off, encourage undergrowth of shrubs and to allow seedlings to emerge. Biodiversity comes not from a row of newly planted seedlings or a single ancient tree grazed up to its trunk, but from vegetation which is diverse in species and in age.

Victoria recently decided to allow large remnant trees to be removed provided they were replaced by 10 new trees. This is an absurd concept. Even if they survive, it will be decades before they could do the work of one large tree.

I saw streams at Holbrook which would have been dry but for the salt water seeping out into seriously eroded creekbeds. Water courses in this area have still not been fenced off. Where animals are able to graze up to the water's edge, the vegetation can no longer hold the soil. We have known about these principles for decades and yet still waterways are unprotected.

My reason for raising this issue tonight is to point out again to the Government that we have begun to solve the problem but we are still not doing the most obvious work to stop it getting worse. The Natural Heritage Trust Fund is assisting with a small number of fencing projects but the point is that we now risk doing exactly the same thing on pastoral leases.

The Native Title Amendment Bill has been criticised by the National Biodiversity Council because it allows the states to by-pass Native Title and allows for the upgrade of pastoral leases. It allows pastoral leases to be upgraded for cotton or rice growing or other crops and this land is, by and large, much more vulnerable than Kerang or Holbrook ever was. This land must be carefully managed and it is the role of the States and the Federal Government to see that this happens.

This week my office received a copy of a letter to the Minister from Dr Tim Flannery, author of The Future Eaters, and whose work Senator Minchin said he admired. Dr Flannery says he shares the concerns of the National Biodiversity Council about changes to land use and the impact this will have on Australia' s biodiversity.

He says "I am concerned that the Native Title Amendment Bill, in making it easier to expand the range of land uses, will almost inevitably lead to that further degradation. He said to the Minister, "I urge you to carefully consider the implications for Australia's biodiversity that arise from the Native Title Amendment Bill."

I will of course raise this issue when we again go into committee this week on this legislation but in the meantime, I think it is important that we reflect on the damage already done to our land and take all necessary steps to prevent further damage. Native Title acts effectively as a safeguard against that—another protection against unwise, outmoded farming practices in this country.