Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, finally you are in the chair for some good news for the environment, and that, sadly, is a rare thing. To be frank, many Australians—me included—too often switch off when they see stories in the news about climate change or the environment, as it's generally bad news. It's depressing. There is a lot to be despondent about. The State of the environment report released by the minister last year shows that the Australian environment is in a bad way and is getting worse. The trends are wrong due to degradation, loss and inaction under the decade of the previous government. We're winning a prize that I don't think anyone in this chamber would actually want to win. We are the extinction capital of the world. Our country is the extinction capital of the world. It's a gold medal you don't want to win. That's after a decade of neglect, dysfunction, decay, division and dereliction of duty from those opposite.

The government is committed to protecting 30 per cent of Australia's land and seas by 2030—the same goals under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. This bill is a key part of delivering on the government's positive nature repair plan, with the establishment of a nature repair market. Why? It will make it easier for people to invest in activities that actually help to reverse that decline and repair nature. The government is deadly serious about reversing the decline—not just stemming the tide or flatlining but reversing the decline and starting positive repair of our natural environment to reverse disrepair and degradation and to leave nature in better shape for our kids and grandkids. There's a lot of rhetoric like that bandied around in this parliament: 'We're going to leave things better for our kids and our grandkids.' With regard to the natural environment, that's exactly what we have to aim to do, and that's exactly what the government's bill will contribute to. It will contribute to the notion of stewardship—that, as custodians of this world right now, we should leave the place in better shape than we found it. We're at risk of being the first generation to leave a lower standard of living and a degraded natural environment for the generation to come after us, and that's a disgrace.

This bill will support landholders, including farmers and First Nations people in particular, to plant native species, repair damaged riverbeds and remove invasive species. It will make it easier for business and philanthropists to invest with confidence in these efforts. The critical point is the focus on getting investment into privately held land. That is so important because 60 per cent of our country's land mass is in private hands, the majority of which is controlled by farmers and First Nations communities. It's on private land, also, that a large percentage of the critically endangered habitat rests. You cannot reverse the decline in our natural environment without investment in private land rehabilitation. There's only so much you can do with national parks and publicly held land, be they riverbeds or railway tracks. You just can't get there without dealing with privately held land. Of course, reversing the decline has environmental benefits in its own right, but it's also absolutely critical if we're to hand back that gold medal that we don't want of being the extinction capital of the world because the primary reason for the extinctions that we're seeing is the loss of natural habitat for threatened species.

This is a positive, practical, long-term plan which, I might add, contrasts with the shameful record of those opposite. As I said, last year the Minister for the Environment and Water released the official five-yearly report card on the Australian environment, the State of the environment report. The former minister, now deputy opposition leader, the Hon Sussan Ley, hid the report from the Australian people, refusing to release it. She actually commissioned the State of the environment report and then hid it in the cupboard because the then government were too ashamed of what the report revealed about trends in the environment and their record. It's a catalogue of horrors. It reveals, in black and white, just how much damage a decade of the Liberal and National parties' neglect did to our environment. It's in bad shape and getting worse. It found that Australia has lost more mammal species to extinction than any other continent. For the first time, Australia has more foreign plant species than native species. Habitat covering the size of Tasmania has been cleared between 2000 and 2017. Plastics are choking our oceans—up to 80,000 pieces of plastic per square kilometre. Flow in the Murray-Darling rivers has reached record low levels as at December 2019.

Earlier, I said 'neglect'. I'd like to withdraw that. I was wrong. It's worse than neglect; it's active hostility. Those opposite took positive actions to damage the environment. In the last decade, they axed climate laws. They actually withdrew them. That's not neglect; that's damage. They failed to fix Australia's broken environment laws, despite having a blueprint which they commissioned which mapped out how they should proceed. They failed to act on it. The Leader of the Opposition actually laughed about our Pacific island neighbours going underwater. They failed to land a single one of the 22 different energy policies that they had in nine years. In a decade in government, they had 22 different energy policies, none of which were implemented. They sabotaged the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. They promised $40 million for Indigenous water but never delivered a single drop. They set recycling targets—they announced them. That was one of their special talents, announcing things but then not actually delivering. They announced the recycling targets but had no plan to actually deliver them. They had a recycling target that sounded very good, of 70 per cent. They were going to recycle 70 per cent of things. They were stuck at 16 per cent for four years, but they just kept re-announcing it. It's all about the press release. It's all about the Australian flags behind you while making announcements but not actually doing anything positive.

They voted against the safeguard mechanism this term. It's a policy that they previously championed, of course. Such a rabble, they voted against themselves. They voted against energy price relief for households and small businesses. They actually cut the highly protected areas in marine parks by half. That was their great initiative to protect the marine environment. They cut the marine parks in half. They cut billions from the environment department. They then went and complained that there was green tape everywhere and that people weren't getting approvals for new infrastructure, developments and resource developments while they cut the environment department by billions. Who knew? If you don't have the Public Service processing approvals, the approvals don't get done! A decade of environmental crime. Is it any wonder that the Australian people voted these vandals out?

