Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Mayor Wellington: So I'll call the meeting to order. Welcome to this special meeting. There are no apologies. We have only one matter to consider and that is the draft Noosa River Plan to go out to public consultation. We have appropriate staff sitting at the table. Any questions, councillors? Councillor Wilkie: I have a clarifying question. Do you want to stand for that? Mayor Wellington: Yeah, we should do that. Councillor Wilkie: Probably to Craig or Jan. On page 26 there's a reference to LIDAR imagery and it says the analysis revealed that up to 2.3 million tonnes of sediment was mobilised in this area over a seven year period. Based on an average soil replacement cost of $30 a tonne, the cost of this soil productivity loss exceeds... $6 million. It does, but I'm just wondering if it's a simple maths question. Is there
00:01:00 an analysis that's done that helps you arrive at the $6 million figure because multiplying 2.3 million by 30 gives you a figure of $69 million? And I'm just wondering is there another methodology that's implied in this that I'm unaware of? I might hear more of that one. Good luck. Speaker 3: I'm not 100 per cent sure, but my assumption would be that it relates to the loss of agricultural productivity, which is about the surface use, not necessarily just the value of the soil. Speaker 1: They're actually talking about $30 a tonne. Speaker 4: Yeah, and 2 million tonnes. Speaker 1: We'll need to check. Mayor Wellington: That can be reconsidered anyway. I think staff can have a look at that before the final draft goes out for public consultation. I'd be more than happy to. Yep. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Thank you. It may be that what's missing is a per year. That's when I read that it must have been $6
00:02:00 million per year over that period. Speaker 4: Okay. Let us just check the rationale on that. I don't think it changes the substantive meaning of the loss of it, but we'll check that and make sure it's correct. Thank you. Just a quick question. Yeah, go ahead. Councillor Pardon: Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, you go ahead. Yeah, no worries. Yeah, just a question. On page 7, after page 6, because page 7 is not the number of page 7, the photograph there, I was just wondering if that is Councillor Jurisevic with the two children there on the jetty. Page? Councillor Jackson: Page 7? Page 7. Of the PDF or of the document? No, PDF. No? Okay. Mayor Wellington: I've only got a map and it doesn't look like Councillor Jurisevic. Page 7. Oh, sorry. Oh, sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well, okay. Councillor Pardon: Page 7 of the report. Yes. Page 7 of the report. Thank you. Thank you for clarifying. No. Councillor Jackson: Now, may I ask a question?
00:03:00 Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, is it? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is that a serious question? Councillor Jackson: Councillor Jackson. He does. He does. He's aging me. I noticed on, I believe, page 44 of the plan, which is 23 of the PDF, it refers to the development of an energy and gas plant. It's a memorandum of understanding between council and DNR&E in order to jointly agree set obligations and mechanisms for ongoing management and monitoring of activities on jetty leases. And I just sort of went back to something before your time. 7th of March, 2017, council approved under its ordinary meeting that it would have an MOU with the DNR&E and seek to develop a memorandum of understanding for regular compliance inspection program and a process by which the parties consult prior to consenting to any new subleases or uses.
00:04:00 So this appears to be already something we've approved. Oh, you've approved. We've approved. Mayor Wellington: Can you stand up to answer? Please stand up. We're in a formal meeting situation. Speaker 2: Sorry. What was the question? It's been approved. It's been approved. Has it been done is the question? It hasn't been done. Oh. It's a properties area. And as far as the last bit of information I have is that there has been an exchange of letters. But as far as the MOU is concerned, it hasn't progressed. Okay. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell. Any more questions? I'd like to move a motion. Can you read it out, please? I'll read it out because it's only quite recently. The Council noted the report by the Environment Officer of Rivers and Coasts to the special meeting dated 20th November 2019 and A, endorsed the draft Noosa River Plan as provided at Attachment 1 for the purpose of further community consultation subject to 1, the vision statement on page 5 being amended to read, our vision is that the Noosa River is recognised as the healthiest
00:05:00 and most biodiverse system in South East Queensland. Our aim is to manage and protect the captain's waterways and wetlands to achieve the greatest possible level of community wellbeing now and in the future. And 2, endorsing the community consultation to begin the 2nd of December 2019 rather than the 29th of November as stated in the report. And B, authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make minor amendments to the document prior to publication. Councillor Jurisevic: May I just clarify that the vision statement that the Council is referring to is the blue paragraph? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Do I have a seconder for that? No. Seconded Councillor Glesgar. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do so. I think the, this vision of the plan is very close to where I envisage we should be. I'm very, I think it's a significant enhancement on what went out last time as a result of
00:06:00 the additional information that we've got both from things like the skill of report, the active acknowledgement of the waterways prioritisation and the waterways and waterways biopassage strategy, also the TNC proposal. And I won't talk too much because I think Councillor Pardon may. It's also enhanced by our research into the commercial fishing. So there is both substance and I suppose the balance between the various issues affecting both the health and the biodiversity of the system are now, I think, well managed or well considered within this plan. And I think it's a very, very significant improvement. And that's one of the reasons why I did suggest we make a slide to amend the vision. It is largely the words that are in there all in one sentence. But I added a significant thing, which is not just the healthiest, which sometimes people just look at in terms of waterway, water quality, but also the most biodiverse.
