Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

TINK () (): by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) as circulated in my name on the sheet revised on 19 June 2023:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (cell at table item 1, column 2), omit the cell, substitute:

(2) Clause 3, page 3 (line 7), at the end of the clause, add:

; and (f) to promote the enhancement or protection of biodiversity against the urgent threat of climate change, drawing on the best available scientific knowledge.

I rise today to move amendments to the Nature Repair Market Bill 2023. I do so very cognisant of the systemic failure of national environmental law we have witnessed to date. We've failed to adequately protect Australia's biodiversity and iconic places. Australia has the shameful distinction of having achieved greater mammal extinction than any other continent. We don't just top extinction leagues among countries; we trump entire continents. My community of North Sydney has made it very clear that comprehensive reform of our environmental laws is needed, including increased government regulation and investment. We recognise the size and scope of the reforms required to not only protect but also restore and repair our environment, and we are anxious to ensure this market based scheme is a positive step, not one which sets efforts back.

The Biodiversity Council survey released this week found a majority of people are concerned for Australia's biodiversity, with at least two-thirds 'very' or 'extremely' concerned about waste and pollution, land clearing, extinction of species, loss of pollinator species and loss of natural places. About three quarters said more money should be spent on the environment. Scientists have said we need at least $2 billion annually to recover Australia's full list of almost 2,000 threatened species.

Given the concern of many across my community and across the wider sector, my first amendment relates to delay in the commencement of the act. The truth is many in my community are confused as to why the government is introducing a market based solution as its first priority, given the size and scope of the new environmental reforms. I would like to reassure the chamber, though, that I have heard the minister, in terms of explaining her timing. I still move this amendment, though, because my community fears that, without these as a strong foundation for reform, the market based scheme that this bill establishes may well fail. Failure in biodiversity protection could lead to adverse outcomes and set all of our efforts back significantly.

It is my very clear view that this market should not be operational until after the new offsets National Environmental Standard is legally enforceable and the new environmental protection agency is legally established. The minister has indicated these reforms are on their way, with an exposure due in the second half of 2023. So my amendment allows for a 12-month period for the broader reforms, within which this repair market would sit, to be developed, debated and passed. I ask the minister, then, to outline to all in this place and to my community once again her rationale for proceeding with this market mechanism before we have the framework of solid environmental standards and a regulator to enforce them.

My second amendment would recognise that action on nature repair cannot happen in isolation from action on climate change. Overwhelmingly, my community of North Sydney have told me their No. 1 priority for the environment portfolio is to address the underlying causes of poor biodiversity, which are human impacts, invasive species impacts and climate related impacts. The impacts of climate change—including drought, bushfires, storms, ocean acidification, sea level rise and global warming—on our ecosystem are clear. We know many plants and animals cannot adapt to the effects of climate change, with 1,000 plant and animal species and ecological communities already at risk of extinction in New South Wales alone. For this reason, I am proposing to amend the objects of this act to ensure that climate change drivers and impacts are incorporated and integrated into every step of environmental and biodiversity protection.

The amendment adds to the objects of the act the objective:

to promote the enhancement or protection of biodiversity against the urgent threat of climate change, drawing on the best available scientific knowledge.

This wording mirrors changes that were recently passed in the Climate Change Act. I understand the minister is not accepting these amendments because actions on climate change are being covered by other legislation, like the safeguard mechanism. However, I would appreciate confirmation from the minister that she recognises that action on nature repair cannot happen in isolation to action on climate change.

See this speech in context