Public Information is a priority

Dr Maxine Cooper
ACT Commissioner for the Environment

Dear Dr Cooper

I write regarding your investigation into the complaints about two trees in Corroboree Park and the investigation into the Urban Forest Renewal Program.

As I'm sure you're aware, free and easy acess to information is essential in ensuring all members of the public are able to be on an equal playing field, so to speak, and able to contribute in an informed way to your investigations. To avoid 'tokenistic' consultation, one must be open with information and have a strategy for ensuring engagement with participants is meaningful to them. There is a wealth of literature on this and experts as well as experienced facilitators and organisers at the ANU who I'm sure would provide advice.

At the public meeting the weekend before last, in Corroboree Park, you said you need to publish more on your website. I think it is very important that this is actioned ASAP. My view on this is that all information relevant to the issues under investigation should be made public on the Commissioner for Environment website. This would not of course include your own thoughts, but it should include all the information that you are considering. For example, one would expect to be able to find:
- description of the complaint or the complaint itself if permission is granted by the complainant
- arborists reports
- bird watchers' reports
- TAMS data, for example records of their inspections of the Tall Tree and Corroboree Tree in Corroboree Park - photos from the cherrypicker and below, written analysis, the views of TAMS specialists on the ground etc.


For the UFRP investigation, one would expect at least:
- a thorough explanation of the system currently used for maintaining urban trees/forests (preferably a proper planning document but, if that doesn't exist, something valid still needs to be provided). This needs to have enough detail for it to be complete and meaningful to residents and tree/forest experts in the community offering their free advice.
- statements from the relevant authorities as to the rationale and thinking, supporting research etc, behind current systems for maintaining urban forests, assessing street tree health and for making decisions about pruning, removals and replanting.
- tree assessment forms and explanations of how they work and how to use them
- documents that set out best practice for urban forest management

In my view, if one invites information from the public, one has the responsibility to provide information to them also, so that we can form views based on evidence. This is how truly wonderful solutions are arrived at - through openness, and harnessing the creative intellect of whole communities towards a common concern. I understand you are sticking to a process that has been that way for a while -but I think that changing it would yield such wonderful results that you should go ahead with that idea.

I note that the Canberra Times has published the Terms of Reference for your investigation into the UFRP. Could you explain where this is on the www.envcomm.act.gov.au website? I haven't been able to locate it.

Also could you please let me know where the public can access reports from previous investigations? I understand your process is that your office report to the Department and then your report and the Department's response is made public. Is that on your website of theirs? If the latter, it would be good to put some links in from your website.

Thanks for receiving this and for all your good work! I look forward to your response.

Nicky Moffat