I support initiatives to…

I support initiatives to improve ESA related processes as they are certainly not perfect, but am concerned with the proposed approach. I will focus on three main areas of concern for me.
- Reduced role of COSSARO from decision makers to advisors. This is a move away from making this science-based toward the government of the day's wishes. There have been no guidelines provided for how the government will consider COSSARO's recommendations and what would stop them from delisting species out of convenience.
- Minimizing the definition of habitat. There is no evidence provided that the current definitions are inaccurate or further that the definitions themselves are slowing down development approvals,
- Moving toward registration-first approach. It's my understanding that a lot of processes are already proponent led with key permits getting reviewed. The loss of oversight will surely lead to mistakes and species loss.

Biodiversity protection requires adoption of the precautionary principle - ecosystems are far too complex for us to understand the possible impacts of every action and further we cannot act once species are gone. As such the current paradigm works to reasonably protect species through best available science. If the science is taken out of the process, it will be meaningless.

There must be further assessment as to the possible impacts here, what losses may be anticipated. Or, own the fact that you are okay with losses in the name of development. You can't pretend that this will be an improvement as has been touted by your party.

Biodiversity loss feels like an abstract notion, but I am thinking of my children and their children not knowing the wonders of nature like I got to, it's not worth it.

Please remember that you could provide better infrastructure funding and encourage densification so that we would avoid the sprawl that leads to development interfacing with nature in the first place.