{"id":"BILL-WA-A48D907C4B5846F948258C7C0027F650","name":"Conservation and Land Management Amendment Bill 2025","slug":"conservation-and-land-management-amendment-bill-2025","collection":"bill","jurisdiction":"wa","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":"2025-04-30","administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":446164,"registerId":"BILL-WA-A48D907C4B5846F948258C7C0027F650:current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2025-04-30","status":"in_force","reasons":null,"registeredAt":"2026-05-08T16:47:37.356Z"},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"retrieval-0001","sectionType":"document_chunk","heading":"Document excerpt 1","content":"# Conservation and Land Management Amendment Bill 2025\n\n15—1 page i\nWestern Australia\nConservation and Land Management\nAmendment Bill 2025\nContents\n1. Short title 2\n2. Commencement 2\n3. Act amended 2\n4. Section 55 amended 2\n5. Schedule 1 clause 1 amended 3\n6. Schedule 1 clause 2 amended 3\n7. Schedule 1 clause 3 amended 4\n8. Schedule 1 clause 4 amended 5\n\npage 1\nWestern Australia\nLEGISLATIVE COUNCIL\nConservation and Land Management\nAmendment Bill 2025\nA Bill for\nAn Act to amend the Conservation and Land Management Act 1984.\nThe Parliament of Western Australia enacts as follows:\n\nConservation and Land Management Amendment Bill 2025\ns. 1\npage 2\n1. Short title1\nThis is the Conservation and Land Management Amendment2\nAct 2025.3\n2. Commencement4\nThis Act comes into operation as follows —5\n(a) sections 1 and 2 — on the day on which this Act6\nreceives the Royal Assent;7\n(b) the rest of the Act — on the day after that day.8\n3. Act amended9\nThis Act amends the Conservation and Land Management10\nAct 1984.11\n4. Section 55 amended12\n(1) Delete section 55(1a)(c).13\n(2) After section 55(1a) insert:14\n15\n(1B) The purpose of timber production cannot be prescribed16\nunder subsection (1a)(e).17\n(1C) In subsection (1B) —18\ntimber production does not include the removal of19\nsalvaged forest products in circumstances set out in a20\nregulation that prescribes the removal of salvaged21\nforest products under subsection (1a)(e).22\n23\n\nConservation and Land Management Amendment Bill 2025\ns. 5\npage 3\n5. Schedule 1 clause 1 amended1\n(1) In Schedule 1 clause 1(1):2\n(a) delete “his” and insert:3\n4\nthe member’s5\n6\n(b) delete “he” and insert:7\n8\nthe member9\n10\n(2) In Schedule 1 clause 1(2):11\n(a) delete “he” (1st occurrence) and insert:12\n13\nthe member14\n15\n(b) delete “his” and insert:16\n17\nthe member’s18\n19\n(c) delete “he” (2nd occurrence) and insert:20\n21\nthe member22\n23\n6. Schedule 1 clause 2 amended24\nIn Schedule 1 clause 2:25\n(a) in paragraph (a) delete “he” and insert:26\n27\nthe member28\n29\n\nConservation and Land Management Amendment Bill 2025\ns. 7\npage 4\n(b) in paragraph (a) delete “his” and insert:1\n2\nthe member’s3\n4\n(c) in paragraphs (b) and (c) delete “he” and insert:5\n6\nthe member7\n8\n(d) in paragraph (c) delete “his” and insert:9\n10\nthe member’s11\n12\n7. Schedule 1 clause 3 amended13\n(1) In Schedule 1 clause 3(1) delete “his” and insert:14\n15\nthe person’s16\n17\n(2) In Schedule 1 clause 3(2):18\n(a) delete “his” (1st occurrence) and insert:19\n20\nthe member’s21\n22\n(b) delete “his” (2nd occurrence) and insert:23\n24\nthe25\n26\n(3) In Schedule 1 clause 3(4) delete “his” and insert:27\n28\nthe person’s29\n30\n\nConservation and Land Management Amendment Bill 2025\ns. 8\npage 5\n8. Schedule 1 clause 4 amended1\nAfter Schedule 1 clause 4(4) insert:2\n3\n(4A) The presence of a person at a meeting of the Commission4\nneed not be by attendance in person but may be by that5\nperson and each other person at the meeting being6\nsimultaneously in contact by telephone or other means of7\ninstantaneous communication.8\n9","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"Yes. The Bill narrows the scope of what may be prescribed under the existing regulation-making head in s.55(1a)(e) by excluding \"timber production\" from the list of prescribable purposes (new s.55(1B)). That is a targeted change of scope: it removes a regulatory authorisation pathway for timber production. The Bill simultaneously creates a delegated exception for removal of \"salvaged forest products\" (new s.55(1C)), shifting the practical boundary of the prohibition into subordinate regulation. The other changes (gender-neutral drafting and permitting remote attendance) change form and procedure but do not expand the Act's substantive policy scope."},"complexity_factors":["Short, 1-page substantive amendments (4–8) and brief schedule edits — limited length","Only one substantive policy change (insertion of s.55(1B)–(1C)); other changes are drafting/administrative","A single cross-reference to existing s.55(1a)(e) — requires checking that subsection in the principal Act but not extensive cross-referencing","Delegation to regulation for the definition of \"salvaged forest products\" introduces interpretive dependence on future subordinate legislation","Multiple simple textual replacements to make language gender-neutral across Schedule 1","Addition of a remote-attendance mechanism (Schedule 1 cl.4(4A)) — operational but not legally complex","A minor apparent typographical omission in Schedule 1 clause 3(2)(b) that may require drafting clarification"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this Bill changes (mechanically)\n\n- It amends the Conservation and Land Management Act 1984.\n- It prevents the government from using one particular regulation-making power to prescribe “timber production” as a permitted purpose under section 55(1a)(e) of the Act (new s.55(1B)).  At the same time it creates a narrow exception: regulations may still allow the removal of \"salvaged forest products\" in the circumstances the regulations set out (new s.55(1C)).