A heated debate over koala protections has exposed deep divisions inside Redland City Council, with councillors clashing over last-minute changes to a key submission to the State Government.
The dispute centres on council’s response to the State’s South East Queensland Wildlife Conservation Strategy (2026–2036), with multiple councillors raising concerns that expert advice had been stripped from an amended version circulated just hours before debate.
Cr Rowanne McKenzie, who introduced the motion, said the submission backed koala protection but called for stronger State leadership, clearer data and more practical support for councils.
“The submission supports koala protection, but the State needs to provide clear leadership, better data, and more practical support to councils and communities,” she told the chamber.
She argued councils were being left to carry the burden of protecting endangered species without adequate funding or coordination.
“Local governments cannot continue to bear the financial burden of protecting State and nationally recognised endangered species,” she said.
But Cr Paul Bishop warned the late changes risked undermining years of scientific work and could weaken protections.
“A lot of the officers’ recommendations in this report have been redacted, removed, taken out,” Cr Bishop said.
“When we depart from expert, data-driven advice — particularly in complex ecological systems — we’re increasing the risk of unintended consequences that might not be easily reversed.”
He backed the original officer recommendations, describing them as “detailed, evidence-based” and grounded in years of research into koala habitat, movement corridors and survival needs.
“The question is — what is the foundation upon which we want this submission to stand?” he said.
“Is it science and careful analysis… or something that may erode the habitat we are seeking to protect?”
Tensions escalated during a fiery exchange between Deputy Mayor Julie Talty and Mayor Jos Mitchell over the amendments, with key sections of the submission struck out.
Mayor Mitchell, joining the meeting online, repeatedly pressed for answers on why officer-backed content had been removed.
“On pages 9, 11, 12 and 13, large sections have been struck out. Can you explain why officer recommendations… have been removed?” she asked.
Cr Talty responded: “I would suggest that councillors who do not support particular statements in the submission have removed those statements accordingly.”
When asked which councillors made those changes, the Deputy Mayor said that would be reflected in the vote and declined to provide specifics.
Mayor Mitchell also questioned the removal of a section linking urban planning and koala conservation.
“Can you tell me why that paragraph has been struck out?” she asked.
Cr Talty replied: “No, I cannot provide specific reasoning for individual sections being removed.”
Frustration grew as Mayor Mitchell said her questions had gone unanswered.
“So just to clarify for the record — I’ve asked two questions and they have not been answered,” she said.
Cr Talty moved to close down the exchange, noting there had been “multiple opportunities” to discuss the material prior to the meeting.
The debate also revealed broader concerns, including the removal of references to First Nations land management practices and proposals to adjust vegetation clearing thresholds.
Cr Bishop warned that increasing clearing thresholds could weaken the overall conservation system.
“Koala conservation is not achieved through a single measure — it requires a system,” he said.
Despite the disagreement, Cr McKenzie maintained the submission aimed to deliver a more coordinated, flexible and locally responsive approach to conservation across South East Queensland.
The motion was passed 7-4 with Cr Wendy Boglary, Cr Lance Hewlett, Cr Bishop and Mayor Mitchell voted against the amended submission.
