Permitted NSW fire-prone clearing doubled

The NSW government will more than double the amount of native vegetation that can be bulldozed around fire-prone homes ahead of the upcoming bushfire season.

NSW Environment Minister Matt Kean. Picture: Bianca De Marchi

The NSW government will more than double the amount of native vegetation that can be bulldozed around fire-prone homes — from 10m to 25m — ahead of the upcoming bushfire season, according to leaked documents.

The proposed amendments, contained in a cabinet-in-­confidence memo obtained by The Australian, fall significantly short of the 50m buffer sought by some senior Berejiklian government ministers, setting up further division over contentious environmental policies.

“Amendments include … 25m of vegetation clearing along fence lines according to a yet-to-be- ­approved code covering clearing in endangered and threatened species habitats, riparian ­corridors and clearing for non-­bushfire risk mitigation pur­poses,” the document reads.

Cabinet will on Tuesday consider the government’s response to the NSW bushfire inquiry that was established in July in response to the catastrophic Black Summer bushfires.

The fires, which lasted four months, killed 34 people and destroyed more than 3000 homes across the country.

The cabinet documents also reveal that funding required to put in place the inquiry’s 76 recommendations would reach $220m in 2020-21 and $1.09bn in the next four years.

The most significant costs this year would include $28m for a state strategic fire trail network, $27m for protective clothing and equipment and $18m for a tanker fleet upgrade.

While the inquiry, led by former NSW police deputy commission Dave Owens and former chief scientist Mary O’Kane, made no findings in relation to land clearing, it did make observations about the current scheme.

Under the “10/50” policy, homeowners are allowed to clear trees within 10m of their property and underlying vegetation — but not trees) up to 50m away. “Many question the effectiveness of the scheme, given many properties cleared in accordance with the scheme were still affected by the fires,” the inquiry report noted.

The cabinet submission will propose 25m of vegetation clearing to take place along fence lines “to simplify complex vegetation clearing requirements”.

“The (Rural Fire Service) case is that 25m is needed for effective firefighting regardless of the state of the boundary,” it reads.

Sources with knowledge of government discussions said moderate-aligned ministers, including Environment Minister Matt Kean and Planning Minister Rob Stokes, were pushing for as little change as possible to the existing scheme.

Others, including Deputy Premier John Barilaro and Emergency Services Minister David Elliott, wanted more clearing.

Critics of the “10/50” rule contend that it has been misused by landholders to enhance development opportunities, scenic views and property values.

In its submission to the inquiry, the National Parks Association of NSW recommended repealing the rule in part because it relied on self-assessment.

The NSW Wildlife Council agreed, saying: “Allowing clearing without expert approval risks environmental considerations, threatened species and ecological communities being either disregarded or inadequately assessed.”

Mr Barilaro and the Nationals publicly brawled with Gladys Bere­jiklian over another environmental policy — the protection of koala habitats — only last month.

He has since taken mental health leave and is absent from parliament, meaning he will miss the cabinet discussion.

Mr Elliott, Mr Kean and Mr Stokes all declined to comment, citing cabinet confidentiality.

“(The) financial impacts for the state government will be substantial,” the document reads. “The plan would implement all 76 of the report’s recommendations over several years to spread financial impacts (sic) over several budgets.”

Cabinet will also discuss whether the government should compensate landowners for damage caused to fence lines, a question that featured prominently during the inquiry.

It heard that public land managers — including the NSW Nat­ional Parks and Wildlife Service and Forestry Corporation — were often perceived as “bad neighbours” because they did not always reduce fuel loads on their side of the boundary.