Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Hansard source

In speaking on the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Cost Recovery) Bill 2014, I support the amendments moved by the member for Port Adelaide and shadow minister for the environment. I will begin by repeating what those amendments are:

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

“whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading the House notes:

(1 ) the government’s poor environmental record;

(2)    the importance of protecting Australia’s rich and diverse environment;

(3) the need to fully examine the range of changes proposed to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act since September 2013; and

(4) the lack of assurance from the government about the future management and protection of our natural environment.”

Any legislation relating to the environment brought into this place by the Abbott government should ring alarm bells, and this legislation certainly does. It may appear to be simple legislation associated with cost-recovery, but the reality is that it goes to far more than that. One has only to look at the Abbott government's track record since coming to office with respect to the environment to understand why this legislation should be of concern, and I am going to go to some of the track record of the Abbott government since coming to office.

Budgets do not lie because budgets effectively enable governments to put their money where their mouth is. The money that is allocated in a budget clearly identifies a government's priorities and its long-term plans for the country. And if you look at the budget that was handed down only this month and carefully look at the expenditures that were cut from the environmental initiatives within that budget you get a very clear picture of what this government's priorities are, and how low a priority protecting the environment has.

Firstly, there is the $1.3 billion cut to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, which not only cuts thousands of jobs, expertise and innovation, and perhaps pushes them offshore but it undermines our competitiveness. This is the competitiveness that would enable us to in the future perhaps compete with other nations in respect of clean environmental programs, clean energy and the like. Most countries around the world are doing exactly that today—spending more money on innovation and technology with respect to green energy projects, rather than less. But Australia is going in the opposite direction.

I talk about energy programs because they are directly related to the environment. Carbon emissions and global warming have a direct impact on the environment, so when you affect those programs you directly affect our ability to manage the environment. Then there are other cuts, such as the cut to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. What I do not understand about cutting the Clean Energy Finance Corporation—which also funded many of the initiatives I just referred to in relation to new technology and projects to enable us to remain energy sustainable and efficient as well as using the green energy innovations that are now available to us—is that the corporation was making money for the government. Closing down a corporation that is actually making money for the government highlights the disdain that the government has for the environment. You would not do it if you were not somehow trying to stop government investment in and protection of the environment. Even if you did not support that particular corporation on ideological grounds, you would think the fact that it was making money for the government, returning money to the government coffers, would mean that the government that claims we have a budget crisis would keep it. But, no, because it was an initiative linked to the environment, the government wanted to cut it.

The government then reduced the funding for the Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships Program as well as for the National Low Emissions Coal Initiative—again, two important environmental programs. The Australian Climate Change Science Program, which replaced an earlier program, will be cut by $21.7 million. The Caring for our Country program has been cut by the $483 million and the Environmental Stewardship Program has been cut by $25.8 million. The National Water Commission is to be abolished and the Office of Water Science is also to be abolished. The water buybacks for the Murray-Darling Basin will be capped at 1,500 gigalitres and there have been $168 million in cuts to water funding programs, as well as $239 million of cuts to infrastructure project spending to make water use in the Murray-Darling Basin more efficient.

These are all cuts that go to the heart of programs and projects that were there to try and protect our environment, which was the indirect benefit and outcome of many of those programs. Going to direct funding, there have been funding cuts to environmental organisations across the country. These are organisations such as the Environmental Defender's Office, the Conservation Council of Australia and so many others that have been doing much of the good work in analysing and reporting back to the broader society on how our environment is going and on the general state of the environment. These are not-for-profit organisations that rely on government assistance. Unlike business organisations that have their own funding streams, these organisations rely on government support, yet that support has been entirely cut out, just as government support has been cut for the national wildlife corridors initiative.

Other cuts include: cuts to the CSIRO of $111 million; the cooperative research centres, $80 million; the Australian Research Council, $75 million; and cuts to the Australian Institute of Marine Science. Again, these are all government organisations that provide invaluable research work with respect to our environment. It is their research work that so many government departments, community groups and industry rely on in making environmental assessments. It is their work that enables us to understand the environmental changes and trends that are occurring throughout Australia and throughout the world, for that matter.

My friend the member for Wills quite properly alluded to the Abbott government's push to delist about 74,000 hectares of the Tarkine forest area in Tasmania from World Heritage listing.

See this speech in context