I contribute to discussion on the petition as the member for Blue Mountains, and Parliamentary Secretary for the Environment. The Government acknowledges the petition and the heritage value that some people associate with wild horses in Kosciuszko. I respectfully acknowledge the visitors in the gallery and their strong-held views, their passion and concerns that resulted in their presence in this place after submitting the petition to the Parliament of New South Wales. In 2019 I brought a petition to the Parliament calling for debate on the issue of wild horses. Those petitioners made their case to the community and to the Parliament, and built an argument for the repeal of the Kosciuszko Wild Horse Heritage Act 2018. I acknowledge the activists and environmentalists who collected those signatures. It took some years for the repeal bill of 2025 to pass, but it did. It is law.

We cannot forget that the park was established as one of the largest conservation reserves in Australia. The park preserves a range of special places and elements, such as the largest true alpine zone in mainland Australia, the most extensive peatlands in mainland south-east Australia, and a remarkable diversity of plants and animals, including 21 alpine flowering plant species that are found nowhere else on earth. Wild horses—beautiful animals but nevertheless an introduced pest—should not have protection above all other ecological, environmental and cultural values within the Kosciuszko National Park. Let us be clear: Wild horses—or brumbies, as they are sometimes called—are not native to this land. I acknowledge that, for many people, this is an emotional issue across the political spectrum and within communities. However, wild horses are an introduced species. The concern for many of us has always been the environmental destruction and degradation of our national park by wild horses that were allowed to breed unchecked, causing irreversible damage to soil, water, rare and threatened species, and endangered ecological communities that are unique to the Kosciuszko National Park.

Labor promised to minimise the impacts of pest species—both plant and animal—through adequately funded and effective control programs, including for wild pigs, dogs, deer and horses. We promised to repair the mountain catchments by establishing a highly trained Kosciuszko works crew dedicated to halting erosion and restoring and repairing the slopes, wetlands and mountain streams that are currently under threat as a consequence of the wild horse population. This is what responsible custodians of those lands should pursue. It is what experts, traditional owners, Aboriginal Elders, national parks workers and scientists are telling us ought to happen in this unique and pristine environment. I thank the scientific community, academic experts and NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service staff, who have been dealing with appalling behaviour by those who do not agree with the law.

The central question before us is not simply what we think about wild horses, but our responsibilities to the health of Kosciuszko National Park as a whole. The Government's position on the issue has been clear. The people in the gallery are entitled to disagree with what the Government is doing.

But they are also entitled to know where everyone else stands. The Coalition says one thing in Monaro and another in Mosman; we just do not know what it is going to do on this issue. We saw this division in the Coalition play out in the other place. The Liberal Party has a "choose your own adventure" approach to the issue. At least the National Party is consistent—just diametrically opposed to the party that it is meant to be in coalition with. The Government will continue to get on with the job that the people of New South Wales expects it to do, and that is to reduce horse numbers to 3,000 in the retention areas by 1 July 2027. Debate on these issues in the public sphere is often filled with emotion, anxiety and passion. It is, as my colleague the member for Wagga Wagga has pointed out before, often ugly and difficult. We need to respect one another and give one another a hearing, whatever the outcome of said debate.