00:07:00 Because I think a lot of the actions we are doing are look at, is look at ecosystem rehabilitation. It's about returning the river to a previous state where we both have more abundance, but also more diversity of the species that will occur throughout the catchment. I also think that in terms of splitting it to make it more readable, that the aim is to manage and protect focused on the waterways and the wetlands and their riparian zones to achieve the greatest possible level of community wellbeing. I think that's one of the things that this community really recognises, that the presence of the river, not even if they don't use it, the presence of river provides a benefit. And this is outlined in the report. The people who go there to fish or to paddle or to swim, it provides us with a lifestyle that is enviable across South East Queensland. And it's important that when we look at prioritising investment, when this plan becomes endorsed, that we recognise what we're going to do is improve the wellbeing of our community, improve the opportunities for lifestyle, while protecting the health and the biodiversity within the
00:08:00 river system. Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Jackson: Councillor Jackson. I'd like to ask a question of... Well, perhaps Jan and Craig. I know what it says in the suggested amendment, to achieve the greatest possible level of community wellbeing now and in the future, whereas the original one that you have there says protected for the greatest possible wellbeing of the community now and into the future. Can you see a difference in the wording meaning at all? Speaker 4: Through the Chair? I can't see a significant difference in the meaning. I think what Councillor Stockwell's proposed is pretty much within keeping with the existing vision, just slightly reworded. And I don't think it underlines any of the other best of the document which was developed with that vision in mind. Councillor Glasgow: Councillor Glasgow. I actually have a question probably for the CEO and the Mayor. Just with the way it's written, I probably applaud what you're trying to do here, Councillor
00:09:00 Stockwell. But the vision of this river system is that it is celebrated. And it's got here, this river is recognised as the healthiest. Is this unfamiliar territory to be sort of rubbing in salt wounds of our neighbours to our left and our right, sort of going, we're a healthier, better river system? And is it just something we want to be sort of dabbling in with our neighbours to our north and south, you might say? We're kind of making big statements here. I quite like what's written, which is good. I agree. But is this something we want to go and get involved with, you think? Mayor Wellington: I think it's fair to say that the Noosa River has had a bit of a modern history in being the healthiest waterway in South East Queensland. And the Healthy Land and Waterways report card has demonstrated this consistently. And they indeed have noted its health in relation to other waterways in South East Queensland. So I don't think it's actually necessarily a critique of our neighbours so much as a
00:10:00 statement of fact that the Noosa River tends to be a healthier waterway. It tends to be the healthiest. But arguably, that's because the Noosa River has a beginning of its life in a national park, whereas others tend to begin in agricultural land and developed lands. So there is some good fortune here on our part. But no, personally, I don't have a problem with that. But you know, by all means, vote against it if you don't like it. No, no. Councillor Glasgow: You're happy with it. Councillor Wilkie: I'm happy with it. That's fine. You sort of mentioned it. Mayor Wellington: Yeah. Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Question to the staff. How long has the vision as it appears in the vision statement, the one sentence vision statement as it appears in the draft Noosa River plan, how long has that been the vision statement? And were there any comments, submissions in the first round of consultation about the vision statement? Does this reflect any changes? Speaker 4: Certainly. Through the Chair, the vision statement from the previous version went out to consultation in August 2018. It was that the Noosa River system is celebrated as the healthiest river system in southeast
00:11:00 Queensland and is managed and protected for future generations. It was modified slightly. I don't recall us getting any specific feedback around that vision when we went out to consultation the first time. It was modified slightly in the version you see before you today to focus a little bit more around greatest wellbeing, because we thought that incorporated a bit more of a community element and the recognising the human use of the river as well as just its environmental value. So that was the rationale for the change. I don't think the changes as proposed here changed the meaning of that. Councillor Wilkie: Another question. Yeah, sure. And part two, endorsing community consultation began on 2nd of December rather than 29th of November. Does that have to do with days of the week? What's the reason? Speaker 3: I can answer that. If there's going to be changes made to the version that we have today, it's going to be a bit difficult to get it up on the website tomorrow. We'll probably need tomorrow to make any minor changes and have it up early next week.
