Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics report Inquiry into Indigenous economic development in Queensland and advisory report on the Wild Rivers (Environmental Management) Bill 2010. It was of interest to me to listen to the chairman of the committee provide his synopsis of the majority findings of the committee with regard to the wild rivers legislation in Queensland and that proposed by the Leader of the Opposition. In summary, it will not surprise the House to know that the committee divided on this issue. It was fascinating for me as deputy chair of the committee and for all of us as coalition members to review the chairman's report when it first came in, because I think that the report perhaps goes as close as one can possibly get to having federal Labor members of a committee being critical of a state Labor government without actually doing it in an explicit sense. That is precisely what happens in the list of recommendations, in particular the recommendations that pertain to the level of consultation that is undertaken. I noticed as well the comments made by the chairman with respect to the need for there to be a greater level of consultation with Indigenous landowners who are on the land in Cape York about the operation of wild rivers legislation within the Queensland context.

Let us just revisit what the committee's task was. We were tasked with the job of investigating barriers to and opportunities for Indigenous economic development in Queensland and in particular in Cape York. We were also asked to report on the Wild Rivers (Environmental Management) Bill 2010, which was introduced as a private member's bill by the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Tony Abbott, in November last year.

In the considered opinion of the coalition members of the committee, the Queensland Wild Rivers Act, an overriding planning instrument, is the single most significant barrier to any form of Indigenous economic development, so it is that act at a Queensland level which is the main focus of the dissenting report by coalition members of the committee. Having taken the Queensland Wild Rivers Act 2005 to be the most significant barrier to Indigenous development, coalition members of the committee identified that the Wild Rivers (Environmental Management) Bill 2010 is clearly the best opportunity to improve the lives of Indigenous peoples in Queensland and that, perhaps most significantly, through the passage of that bill the parliament can restore to native title holders those rights which allow all other Queensland landowners to invest in their future. Of course, that bill is also about restoring the rights and promoting the self-determination of those communities so that those who wish to have their development regulated by the Queensland government may continue to do so.

When looking at the Wild Rivers Act in Queensland, a number of things came from the evidence that made it crystal clear that this was in fact the main barrier to economic development of Indigenous peoples in Cape York. The crux of the issue for coalition members of the committee, and indeed for any objective observer of evidence that came before the committee, came down to this: under the Wild Rivers Act in Queensland, is it possible for there to be development, especially within highly protected areas, if there is negative environmental impact? I stress that the coalition members specifically inquired as to whether that negative environmental impact could be a net negative or just a negative environmental impact.

I would like to put in the Hansard again an exchange between me and the Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management representative Mr Scott Buchanan. This is an excerpt. I asked:

… can I also ask whether impacting in a negative way is a net negative impact or is that just a requirement to demonstrate no negative impact?

To that, Mr Buchanan replied:

No negative impact.

I said:

So any negative impact at all would effectively void the application.

Mr Buchanan said:

That is right.

In those four sentences is the entire crux of the matter with respect to the operation of wild rivers legislation. Those four sentences betray the entire argument of the Queensland Labor government and of the Labor majority of the economics committee, who suggested that the Wild Rivers Act was not a barrier to Indigenous development, because those four sentences underscore that, for an Indigenous person in Cape York, Queensland, within a declared wild rivers area, any negative environmental impact voids an application.

So you could have a project which is highly positive to local Indigenous people. You could have a project that will drive employment. You could have a project that will drive investment. You could have a project that will lift and empower the Indigenous people in that part of the world. It does not matter that it might be a net positive by a magnitude of 100; the simple existence of any negative impact whatsoever renders the application void. And that goes to the core of the dissenting report of coalition members of the committee, who very clearly understood that, despite all the hyperbole, despite all the rhetoric, it is crystal clear that in reality there is no opportunity for Indigenous development.

The other key concern of coalition members was the issue of consent. It is very clear from Indigenous witnesses who appeared before the committee that consent was not forthcoming in the vast bulk of instances and, what is more, where there was Indigenous consent, it was in every way, shape and form almost tokenistic. In that sense, the coalition members commended the bill that was put forward by the Leader of the Opposition. They commended the fact that the Wild Rivers (Environmental Management) Bill is absolutely the best pathway to overturn the ridiculous application of the Queensland government's Wild Rivers Act and to empower Indigenous people throughout Cape York.

That notwithstanding, coalition members are particularly grateful to the committee secretariat for their assistance and for the work that they did. I am confident that, when the Wild Rivers (Environmental Management) Bill has its opportunity to be debated in this House again, it will be successfully passed with the support of the crossbenchers and we will once again be able to empower Indigenous Queenslanders in Cape York wild rivers declared areas.

See this speech in context