Threat to Landcare funding
It is of great concern to Murrumbidgee Landcare (MLi) and the community Landcare movement at all levels that the Australian Government has under consideration serious cuts to Landcare funding. The Commission of Audit recommends Government HALVE National Landcare Program Funding.
MLi is in contact with the state (Landcare NSW) and national (National Landcare Network) community Landcare representative organisations on this issue. We are encouraging them to take the strongest action possible to communicate to government at all levels that a reduction in funding will have a dramatic and destructive impact on the community Landcare movement and community environmental action, which already is significantly under resourced. Locally, we are getting in touch with all groups and networks and we encourage all to get in touch with their local members of parliament and let the know this is neither wise nor OK.
Please get in touch if there are other actions you think we can take to protest against this proposal. Email Marion at » manager@mli.org.au
Commission of Audit recommends Government HALVE National Landcare Program Funding
|
Programme name |
Programme description |
Recommendation |
Rationale |
|
National Landcare Programme (formerly Caring for Our Country)
|
Supports individuals, farmers, regional natural resource management organisations, community, Coastcare, Indigenous and Landcare groups to protect the natural environment and build resilience in our ecosystems and farmlands. It is an ongoing initiative that offers multi-year funding. $2 billion in funding from 2013-14 to 2017-18.
|
Halve funding and better align to the goals of the EPBC Act (e.g. continue funding which supports world heritage areas, and dealing with invasive species), focusing on activities with the greatest positive environmental externalities that landholders would not otherwise have an incentive to conduct themselves.
|
While there are public benefits from the National Landcare Programme, it also provides funding for activities that deliver substantial private benefits and that landholders would have an incentive to undertake without public funding. There is also overlap between Commonwealth and State responsibilities and activity. Funding should be reduced and redirected to the activities with the greatest environmental externalities that do not provide sufficient private benefits for landholders to fund themselves.
|
Tom Stacy, Chair
Marion Benjamin, Program Manager