00:12:00 Mayor Wellington: Anyone else wish to speak or ask a question? I'll speak. Councillor Jurisdict. Councillor Jurisevic: I'd just like to concur with the comments of my fellow Councillor, Councillor Stockwell. I think the changes that have been proposed here give aspiration to where we want our river to be for the future. Some of the most significant changes that are in there and one of the most significant ones for me in particular is seeing the zero litter aspiration come back. Councillor Jackson: Are we speaking on the motion or just on the amendment? Councillor Jurisevic: On the amendment. Mayor Wellington: There is no amendment. Councillor Jackson: There is no amendment. Mayor Wellington: I'm sorry. This is the motion. It's the only motion that's been put. Speaker 1: Okay. Mayor Wellington: Carry on, Councillor Jurisdict. Councillor Jurisevic: Losing my train of thought. One of the most pleasing things for me to see is the addition of an aspirational plan of zero litter to the Noosa River. With a set timeframe, some of the aspirations with regard to a litter capture and that in the earlier version to my mind left some scope for desire, but to achieve aspirations
00:13:00 to try and achieve litter reduction of this capacity in this river plan is commendable for mine. And all the other aspirations in this plan I think meet the aspirations of a community that wants to see a long held healthy and diverse river. For our community, for futures to come. Mayor Wellington: Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Jackson. Councillor Jackson: May I also speak? Now that I know it's a motion. I'd like to thank staff for both of Ukraine and Jan for the large amount of work that's gone into preparing this revised draft. And I see this draft as aiming to capitalise on the ecological, social and economic values of the Noosa River. And I see that as an enhancement from the previous draft. So I think that's really great. It's very clear in articulating key issues and proposing an action plan to address these. Some of the key issues identified and addressed in the plan include how can water quality
00:14:00 habitats and biodiversity be protected from rural and urban sediment runoff, pollution and littering? What can be done about unsealed rural roads, which are a major source of sediment entering local waterways when it rains? What can we do about the impacts of climate change, such as damage from heavier rainfall and flooding of wetlands and riparian zones and during dry periods, declining environmental flows impacting water quality, aquatic life and recreational activities? What about abandoned and derelict boats? How can Council work with the state government to manage anchoring, mooring and living on the river? What do what do we do about waste being discharged from homes? Boats directly into the river? How much commercial and recreational fishing is sustainable? What should be done about the eroding Noosa spit? Should businesses be allowed?
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 Should more businesses be allowed in the Noosa River? And how do we manage traffic and boat wash of high numbers of boats during peak seasons? This draft plan has actions for all of these things and more. It's a fine balance between keeping the river pristine and healthy and keeping it clean and healthy, while at the same time providing residents with employment and income and enjoyment by the community and visitors. So I'm very keen to hear community feedback on this revised draft, and particularly to find out if there are any gaps or unintended consequences that have not been captured or addressed. But I'm very happy to endorse this plan. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie? Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, commend this plan. I think the staff and the anonymous matter were done, and I was prepared to fully endorse the proposed motion, as it appeared in the Council report.
00:16:00 I'm very uncomfortable with this motion and the change of the vision statement at this late hour after the time the original vision statement was spent is part of the plan and going out to the community. My understanding of a vision statement, the shorter they are, the better they are, and I prefer a one sentence vision statement as the original one was. A vision statement is where you want to go and a mission statement is how you're going to get there. That's my understanding. What we appear to have here is a combination of a vision statement and a mission statement wrapped up as a mission statement. The vision statement, where we want to go, Noosa River be recognised as the healthiest and most biodiverse system in South East Queensland. Great. How are we going to get there? By managing and protecting the catchments, waterways and wetlands to achieve the greatest possible level of community wellbeing now and in the future. So it just confuses the issue at this late stage. For that reason, I'm uncomfortable about that element of the motion.
00:17:00 What I do like about the draft plan is that it seeks to capture more elements affecting the complex natural wonder that is the Noosa River system and lake system. Although the Noosa River receives the highest rating of any river in South East Queensland, this plan reflects a strong commitment to do so much more to protect and improve the health of the river for centuries to come. It's an integrated plan that seeks to take a more holistic approach to the Noosa's fresh water creeks, wetlands, lakes, river estuary, coastal creeks and groundwater and a whole of catchment management approach to land based and on river activities. It proposes action, education, better monitoring as well as regulation to protect our rivers and waterways, mostly achieved through partnerships and that's fantastic. The Noosa residents place an extremely high value on the river as a natural asset and understand better than most that clean and healthy waterways mean clean and healthy oceans. Key actions like more integrated water monitoring across multiple sites in partnership with other groups and ongoing benthic studies will provide a more complete and detailed picture upon which future councils can base their responses and track the progress of programs like this proposed zero litter to river by 2030 target.
