ALGA submission to the ministerial reference group
The Natural Heritage Ministerial Board requested the establishment of a ministerial reference group to provide advice that will assist the Australian Government in refining the regional delivery of its major natural resource management (NRM) programs.
- Contents of this page
- ALGA Submission to Ministerial Review
- Ministerial reference group on NRM program delivery: Terms of reference
19 December 2005
- Mr Kim Keogh
- Chairman
- Ministerial Reference Group
- GPO Box 787
- CANBERRA ACT 2601
Dear Mr Keogh
ALGA Submission to Ministerial Review
Thankyou for the opportunity to meet with the panel to discuss the review of the regional NRM arrangements. In my view, much has been achieved - the Australian Departments of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry and Environment and Heritage are working well together, the Commonwealth and the states are collaborating, and the program design is rigorous. However, some of the elements of implementation need to be strengthened, in particular, the role and relationship with local government.
Administrative arrangements
Greater recognition of the roles and responsibilities of local government
Local government has not been given adequate recognition under the bilateral agreements. This has resulted in a lack of recognition of local government at all levels in the regional NRM model. A clear acknowledgment of local government as a sphere of government rather than another stakeholder, and a good understanding of the roles and responsibilities of local government are required. An increase in local government participation and environmental outcomes through a partnership approach is likely to result.
The engagement and involvement of local government in regional activities has started to increase recently through projects such as the local government NRM facilitators, jointly funded projects between local governments and the regional bodies, the establishment of local government liaison officers and local government advisory boards in some regions. These have all increased communication between councils and their regional body and increased awareness of the roles and responsibilities of each group.
Any future high level agreement should adequately recognise local government and highlight how local government is to be involved in all regional processes. One such mechanism is through the development of memorandums of understanding (MoUs) between the councils in a region and the regional body. These MoUs should be flexible enough to account for differences across the regional bodies and councils. All spheres of government and the regional bodies need to develop a clear vision on how local government will be involved in the regional NRM model. Each regional body can then work with the councils to develop an MoU style document.
Local government membership on the joint steering committees
In administering the bilateral agreements, the Australian Government and each jurisdiction have established a joint steering committee (JSC). Western Australia is the only state where local government is a member of the JSC. Many decisions made at the JSC impact on local government and yet local government has no say in these decisions. In addition, there is currently no feedback mechanism between each JSC and the relevant state local government association, making it difficult for the peak local government organisations to keep abreast of the JSC decision making process, let alone be included.
Adequate local government representation on these committees provides a range of benefits, including the provision of advice on governance, land use planning, local government roles and responsibilities and how local government can participate in projects. Consequently, ALGA seeks the appointment of a local government representative as a full voting member of each JSC.
Level of local government involvement
Local governments across Australia are very diverse, in terms of geography, size, population base and capacity. Likewise, the regional bodies are also diverse. Consequently, individual councils have a varied involvement in regional NRM. This can tend to paint a confusing picture of how well local government is engaged in the regional model.
Councils were undertaking significant expenditure on environmental projects prior to the introduction of the regional NRM model and continue to do so. In 2002-03, councils spent $1.9bn on NRM activities alone. This highlights the significant capacity of councils to achieve real environmental benefits and deliver meaningful outcomes. It also highlights the great potential for improved partnerships between councils and the regional bodies, allowing both organisations to gain leverage off each other.
Adequate funding of local government
Local governments are experienced in governance and project management and are answerable to their communities. Condequently, they should have a greater involvement in the governance and priority setting processes associated with the regional model. Participation in the regional process requires councils to invest resources. Many of the NRM activities and projects being undertaken by local governments are funded through rate collection. The roles of local government in regard to NRM have been increasing, however their ability to raise revenue to cover these activities has not. ALGA strongly contends that any future regional NRM program should ensure local governments are adequately resourced, in order to facilitate full participation.
Regulatory and statutory responsibilities
Greater clarification of the regulatory and statutory responsibilities of councils and regional bodies is required. Situations such as in NSW, where both groups are responsible for approving land clearing activities by landholders, without mutual consultation, must be avoided. This situation creates obvious uncertainty, administration, duplication and adverse environmental outcomes.
The QLD state investment project
Under a state investment project (SIP), the Local Government Association of Queensland has piloted a project to increase the awareness of and involvement in NRM by local governments. The project has enabled the Association to visit all councils including indigenous councils, make presentations to councillors during council meetings, hold an annual environment conference and develop resources to assist councils to expand their involvement in NRM. As a result, the priority councils place on NRM has been increasing throughout Queensland.
This Queensland project has demonstrated how a relatively small investment in local government has achieved significant outcomes. Councils are analysing their own spending on NRM, ensuring their NRM objectives are firmly outlined in their corporate and strategic plans ,and fully funding targeted NRM activities.
This project points to the way ahead. Adequate funding will enable councils to be kept well informed of the regional arrangements, increase the profile of NRM within councils and increase councils' capacity to participate in regional NRM projects. This will result in long term improvements in environmental outcomes. Many of the project support resources produced in Queensland could be slightly modified to suit the needs of local councils in other states.
