Ms O’CONNOR – Thank you, Chair. Minister, when the Audit Office undertook its review of the expressions of interest process, and this would be sort of four or five years ago now, they were advised by Parks that all leases and licences are subject to ongoing review. The documents released under RTI have called this advice into question. There’s an e-mail from a Parks officer to the Tasmanian Walking Company from August 2021. It says a whole-of-state approach for audits with licenced operators is still sometime off. While an audit of Tasmanian Walking Company’s operations on the Overland Track was conducted in 2020, there’s no indication based on the documents in the RTI that any audits had been conducted since then. This is despite those huts being full of rats a couple of years ago on the Overland Track. Minister, how often are operators working in Tasmanian national parks monitored to ensure they’re complying with lease and licence conditions, and are they?
Mr DUIGAN – Thank you. Before I throw to the department to answer that, I would point vigorously to the work we have done around transparency on lease and licencing and having published all of the leases and licences. I think you would have to concede that that is a very good step in terms of providing visibility of those things.
Ms O’CONNOR – I think we helped you do that through an appeal on an RTI to the Ombudsman. I think it was the Ombudsman’s decision that helped you be better. Your better self.
Mr DUIGAN – That said, in terms of the auditing of those leases and licences, Sophie?
Ms MULLER – Specifically on the Tasmanian Walking Company, and this is an example. We had an inspection, or an audit, undertaken between 28 July and 2 August this year. Greywater systems were found to be generally performing well without any significant concerns. That’s just an example of an audit process that has been undertaken. We have got a team in the property services branch – a small number of people – who are responsible for looking at those sort of milestones and triggers for those types of processes. While I don’t have a specific answer around how often because it would vary depending on the nature of the agreement – and there are requirements in those agreements and noting that we’ve got over 6000 agreements on Crown and reserve land – we do have a process for routine audits and inspections that we undertake.
Ms O’CONNOR – OK, thanks Sophie. Is Parks developing a whole-of-state approach for auditing the activities of licence holders on protected lands?
Ms MULLER – Was that a question about a process?
Ms O’CONNOR – Are you developing some consistent whole-of-state auditing process for examining those licences, before they’re automatically rolled over, for example?
Ms MULLER – Sadly, when we have rollovers, we absolutely undertake an assessment on whether there’s any outstanding matters, any issues or concerns, any outstanding payments and there’s certainly an input into the decision around rollover sort of agreements.
More broadly, in terms of taking a consistent approach across the state, we have a project underway for CREST, which is Crown Real Estate System Tasmania, which is a project to replace that system which is at end of life. It’s no longer performing the functions the functions that we require, and it will enable us to better track the requirements within those types of agreements and more in an automated way identify those triggers for audits and compliance checks and payments, rental reviews – the range of things that need to be considered through the management of those 6,000 agreements.
That system will provide us with a more modern contemporary platform to take a consistent approach – we’re in the development of the business case for that project. It is still a little while away, but I think that’s the solution for us to be taking a more consistent stable approach.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thank you. Sophie. Can I check, Minister, are there any Park management plans that are currently under revision and being reworked? What’s the status of the next Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area management plan? I think the last one came out in 2016.
Mr DUIGAN – Yes, let me see. Ben Lomond management plan currently underway and in relatively late stage of development. Would that be fair to say?
Ms MULLER – In the early stages.
Mr DUIGAN – Well, either early or late. Obviously, we had Maria Island –
Ms O’CONNOR – That’ll be publicly consulted?
Mr DUIGAN – Yes, through whatever our normal process is in terms of that. In terms of TWWHA management plan, there is a requirement every seven years to review that plan.
Ms O’CONNOR – Here we are.
Mr DUIGAN – Important to recognise that it’s a review of the plan rather than a reinvention of the plan. I think, due at the end of next year, is that fair to say?
Ms MULLER – Middle of next year.
Mr DUIGAN – Middle of next year, and you might like to speak to how that work goes or Andrew.
CHAIR – Has it started?