00:18:00 The plan provides a great snapshot on what's currently being done, the challenges that the river already faces, it's a great document, and it's also an inspiring blueprint for future action. And again, I thank the staff for the enormous work they've done and I thank the councillors for their passion in wanting to still amend and improve the document even at this late stage. Councillor Pardon: Councillor Pardes? Yes, Mr Chairman. Yeah, look, I agree with some of those statements of Councillor Wilkie. But I'm going to die in the dishes over vision statements. That's probably the longest one I've ever seen. But having workshopped many over the years, no one ever agreed on a vision statement. It becomes a mishmash and eventually you arrive at something that everyone can live with.
00:19:00 But that's okay. The Noosa River Plan, gee, we go way back, 2004 and beyond. And some of the questions that Councillor Jackson put in there, I think they're very important. What are we doing about the, you know, grey water into the river? What are we doing about moorings? What are we doing about boat wash? What are we doing about speed on the river? All these things, and that's where we started. That's what triggered the old Noosa Council. That's where we started. What can we do about this? How do we engage with the state? And thus the old Noosa River Plan was formed, and MOUs and meetings with the state over time, about every quarter, and Councillor Griffin, as the former Councillor Griffin sort of led that charge with regards to the river. Councillor Stockwell comes along, and he embraced not only the river, but the whole system. So we've sort of expanded to include lakes on the whole,
00:20:00 the system as a total, which is a good move to embrace the lot. Then we've workshopped many times. We've had community juries involved and recommendations to take over, basically to take over from the, from the state government, when all those things that Councillor Jackson pointed out, well, whose responsibility are they? Whose responsibility for the moorings? Whose responsibility for the boats, the speeds, all that? It's all state government responsibility. And when the state doesn't act, that's when a local authority like us stands up and says, well, you know, we just can't have this. Our people won't support it, and we have to do something about it. So that's where we get engaged, and it'll be interesting to see, because we'll see what comes back, because there's a draft going out to our people. But I would imagine most of our people, given the length of time and the various juries and engagements that we've had, there will be some feedback.
00:21:00 But I reckon there's not a lot of scope for much that we've missed or the people have missed that were engaged in this process. So great document, and thanks, staff, because you do all the work, and that's terrific for us. With regards to the fishing, that was a bit of an add-on late. The Noosa River and fishing is probably why I ended up here. I fished this river in about 1969 before the river mouth was altered, and it was a mecca for fish. And even into the 70s, when they built the canals, Noosa waters, et cetera, all those canals were full of fish. The waters were black with mullet a couple of feet or half a metre deep. They'd pour into the river to spawn and school up and move along the beaches north. The whiting was so big, you'd be lucky to catch one for bait. We used to catch them for live bait.
00:22:00 They were that big. You had to put a whiting on it. It was a legal size. If you put a hook through and threw it out, then it'd get smashed by a mangrove jack, a big tail, or a Jew. Just an amazing mecca. So some of the stuff that's being done and the partnerships that we've formed, Thomas Foundation, et cetera, bring back the fish, the oyster reefs. We've copped some criticism in our community over these oyster reefs, and I've explained to people what it's about. And anyone who wants to put up $1.2 million and partner with this council, well, I'm listening to, because that's a great opportunity to bring back some of the oysters, et cetera, and we know the condition that we've done, that the studies have been done. And we know what was here before with regards to the strata that was taken out of this river and millions of oysters annually to go to Morton Bay to set up oyster leases in other parts from the river. So we'll never put it back pristine because, unfortunately, human beings being involved, as we are.
00:23:00 So many living here, so much pressure, amateur fishing pressure, commercial fishing pressure. But we have opportunity. We have opportunity, as it says in the report, we have opportunity to buy out trawlers, et cetera, some of the things that are removing our seagrasses, and taking out the biodiversity that's in that motion. So that must be five minutes up. That is. I'm being set up now. So with that all being said, I commend this document to the people, the draft. Let's see what comes back. But I think there'll be a lot of positive outcomes in the future. And some of those questions that were posed and how we deal with them, partnering with the various state and federal bodies, because there's sums of money involved here. And I know recently, I've heard recently, that the Queensland government's even sort
00:24:00 of having a look at us, possibly some of their officers, being embarrassed that a local government is doing this. And I think that's something that has to, say, take over the river system and its lake system to look after. Because they're not doing the job. Thank you. Thank you, Johnson. Councillor Wilkie: May I move an amendment? Mayor Wellington: Oh, yeah, of course. Councillor Wilkie: I'm sorry to do this. This is a bit of a surprise to me. But I'd like to move an amendment. So for part one. Speaker 3: Do you have any time to copy it down? Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So what's it going to be? Part one. Councillor Wilkie: Part one reads, as is to the words South East Queensland. All correct? Yeah. Can't paste that down.