Broaden focus of plans, better utilise local government skills and NRM investment
The regional NRM plans have been drawn up with two specific government programs in mind. Therefore many of the plans do not cover the whole range of NRM activities, such as regional recycling activities, stormwater management or sewerage treatment. All these activities impact heavily on the environment and can influence the ability of the regional body to achieve their resource condition targets set out in the plans. ALGA believes as plans are revised, their focus could be broadened to include a wider range of NRM issues.
In addition, regional plans and strategies could have a greater focus on generating partnerships, such as with their local governments. The sharing of resources between councils and regional organisations offers significant benefits, as already outlined.
To date, regional organisations have not adequately utilised the skills and capacity of local governments. For example, local government is ideally placed to promote urban NRM to the community. Other possible joint on-going projects could include the sharing of skilled NRM practitioners, providing education for council staff and councillors and providing education and extension services to the community.
Planning
There is currently little or no co-ordination between planning undertaken at a local level and that undertaken by the regional NRM bodies. This is despite a project under NHT1, undertaken by the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV), which outlines ways of better integrating regional and local NRM planning. A lack of funding to implement the MAV project meant the desired outcomes were never achieved. Moreover, recent state government planning in some jurisdictions has not even acknowledged the existence of the regional NRM arrangements.
Planning must be more coordinated. This can be assisted through a greater understanding of the benefits of improving coordination, such as council's ability to assist regions to meet their resource condition targets like water quality. As regional plans are reviewed and revised, greater involvement by local government in the development of new plans is critical to improving coordination.
In-land focus of plans
Inadvertently, the NAP has created great inequality between coastal and inland regions. Whilst it is recognised that equality is not a focus of the regional NRM model, reduced funding in non NAP regions has affected on-ground and capacity building projects. In Queensland, for example, all the NAP regions have funded a regional local government liaison officer, however, no such liaison appointments have been made in non NAP regions.
Many of the regional plans have a significant inland focus. At the same time, there has been considerable development pressure along Australia's coastline. This development has placed pressure on the natural environment, specifically biodiversity, water quality and marine life. Coastal councils are discouraged by the lack of recognition of the NRM issues facing the coastline in the regional plans and the resulting lack of funding opportunities for coastal projects.
An excellent opportunity to promote partnerships has been missed. A recent ALGA survey of coastal councils found that only 43 per cent of coastal councils believed their regional plan adequately addressed coastal issues. Councils are undertaking many coastal projects, but are frustrated at their reduced ability to leverage funding from other sources.
ALGA looks to see a greater focus on the management of the coastal natural resource base in future NRM programs.
Challenges for future programs
There are a number of examples where local government participation in the regional model has been increasing. These initiatives should be built on as they have the benefits of creating good partnerships between councils and their regional body and improve the communication and understanding of the roles and responsibilities of each organisation.
Given the council election cycles, there is an on-going need to provide support and training for councillors in NRM. In this regard, strong partnerships between councils and regional bodies and adequate resourcing of local government to undertake NRM are necessary.
Information sharing between local governments and regional bodies should be improved. More work around interoperability and data sharing between governments and agencies is required for effective decision making, reporting and monitoring and evaluation activities.
The regional model is facilitating a more coordinated approach to natural resource management. ALGA therefore supports the continuation of the current model. However, ALGA believes a number of enhancements are possible in the administration of the program which will greatly improve the environmental outcomes that can be achieved.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer these thoughts. I trust they will assist in your deliberation on this important national program.
Yours sincerely
Ian Chalmers
Chief Executive
Ministerial reference group on NRM program delivery: Terms of reference
The Natural Heritage Ministerial Board requested the establishment of a Ministerial Reference Group ('the Reference Group') to provide advice that will assist the Australian Government in refining the regional delivery of its major natural resource management (NRM) programmes, which currently include the Natural Heritage Trust and the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality.
The Australian Government, in collaboration with the states and territories, has implemented a regional model to deliver a significant proportion of its NRM programme investments. This model has sought to empower regional communities to prioritise issues and design innovative and integrated strategies, which governments invest in to achieve regional, state and national NRM priorities. Regional NRM bodies are operational in 56 regions around Australia. As of 30 June 2005, regional NRM plans have been accredited, and investment strategies approved, in 52 regions.
The Reference Group will provide advice on:
- the strengths and weaknesses of current NRM programs' regional delivery arrangements
- improving the effective delivery of NRM programs regionally, including possible actions to streamline processes
- enhancing regional community engagement in NRM including through involvement of local government, landcare groups, volunteers and other stakeholders.
In developing this advice, the Reference Group will undertake targeted consultations with key stakeholders associated with the regional delivery of the NRM programs.
The Reference Group will complete its consultations by 30 November 2005 and report to the Natural Heritage Ministerial Board by 1 February 2006.
The Secretariat for the Group will be provided by the Australian Government NRM Team.