On the government's positive plan, Deputy Speaker—how will it work? I'm glad you asked, rhetorically! The bill is establishing the machinery for a nature repair market. The 3Rs: register, rules and regulator. The market will apply to projects that enhance or protect existing environments or those which establish and restore habitats on land, in lakes and rivers, or in marine and coastal areas. The scheme will be open voluntarily—there's no compulsion. We've heard some of the histrionics over the last few days from those opposite. Smelling salts, I was thinking yesterday, may be in order. It will be open voluntarily to farmers—yes, we're allowed to say farmers too—First Nations communities, conservation groups, businesses and councils. When a landholder chooses, of their own volition, to conduct a repair project they get a tradeable certificate. It's setting up a market. That certificate will have standardised information, stuff like the land size; the kinds of work which are being done and a description of that; an outline of the environment, habitat or threatened species which will be protected as a result of the work; and the length of time that actions will continue. That certificate will be tracked, recorded and publicly available on a public register, setting up a transparent market.

The market, importantly, will be based on science and will enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to promote their unique knowledge about land management on their terms. Establishing the marketing legislation, though, is key. I've actually had people to say to me: 'Why can't people do this now? They can just go and invest their own money. They can leave money in wills. Companies can do their corporate social responsibility and invest money now.' The importance of establishing a market in legislation is about ensuring its ongoing integrity; to encourage investment; to give investors, philanthropists and business confidence to invest in a tradable commodity; and to drive environmental approvements across Australia. Capitalism actually only exists because governments underwrite it. It's a serious point. You can only enter into a contract because the governments will set up the courts to enforce the contract. In this regard, we're setting up a market that has a tradeable certificate and transparency so people can invest with confidence.

The bill will enable the third of the three Rs, the Clean Energy Regulator, an independent statutory authority with significant experience in regulating environmental markets, to issue those tradeable biodiversity certificates, which can then be banked or sold to businesses, organisations, governments and individuals.

The projects will deliver real, long-term, nature-positive outcomes: weeding, planting trees and pest control, as I said, on land or water, in marine and coastal environments. They will create more opportunities for economic participation for First Nations communities through doing, and being funded and supported to do, environmental repair and maintenance on their lands, contributing to the reversal of habitat loss and stemming the loss of threatened species. There will be opportunities to actually design those projects that reflect that connection to country and the knowledge and wisdom of First Nations peoples.

The market, importantly, will operate in parallel with the carbon trading market facilitated by the same regulator. Putting the two markets together under the same regulator will create both efficiencies and synergies. That alignment will encourage carbon-farming projects and also deliver benefits for biodiversity. The administrative efficiencies in this approach and, more importantly, the clear and accurate oversight of claims are critical to both markets.

It is important that the regulator is competent, properly resourced and properly empowered lest we see more accusations and incidences of so-called greenwashing. People need to have confidence in making these investments, that the things they're investing in, the outcomes they're buying and the certificates they hold have a real and practical impact, and value on their balance sheets—on the books. That's important. Again, only government, through the power of government, can set up an enforceable regulatory regime, which is critical in giving confidence to philanthropists and businesses to invest.

The biodiversity certificates have to have integrity. Through that transparent regulatory approach, people will be confident that there will be an actual environmental improvement as a result of their investment. The key integrity measure will be an independent expert committee responsible for ensuring that projects deliver high-quality nature -positive outcomes underpinned by a consistent approach to measurement, assessment and verification. There will be assurance and compliance requirements, including monitoring, reporting and notification of the delivery of project activities. And the regulator—all that transparency—will have strong monitoring and enforcement powers to ensure that things actually happen in accordance with the rules. The department is now working with the ACCC and ASIC to ensure that certificates are not victims of more greenwashing claims, that the statements made on certificates accurately reflect the projects and the investments made, and that projects in both the carbon and biodiversity markets will not be affected by misleading claims.

The Nature Positive Plan reflects the government's commitment to actually restoring accountability and trust in public administration after the damaging decade of those opposite. As I said, that information will be available on a public register. The bill will also establish the Nature Repair Market Committee, which will be responsible for providing advice to the minister following public consultation on the submission and their advice. There will be five to six experts who have significant experience and significant standing. Of course, the qualification to be one of those experts won't be being a member of the National Party or the Liberal Party; they'll be appointed on merit. Again, that might be triggering for those opposite, given how they stacked out every board and committee they could find. Look at the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation: half of them were ex-Liberal and National MPs, but not one of the people on that board had expertise in affordable housing. And it would be unkind to go over Infrastructure Australia again, wouldn't it, member for New England? We don't need to go over that—

See this speech in context