\n- It modernises the drafting in Schedule 1 by replacing gendered pronouns (\"he\", \"his\") with neutral terms (\"the member\", \"the person\", \"the member’s\").\n- It allows members of the Commission to be present at a meeting by telephone or other instantaneous communication — that is, remote attendance counts as presence at the meeting (new Schedule 1 cl.4(4A)).\n\nWho this affects\n\n- State regulators (the Department and Ministers who make regulations under the Act) — because the Bill narrows one avenue for authorising timber production and delegates definitional detail to regulation for salvaged products (s.55(1B)–(1C)).\n- Commercial forestry and timber operators — they can no longer rely on the particular subsection to have \"timber production\" prescribed as a purpose; that removes a regulatory route for authorising production on affected land (s.55(1B)).\n- Persons or businesses that recover and sell salvaged forest products (for example after storms or fire) — the Bill allows regulations to permit removal of salvaged products, creating a regulated exception (s.55(1C)).\n- Commission members and meeting organisers — remote attendance is explicitly permitted, which changes meeting logistics and reduces the need for physical presence (Schedule 1 cl.4(4A)).\n- General public and other stakeholders dealing with Commission processes — neutral drafting reduces ambiguity about who duties and rights apply to (Schedule 1 edits).\n\nWhy it matters (purpose-claims and trade-offs)\n\n- The Bill mechanically narrows the regulatory power to designate \"timber production\" as a purpose under the cited subsection (s.55(1B)). The stated effect is to prevent timber production from being authorised by that specific regulation-making head of power; the Bill itself does not prohibit timber production by other means of authorisation in the Act or elsewhere.\n\n- The Bill explicitly allows a regulatory exception for removal of \"salvaged forest products\" (s.55(1C)). That delegates to subordinate legislation the task of defining what counts as \"salvaged forest products\" and the conditions under which removal is permitted.\n\nCosts, incentives and trade-offs\n\n- Who pays: commercial operators wishing to secure statutory authorisation for timber production via the prescribed-purpose route could lose a regulatory pathway (they bear opportunity costs). Salvage operators may gain commercially if regulations allow removal after disturbance events.\n- Who decides: the primary decision-makers remain the Minister and the Governor in Council (regulations). The Bill shifts a policy boundary (what may be prescribed) from the executive’s wider discretion to a statutory prohibition plus a delegated exception.\n- Incentives and substitution: removing this authorisation route may push proponents of timber production to seek other statutory approvals, negotiated contracts, or private land arrangements. It may also increase pressure to broaden the definition of \"salvaged forest products\" in regulations (a substitution risk).\n- Delegation and regulatory risk: because the exception for salvaged products depends on regulation, the practical scope of allowed removal will turn on how regulations define \"salvaged\" and set procedures — that creates administrative discretion and scope for lobbying over regulatory detail.\n- Implementation and enforcement: enforcement will require clear regulatory definitions and operational rules (e.g. proof that products are salvaged). Without precise regulatory drafting there is legal uncertainty about what removals are permitted.\n- Administrative and transaction costs: permitting remote attendance reduces travel/time costs for commissioners and may increase meeting participation; it also raises minor administrative needs (verifying identity, ensuring simultaneous communication, record-keeping).\n\nOther practical notes and drafting issues\n\n- The substantive policy change is focused and narrow: it changes one regulatory head of power (s.55(1a)(e)) while allowing a regulation-based exception for salvaged products (s.55(1B)–(1C)).\n- The Bill substantially modernises terminology in the schedules to make references gender-neutral; that is a drafting/clarifying change without substantive policy effect.\n- There is an implementation risk that regulators could define \"salvaged forest products\" so broadly that the prohibition on prescribing \"timber production\" is eroded in practice — the Bill leaves that boundary to subordinate legislation (s.55(1C)).\n- A minor drafting/printing observation: one instruction in Schedule 1 (clause 3(2)(b)) as printed appears incomplete; that could cause interpretive or redrafting follow-up at legislative drafting stage.\n\nNet mechanical effect summary\n\n- Narrows one regulatory route for authorising timber production (statutory prohibition), while permitting removal of salvaged forest products by regulation; modernises pronouns; and permits remote participation in Commission meetings. The concrete effect will depend on how \"salvaged forest products\" are defined and regulated and how other statutory routes for timber production are used in practice."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/conservation-and-land-management-amendment-bill-2025","history":"/api/acts/conservation-and-land-management-amendment-bill-2025/history","analysis":"/api/acts/conservation-and-land-management-amendment-bill-2025/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/conservation-and-land-management-amendment-bill-2025/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/conservation-and-land-management-amendment-bill-2025/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/conservation-and-land-management-amendment-bill-2025/documents"}}