00:25:00 And then add on to that, get rid of the full stop. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: And managed and protected to achieve the greatest possible level of community well-being now and into the future. Mayor Wellington: Second Mr Chair. Seconded by Councillor Parton. Councillor Jurisevic: You want to remove the catchments, waterways and wetlands apart? Councillor Wilkie: Yep, and then part two will be the same and part three will be the same. Okay, so it reads, the vision statement on page five being amended to read, our vision is that the Noosa River is recognised as the healthiest and most biodiverse system in South East Queensland and managed and protected to achieve the greatest possible level of community well-being now and into the future.
00:26:00 Mayor Wellington: Okay, speak to it. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, the reason why I've done this, Councillor, is I believe it achieves, it encapsulates in fewer words and one sentence the proposed new vision that we see before us in the first motion, in the original motion. So I'm doing it for brevity. It's, I believe it also, also captures the essence of the original vision statement and the proposed two-sentence vision statement without it being, to my mind, a combination of a vision statement and an omission statement all in one. Just briefer, one sentence.
00:27:00 The one-sentence vision statements are always, from what I've observed anyway, my understanding is they're more concise and we don't need to talk about waterways and wetlands in there. That's implied. Yeah, less is more, I think. And I think it's true to the original vision statement and also Councillor Stockwell's. Mayor Wellington: I've got a question for you, Councillor Wilkie. Yeah. The only significant difference now between that new vision statement and the one in the original document in terms of intent is that the original one in the document presented to us said it's celebrated as the healthiest and we've now got most biodiverse added as well. What's being suggested here is that it's recognised as the healthiest. Do you see a difference necessarily between the words celebrated and recognised? Because it can be recognised as something without actually being what it's recognised for.
00:28:00 Celebrated suggests it actually has to achieve it. Councillor Wilkie: That's a really good question, Mr Mayor. I haven't thought of it that way. I'm comfortable with celebrated or recognised. I'm happy to change it to... I'm happy with recognised. I'm also happy with Councillor Stockwell's suggestion that the healthiest, as well as the most biodiverse system in South East Queensland, I think that's a worthy aspiration as well. But if that's the case, I'm happy with recognised. This amendment is accepted. Depending on how other councillors feel about it, happy to have the discussion about the use of the word celebrated as opposed to recognised as well. Did that not answer your question? Mayor Wellington: No. Well, not really. I mean, we've got a motion before us. You can't change it afterwards when it becomes a resolution. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I'm going to use Councillor Wilkie's argument against this amendment.
00:29:00 I can't support it for the same reason I didn't support what was in the document, because it confuses the vision statement with the mission statement, and it combines them into one. My amendment, while I didn't make it explicit, was the vision statement that was there is cut into both a vision statement and what he called the mission statement. So, there are two separate sentences and not confusing it. So, in the motion as put, the vision statement is the first sentence, and what follows is not a vision statement. It is what we're going to do to achieve the vision statement. It's very clear because it's our aim. It doesn't say our vision is. So, in worrying about it, I think Councillor Wilkie has done something that I was trying to correct, which is the current amendment is a mix of a vision and a vision. It is a complex sentence, which is contrary to good writing of vision statements, because it's trying to achieve two things in one sentence. I'm not going to die in a ditch about it. But that's why I did it, just to be clear.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 It's trying to make it more readable and more concise. It's consistent with good plan making. I did also note that the Mayor made an aspiration of what celebrating means. So, because Councillor Glasgow, to recognise is to acknowledge the existence and validity or legality of something. We want it to be recognised. We don't just want to celebrate. Because celebrating is a social gathering or enjoyable activity. Okay, you celebrate after you're recognised. Just celebrating. We can celebrate the river all we like and not do a damn thing about it. We want to be recognised by worthy peoples. Whether it's scientists. Whether it's the ward. That this is the case. So, that's why I changed that word. I think it's really important that our vision statement is clear. And in one sentence. And shorter than what the current amendment proposes. Thank you, Councillor. Mayor Wellington: I'm going to do exactly what you did and argue against you. And that's because originally your amendment, and I know I'm speaking to the previous amendment, but there's a reason for that. Because what's being sought here is a challenge.
