Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Heritage, the Arts and Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to rise to the call, because we have such limited time. In terms of the environment budget—and I will also be dealing with heritage and the arts of course—we expected an extraordinary contribution to Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions issues and the environmental footprint across the country. However, we were absolutely stunned to see CSIRO funds for essential research slashed, and we have got enormous push-back now as scientists are sacked particularly from the Mildura campus. We have seen the solar panels issue, where the rebate has been slashed to the point where the industry is reeling and there is doubt whether it can continue to be viable as it offers panels to a sector which cannot afford them without that rebate.

In terms of the community being able to adapt to climate change, we have seen the community water grants abolished, and the schools infrastructure grants, which saw an enormous amount of work going into building tanks and irrigation systems on school ovals and for gardens, have gone. We have also not had any indication of where the water use efficiency funds for the Murray-Darling Basin from the coalition’s $10 billion 10-point plan commitment have gone. Those funds seem to have disappeared without a trace—and I am talking about over $2 billion for on-farm water use efficiency. I would very much like the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts to tell us what he and Minister Penny Wong intend to do about these funds, because, with the drought in its fifth year and with farmers looking again at a zero water allocation at the beginning of the next irrigation season, farmers need such investment so that they can deal with the hotter, drier conditions which now seem to be part of climate change—a very critical question.

According to the budget, the minister has rebundled and rebadged the NHT and the National Salinity Action Plan. In so doing, he has cut 40 per cent from the catchment management bodies that are supposed to administer Caring for our Country, the new name for the combined Labor package. On 5 June, when we last considered this bill, Mr Garrett said that to help the catchment management bodies survive the 40 per cent cuts ‘funding of up to $75 million will be available to help overcome transitional problems’. Minister, we really need to know when that $75 million is going to materialise. How is it to be applied for? What bodies—independent or other organisations or NGOs—will be eligible to apply for this transitional money? Is it in addition to the so-called contestable bucket of moneys that is being talked about to make up for the 40 per cent cuts? That is of critical concern particularly for Landcare groups.

Landcare had taken a 20 per cent cut. I know that when you responded to this line of inquiry on 5 June, Mr Garrett, you said, no, it was not a 20 per cent cut of Landcare; it was an expectation that they would find efficiencies. Where is Landcare to find this 20 per cent set of efficiencies given that they are volunteers and given that they have had an extraordinary dependence on matched funding from other agencies? I would like to read you a quote from the chairperson of the Maffra and District Landcare Network in Gippsland, Beth Ripper. She said:

In addition to reduced Facilitator and Coordinator support, Gippslandcare will also be reduced by almost half—

as a consequence of these cuts. She continued:

Gippslandcare is a consortium of all the Landcare Networks in the West Gippsland CMA Region and was established to manage a regional approach for Landcare’s onground works incentive program.

Since their formation, they have done incredibly important work with floods, with fires, with the erosion associated with that and now with drought. Beth Ripper went on to say—and this was sent to me just last week:

With less funding for facilitator and coordinator positions, we fear that our member groups will struggle to continue and vital community capacity building opportunities and enthusiasm for volunteer work will be lost. All we ask is that Landcare be considered as a priority because it underpins the core business of the WGCMA at a community level.

I am receiving letters like this from Landcare groups and catchment management bodies all over Australia. They need to know how to deal with the 40 per cent and 20 per cent cuts so they can literally decide who to sack or which programs to abandon, or both. I am also most concerned about environmental programs like the farm efficiency one and the Environmental Stewardship Program. (Time expired)

See this speech in context