DCQ, LNP slam zero action from long-awaited parliamentary weed report

Despite the 60 submissions received, the six public hearings around the state and the 46 witnesses giving evidence, which has resulted in an 87-page report tabled on Monday, there will be no change to government policy as a result.

The report has been labelled an atrocious use of taxpayers' money by Desert Channels Queensland CEO Leanne Kohler.

"What did we do it for? Is that the best we can do?" a clearly nonplussed Ms Kohler said.

"I had hoped for more, for recommendations for some sort of strategy that would see everyone pooling their knowledge and resources to get the best outcome for the landscape."

Government acknowledgement of the extent of the infestation of weeds around the state might have resulted in some funding, Ms Kohler said.

Read more: Prickly problems at weed hearings

"I've got to give the benefit of the doubt to the committee but I don't know how they could be happy with this outcome.

"We went on ground and looked at the problem (with the committee).

"To come back and say all is good - I don't think there's a local government that would say prickly acacia is under control."

In the foreword to the report, inquiry chairman Chris Whiting said that working within the constraints of the three weeds chosen to focus on - prickly acacia, giant rat's tail grass and fireweed - he believed the committee found that local governments were meeting their responsibilities, and control programs for weeds on Crown land were effective.

"Queensland biosecurity programs are also effective and financed appropriately," he said.

Opposition agriculture spokesman Tony Perrett said for the Palaszczuk government to hand down the report without a single substantial recommendation was ignorant of the issues facing regional Queenslanders.

"The fact Labor admits it never had any intention of implementing any findings from this report is a disgrace and flies in the face obvious need for action on weeds," he said.

"Queenslanders were told this was their opportunity to have their say and make a real difference, but after three years and thousands of combined hours of effort there is nothing to show from it.

"While Queensland loses the battle against weeds in this state, Labor Minister Furner continues to play politics with rural and regional Queensland."

Mr Perrett asked where the report was after the monsoon and flood event in the north west in February, saying an explosion in prickly acacia was anticipated.

After the initial evidence gathering by the parliamentary Agriculture and Environment committee in 2017, no further action was taken until this year, when the report was compiled.

Anticipating a backlash, Mr Whiting, the ALP Member for Bancroft on Brisbane's north and the chairman of the State Development, Natural Resources and Agricultural Industry Development committee emphasised that the report had originated from a referral by the previous government's Agriculture and Environment committee to itself, not from the government or from the parliament.

He said Mr Perrett and the LNP had been irresponsible to portray the inquiry as something other than an opportunity to gain a comprehensive picture of the responsibilities of local governments, programs for weed control on Crown Land, weeds programs under DAF, DES and Biosecurity Queensland, and the coordination of biosecurity and programs under the three levels of government.

"The Member for Gympie has let people down by making statements on our work that were incorrect and misleading, and I will keep reminding people of this," Mr Whiting said. "He'll not use my committee as a platform for his political posturing."

He said it was an inquiry into case studies on just three weeds and it was irresponsible of the LNP to portray the inquiry in the way they had.

"We have finished it, and I encourage people, including all the submitters, to read the report thoroughly," he said.

Agriculture Minister Mark Furner had no comment on the report other than to say questions about the committee process were a matter for that committee.

"The report has been tabled and, as per the usual committee process, the government will respond to the report within three months of the tabling date," he said. "The LNP, as usual, is more interested in slurs and political grandstanding than facts."

Ms Kohler said work recently undertaken by Toowoomba-based environmental consultancy Crossroads for DCQ had shown there was no environmental biodiversity once 50 per cent of an area was covered by prickly acacia.

"It confirmed what we knew but it validates the need to get on top of prickly acacia," she said. "When we finally get a wet season, we're going to see some serious damage from the weed."

Ms Kohler added that a number of other weeds not included in the parliamentary inquiry's terms of reference, such as Mother of Millions and rubber vine were also of serious concern.

"Cacti will be the new prickly acacia out here within five years if no money is put towards its control," she said.

A dissenting report from the committee's LNP members, Pat Weir, the committee's deputy chairman, Brent Mickelberg and David Batt, part of the final report, said the outcome was insulting for the people who had participated in good faith.

"The Liberal National Party believes that Labor has completely disregarded the spirit of the original inquiry," it said.

"It would be hard for Queensland landholders not to be cynical as to the whole process and question whether there was ever any intent to make any meaningful recommendations or rather leave the control of weeds in the 'too hard basket'.

"A report with actual and proper recommendations would have called on Labor Agriculture Minister Mark Furner to actually take action on the management of weeds in this state, something we believe he is unable and unwilling to do.

"This is the same minister who committed $5 million of state funding to match the federal government's commitment to tackle the spread of prickly acacia, and then did not provide the funding following the federal election."

They concluded by saying the report was a disgrace and a complete injustice to the important issues the inquiry was meant to investigate.