00:31:00 It's a challenge to the original motion. Sorry, not amendment. Your original motion said the vision statement to read. The first sentence begins with our vision. And the second sentence, which you said is not the vision statement, begins with our aim. Yet your wording suggests the whole thing is a vision statement. So, I was going to, in fact, argue against supporting your original motion until such time as we sort that dog's breakfast out. What we have now is a vision statement that you suggest incorporates two issues, a vision statement and a vision statement. So, I'm actually happier with the second one. And I think we can move on. Councillor Jackson: I'd like to ask a question of Craig and Jan. And that is the, we are concerned with the catchment as well as the actual review itself. And Councillor Wilkie pointed out that it's unnecessary to say the word catchment.
00:32:00 Because the word Mr. River recognises the healthiest and most by the worst automatically means that in your original vision also didn't have the word catchment. So, is there an issue not having the word catchment in there? Speaker 4: Through the Chair, I think it is implied that in order to achieve a healthy river system, that that requires careful consideration of. Catchment and the whole range of issues coming in. So, certainly from my point of view as someone who practices in this, I don't feel catchments added. There may be a member for the general community. They may feel benefit in seeing the word catchment. But I don't think it changes the meaning of the statement. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: I'm going to move an amendment. The amendment. Councillor Jurisevic: Is it good? Point of order. Good catch Mr. CEO.
00:33:00 Mayor Wellington: Okay. Who else wants to speak to this? Councillor Jackson: I'm going to say something. Yeah. I don't mind. It's all fine. I'm all for whatever. So, I'm okay with Frank. I'm okay with Brian. Councillor Glasgow: It's been full patched up. That's where it's going. Yeah. Look, I'm the Councillor Jackson. I really don't mind. It's all great. I would like to recognise and firstly celebrate how good a job you guys have done with the original plan. You know, people don't forget as a young fellow here that grew up on the river, the river system is much more than just the river. It's like it's a vital part of our body here in Noosa for both residents and visitors alike. You know, it underpins exactly what it's like to be a Noosa resident or a Noosa visitor and come here and enjoy it. This document's great and I think it's only gotten better if not amazing. And once again, I'd just like to celebrate the document with you. Thank you. Thank you.
00:34:00 Councillor Jurisevic: I think we're arguing semantics again, as we tend to do. But the funny part is that once Councillor Wilkie raised that concern, my mind went to almost the identical wording that he placed on the board. So I'm prepared to support the amendment. I think it captures the essence of what we're trying to achieve and places it into a single statement. Whilst I appreciate the intent of Councillor Stockwell's original vision and aim as two separate sentences, I think it's only captured in one. And I think at the end of the day, being a draft, we still may get some feedback from the community if there are any issues with what's there. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Clarence? Councillor Pardon: Yeah, Mr. Chairman, how did I know this had happened? I've workshopped heaps of these things and this is exactly what happens. But look, what I'll do is I'll just rephrase. I'll just say that we'll just reserve judgement until we see what the Chairman's amendment might be.
00:35:00 Okay. Mayor Wellington: Do you want to close, Councillor Wilkie? Councillor Wilkie: No, thank you. Mayor Wellington: I'll put the motion, the amendment, all those in favour, all those against. So that's all except Councillor Stockwell, Councillor Stockwell. Everyone, sorry. Everyone except me. So four was Councillors Jurisdiction, Jackson, Glasgow, Pardon, Wilkie and Wellington. So the amendment becomes the motion. I'm going to move an amendment. When you're ready, come. You're all bailed. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm just confused. Never ceases to amaze me. Mayor Wellington: It's nearly December. So, exactly the same as the previous amendment, except the sentence stops at East Queensland, South East Queensland. And we delete the section and manage and protect it to achieve the greatest possible level of community well-being now and into the future. We're just testing it.
00:36:00 Speaker 1: That's it. Mayor Wellington: So, take off the and, and yes, and it goes to a full stop. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The and is part of the. Speaker 3: No, no, that's it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: There's an and that you have to do. Speaker 3: That's how we get into paragraph two. Oh, two. Mayor Wellington: No, I beg your pardon. Yeah, beg your pardon. I thought you were carrying on with the manage and protect it. I didn't see. Now I can. It's semi-cold. Looking through the wrong part of the glasses. Second that, anyone? Councillor Wilkie: Oh, second. Oh, okay. Mayor Wellington: You can't. You can't second it. You can't second it. You can't second it. You didn't. Yeah, it's an amendment, Paul. I'll second it. Speaker 3: Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Very briefly, in fact, Councillor Stockwell gave me the impetus here by suggesting that the second half of his vision statement wasn't a vision statement. Now we've got a vision statement. Now that's a vision statement. It's simple and it's straightforward and it recognises that our primary purpose here is to create a healthy and high biodiversity, a healthy river system with high biodiversity.
