Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

It is always a pleasure to follow the member for Forrest because she, as a farmer, understands the importance of preserving the environment but at the same time ensuring that social and economic implications are always considered. I rise to speak on the report of the Standing Committee on Environment Streamlining environmental legislation: Inquiry into streamlining environmental regulation, 'green tape', and one stop shops. In doing so, I acknowledge the fine work done by the chair of that committee and the work that went into compiling the report.

I note from the report that quite a bit of logistics went into preparing this report. The inquiry received 83 submissions, 13 supplementary submissions and 29 exhibits. The committee held six public hearings here in Canberra and also in Sydney and Melbourne. I do note with some disappointment that there were no regional hearings. I appreciate the fact that it is logistically very hard to get some of the committee hearings into regional areas, but I would say that for many of the reports of this and many of the other inquires conducted by the parliament it is a shame that we do not get into regional areas more often to hear the words of wisdom of those people who have very much a stake in these matters. It is not always easy for those people to get to the capital cities, but it would be good to hear from those people in regional areas their input, discussions and concerns about these sorts of things. I note that the member for Mitchell in his speech to the parliament on 23 February said:

… throughout this inquiry, the committee was presented with numerous examples of environmental regulation that is duplicative, ineffective, confusing, impractical, contradictory or otherwise inefficient. We—

that is, the committee—

saw that some environmental laws were creating delays and significant compliance costs for business without actually delivering any environmental benefit at all.

That is why this inquiry was conducted. That is why it has produced a very good report. It is a shame that it did not receive the unanimous approval of the committee. I note the Deputy Chair, the member for Makin, in his contribution on the same day as the Chair's speech on the report, said that Labor members reject paragraph 4.70 on page 49 of the committee report. This is the paragraph that refers to the one-stop shop policy. Labor does not support the one-stop shop policy of the government. Labor members also note that the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Bilateral Agreement Implementation) Bill 2014 has not passed the Senate, leaving bilateral agreements with states and territories in limbo. I would urge Labor members to just sometimes end your relentless negativity and get on board with some of the programs and some of the policies—not all; I appreciate there are divergent views between the two sides of the parliament—of the government. I would urge them to work through the committee chairs, to work through the committee process and to just sometimes get on board with what this government is trying to do to build prosperity and wealth and to pay down a lot of the debt and deficit that we have inherited.

I hark back to the committee that I was on, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Regional Australia Committee, headed by the former Independent member for New England, Tony Windsor, when we conducted an inquiry into the Murray-Darling Basin. I note that there were very similar sorts of arrangements to this report—environmental concerns. The Water Act 2007 is unfortunately an environmental document. We should note that and also remember there is a triple bottom line approach with economic and social concerns that very much need to be at the forefront of anything to do with the Murray-Darling Basin. Sure, we had some very interesting discussions. We went very extensively into regional areas right throughout Australia to hear from key stakeholders. Even though there were very different opinions held by members on that committee—we had Labor members, an Independent, Liberal members and me as a National Party member, and obviously Mr Windsor was holding a very controversial government in place with his important number in the House of Representatives—we actually reached a unanimous verdict on the Of drought and flooding rainsreport. There were 21 recommendations, which, had the parliament adopted, I think we would be in a much better position than we are now with the Murray-Darling Basin. Of course, we all need to ensure that the Murray-Darling Basin remains environmentally secure but, at the same time, we need to protect those farmers and those river communities along the way. I am pleased that we will be getting a water buyback cap and legislate for it, hopefully with the support of the Labor members and particularly those in the Senate, to ensure that the cap on buyback of 1,500 gigalitres is passed.

Getting back to this report, I think it is interesting to note that Labor members of the committee prepared a dissenting report. Although there were areas of agreement—which is good, and I acknowledge that—Labor members of the committee did not believe that the committee report fairly reflected the divergent submissions presented in the course of the inquiry. Labor does not support the government's one-stop shop policy, and that is a shame. The majority of the committee's recommendations—that is, those endorsed by the government members—propose to task the Department of the Environment with further reviews or inquiries to try to further streamline processes. That is essential.

I note that, since coming to government, the coalition has been working hard to resolve a large number of important environmental decisions. We have been getting on with the task of cleaning up the mess left by Labor. To 14 January 2015, 355 referral decisions and 145 final approval decisions have been made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. You ask me: what might that present, what might that produce for the nation as a whole? The 145 approvals decisions represent greater than—wait for it—$1 trillion of economic value. That is crucial in getting this country ticking again. That is crucial in creating jobs, in creating opportunity and in creating wealth. Those 145 projects include many of the things that had remained mired in the stalling process that Labor so eagerly embraced, because they were in partnership with the Greens to keep government under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd era. Last October in my electorate of Riverina I announced, in conjunction with the state member for Wagga Wagga, Daryl Maguire, a Liberal, funding of $27½ million each—that is, $55 million of federal and state money—going to a very important project to replace the very old Kapooka Bridge: a pinch point in the Olympic Highway, and a road which stopped so much of the very valuable freight transport getting from Victoria to New South Wales. I note that the project has been delayed by months—just getting the excavators into operation and just getting the whole project underway has been delayed—through environmental concerns. Now, we all need to preserve and protect the environment. From the National Party perspective, I appreciate that. I represent a lot of farmers and they are the best environmentalists. Make no mistake. They have to be—because if they ruin their rivers, or if they ruin their soil, they are not going to have a future. Far too often, we see farmers maligned in this place, and maligned in the media, for the jobs that they do. They are not environmental vandals; they are the people who are environmental protectors.

See this speech in context