Ms MULLER – We’ve done a considerable amount of work to progress that review. The scope of the review is really about our performance against the review in terms of the key KDOs and the actions. It’s been a really sort of thorough and comprehensive internal process to review that and to provide stakeholders with a synced way of analysing it and determining how we’re progressing against those outcomes. Noting the scale of that plan, it’s a large and complex management plan.
We’ve commenced targeted stakeholder engagement, which has been pretty widespread, and that will inform our reports that will then go out for a broader public consultation. A two-stage process, firstly with stakeholders which is underway and then early next year, or in the first quarter of next year, going out more broadly for engagement and feedback from the community.
Importantly, this review will help us to identify the next sort of tranche of priority. It’s both identifying how we’re performing against delivering on the plan to date; identifying some of the sort of challenges and issues around the delivery of that plan; and then, helping us to prioritise the next sort of program of work for us to deliver on the plan.
Through that process, we’re certainly capturing feedback around the performance of the plan itself and that will inform a future potential remake of the plan. But there’s certainly no plans in the near future for that to occur, but we recognise that through this process those issues will arise and ensuring that we’re capturing them as we undertake that process.
Ms O’CONNOR – Can I just understand and then I’ll move on Chair or to anyone else who wants to ask a question. We only heard that the Ben Lomond management plan is being revised and presumably rewritten ‑ at some level Maria Island. Are there others?
Mr DUIGAN – There are probably some light touches for Freycinet today in terms of wastewater, that’s likely to be.
CHAIR – You’ve got a management plan on that?
Mr DUIGAN – Not under review, but anyway.
Ms MULLER – We’re at the early stages of a process to review the Macquarie Island Management Plan.
Ms O’CONNOR – Are any of these management plan reviews subject to revision, in part because there’s an expression of interest project that needs to be facilitated through a management plan change, which is what we saw, of course, with the development of the 2016 World Heritage Area Management Plan, which was written to enable private development, more of it into wilderness areas.
Mr DUIGAN – Not to my knowledge, no.
Ms O’CONNOR – Are there any fresh expressions of interest, projects that you want to share with the committee? Or is it still all sitting there stagnating in a field of broken dreams?
Mr DUIGAN – The Office of the Coordinator-General, manages the expressions of interest project process.
Ms O’CONNOR – Talks to you though.
Mr DUIGAN – Certainly, as they come through, but in actual fact, I am not really aware of anything new. I am happy to read my brief, I will quickly spool you through the numbers. I am advised 73 proposals have been submitted to date, with 10 of those proposals having a current lease or licence arrangement with PWS. Of the nine projects that are operational, there are two within the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area being Tasmanian boat charters and Maydena Bike Park.
The remaining proposal, Halls Island, Lake Malbena is not yet operational. There were 22 projects not endorsed by the panel to progress.
Ms O’CONNOR – They must have been really bad for you to not endorse them.
Mr DUIGAN – No commentary. There are 21 projects withdrawn and a further three proponents have surrendered their lease and licence. There are six proposals still in the assessment panel process, with a further 10 proposals endorsed and now preparing relevant assessment documentation. I am advised proposals that have been approved to proceed via the EOI process, if fully realise, will provide investment of over $99 million and 207 full-time equivalent jobs.
Ms O’CONNOR – That’s just a rubbish palaver statement given the values that we’re talking about here but anyway carry on. I am interested to know who which stakeholders were part of the preliminary time targeted consultation on the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area management plan review.
Mr DUIGAN – Do we have that information?
Ms MULLER – It was a pretty extensive stakeholder list, it included Aboriginal organisations, tourism related organisations currently operate within the TWWHA, environmental groups.
Ms O’CONNOR – Tasmanian National Parks Association?
Ms MULLER – Yes.
Ms O’CONNOR – Tasmanian Conservation Trust?
Ms MULLER – I don’t have the list off the top of my head, but certainly I know that it was a very significant list of stakeholders that have an interest.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thanks Sophie, that’s good.