00:37:00 The ramifications are dealt with elsewhere in the data. It's a document. I think our first priority should be to create a healthy river and a biodiverse system and obviously there are going to be spin-off benefits and those spin-off benefits include community wellbeing arguably. However, it is in fact a long bow to suggest that community wellbeing are a product of increasing the biodiversity of the river in some ways because the entire community may not benefit. Only part of it and obviously everyone benefits including the environment if it's a healthy river. I'm just trying to make a nice, simple, straightforward vision statement that is succinct. I believe that the rest of the document is absolutely about managing and protecting the biodiversity in the system and it's completely redundant therefore in the vision statement. Councillor Jackson: Well, I won't speak. I won't support this amendment.
00:38:00 And the reason is that one of the things I appreciated about the latest version of the draft is the fact that it's not just a vision statement. It's a more complex view that it's not only about the environment and the river but also about social and economic context and the impacts on those. So, I think by removing the word community and perhaps we could continue changing the wording but I actually rather value having the term community and the word community and the implication of community well-being which was in the original revised draft in front of us. And I think that it is good to continue having the word community there as a reminder that it's really also about the community. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Anyone else? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell? Yeah, I support this amendment.
00:39:00 As I said, the reason why I was seeking to make change and perhaps the wording of my motion was rushed. I don't support it. I didn't say that my, previously I said I was amending the existing vision statement and I did split it into two sentences. I thought that was explicitly a vision statement plus something else. So, this is the vision statement that I proposed and I think if we reduce it to that, the rest of the document does speak for itself. So, I will support it. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Jurisevic? Councillor Jurisevic: Why stop the, why stop South East Queensland? Let's get, let's get, become real more visionary. Let's go for the whole of Queensland, Australia and the world. Why stop with South East Queensland? Councillor Glasgow: Semantics. Councillor Jurisevic: Now, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to side with Councillor Jackson on this one. I think the original statement many did talk about community wellbeing and I think it, it does add a level of vision aspiration. I'm not going to die in the ditch on this, but I thought the, the First Amendment covered it all. I don't think we need to keep, keep tweaking it, but I'm happy either way.
00:40:00 Councillor Wilkie: The question, Joe, is saying that South East Queensland is not aspirational enough. Why not Queensland, Australia? Non-pristine, for a non-pristine river, of course. Absolutely, absolutely. Councillor Jurisevic: Why, why, why draw limits there? Why not make it the best, you know, why not aspire to be the best in the world? Mayor Wellington: Anyone else wish to speak to this? Councillor Wilkie: Question to the staff. Are you, are you, are you, are you, are you, are you, are you, are you, are you, are you, Well, I have to ask Mr. Sears, an unfair question to ask the staff, is the aspirations that, what are some of the considerations around the aspirations Councillor Jurisevic's just said? That was a joke. Speaker 3: I'll answer that in the spirit that it was asked, I think. The first thing about the south-east Queensland is that's where our healthy waterway report card compares us to. It's very easy to comparison, and they're in built-up areas. It's almost impossible then to compare the Mercer River with, say, the Jardine River in Cape York,
00:41:00 which is in a natural area. That would be an unfair comparison. If we're going to do comparisons in terms of life with life, we need to be the best in south-east Queensland. Councillor Wilkie: Just to take up your point about comparing life with life, Mr. CEO, if the term non-Christine river was inserted, would that change the value? As long as it's a pristine river, anyway. I'm sorry, it was a river in an urban area. Speaker 3: I think that's just too difficult to compare with different climates. So if you're going to compare life with life, it should be south-east Queensland. Mayor Wellington: Anyone else wish to speak to this, who hasn't? Speaker 3: You go. Councillor Pardon: I'm sitting on the fence. Councillor Wilkie: As I said before, a good vision statement is a short vision statement. I really appreciate the point made by Councillor Jackson and Joe about the inclusion of the words community wellbeing. That's wrapped up in the document as well, but to be consistent with my preference for
00:42:00 brief vision statements, I think this says it all. Less is often more, and we have already had a commitment to quality over quantity. So I'm going to support the amendment. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Glasgow. Councillor Glasgow: On that quick point, less is more. I agree exactly what you've said there. It's nothing. And I've just noticed we've gone from three sentences, four sentences, three sentences, two sentences. So I'm actually looking for the one word. This is one of them. Mayor Wellington: It's your next amendment. Councillor Glasgow: Just to cover this up. Less is more. I am on the fence about Councillor Jackson, about the community too, but I really applaud what our beloved poet over here said about less is more, and I will support the motion in that way. But that's still one word is tempting. Councillor Pardon: Well. Yep. Come on. Mayor Wellington: Yep. Councillor Pardon: Yeah. And I'll support it because, yeah, it shortens this thing. And that's the idea.
00:43:00 That's the idea. Use your vision statements. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. I won't bother to close. So I'll put the amendment. All those in favour. That is Glasgow, Stockwell, Pardon, Wilkie, Wellington. Those against, Jurisevic and Jackson. The amendment becomes the motion. Now we have, we go back to the original motion. Councillors Stockwell, Jurisevic, Jackson, Wilkie and Pardon have spoken to it. That leaves myself and Councillor Glasgow. Do we have a motion? No. No? I will just briefly then. Look, I think that the importance of this document is that it recognises that this Council has a significant focus on the Noosa River. And that's fundamentally, in fact, a continuation of a focus that began following de-amalgamation under the Clayford-led last two year interim council, as it were. In spite of its A minus healthy river rating under the healthy river rating, it's still
00:44:00 under stress. We know the river is under stress. The Thurston historic report that's been referred to recognises that it was once a far more biodiverse river than it is now. And of course, the recent Skeletor assessment of the benthic layer shows that the biota in the river is significantly struggling and has diminished in recent years. Therefore, there is significant work to do in spite of the fact that it still is a relatively healthy river by South East Queensland's standards. With regard to the Council's role vis-a-vis state controls on the river, particularly anchoring, mooring and living on board, councillors, I think I've already explained to you, but it's worth putting on the record that I had a meeting with Angus Mitchell, the new general manager of MSQ, and he is looking in the long term to be able to have a permanent MSQ officer stationed here in Noosa, working out of the Fisheries Munna Point establishment, the
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 newly lowered construction in Munna Point. And in that regard, in fact, there will be a public announcement tomorrow about a trial that MSQ are going to start here, and that will place a MSQ officer here for a number of weeks as part of a trial to see whether or not it is appropriate to have a permanent officer here and how much work there is for them to do. Hooray! Hooray! The next stage is finding the resourcing to have a permanent officer here in Noosa, but that is the current general manager's aim, and that is a fantastic result because, as you all know, for some years now we've been knocking on the State's door as a result of the recommendation by the community jury that Council take over anchoring, mooring and living on board, and we know that that would not be cost beneficial to Council.
00:46:00 In fact, it would be cost negative because there's no way we could recoup enough in terms of either fines or mooring fees to be able to cover the costs of managing it. So thus, if MSQ do eventually move towards a permanent officer stationed here, that actually resolves that issue, and it resolves it in an ideal way from Council and ratepayers' point of view. So we've got to keep our fingers crossed a little longer. I don't know that it will happen before the October State elections, but hopefully in the not-too-distant future we may have an MSQ officer stationed here on a permanent basis. So I support the motion, obviously. Councillor Stockwell, do you want to close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do. And I think it's really important, we probably do, elected representatives of this service when we come to meet like this and argue about State vision statements. We don't often do it, but in the debate I think it brought out some really key points. I'm going to start with what Councillor Jurisevic said, just joking. I'm not. If we're going to achieve that vision statement, we're going to have to demonstrate national
00:47:00 best practice river management and catchment management. We're going to have to demonstrate national best practice in terms of collaborative and integrated action through Council, community, industry and government partnerships. Now, I think that's really important, is that we shouldn't lower our sights any lower than national. In fact, whether I'm sitting around this table in three years' time or whether I'm still working with some of the community groups involved, I would expect that we put our name in the hat for one of those National River Prize awards or something similar so that we can be recognised and we can be recognised. We can celebrate as a community what has been achieved because this does provide a blueprint and I've read a lot of catchment plans from around Australia and around the world and this one is the broadest spectrum that I've seen. This one does have a range of rehabilitation, of involvement around recreation and use of the river, around the commercial uses, fringing the river.
00:48:00 It is the most holistic plan that I have come across. And I've been studying this since the 1990s. So, it does give us the opportunity to achieve the vision. And I'm quite happy that the vision is resource-based because we know what makes this community different is the quality of the natural environment that comes to attract people here to recreate in it, to fish. And I think that will be the essence. If we get this plan right and if we involve the community and business and other levels of government, we will achieve the vision and we will be successful. Mayor Wellington: Thank you very much.