Mal Washer (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Environment and Heritage, I present the committee’s report entitled Sustainability for survival: creating a climate for change: inquiry into a sustainability charter, together with the minutes of proceedings.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

In its 2005 report on sustainable cities, the committee identified a need for a national governance framework for advancing sustainability in Australia. It formed the view that a national approach would be an effective way of engaging all levels of government in their decision-making processes. In turn, the committee proposed a concept for coordinating action in this area that primarily involved the Australian government’s formation of a sustainability charter, supported by a commission and commissioner. This report further explores the concept of a national sustainability charter. The committee believes the charter itself should be aspirational in order to reach everyday Australians. It should define sustainability in an Australian context and contain clear and concise objectives and time frames. On their own, aspirational statements may not be sufficient to drive progress so the committee recommends that the charter also be linked to a set of measurable targets.

In the report the committee examines sustainability in the areas of the built environment, water, energy, transport, ecological footprint, economics, waste, social equity and health, and community engagement and education. The charter should cover these areas and address their interrelationships. The role of the proposed commission is fundamental to the charter. The committee proposes that the commission work with an advisory committee comprising sustainability champions to perform the initial task of creating the charter and to perform the commission’s ongoing role of influencing and guiding government, industry and the community to work towards positive outcomes. The commission should report annually to parliament on Australia’s progress against the charter and review its terms when necessary.

Industry and community interest in advancing sustainability became evident during the inquiry. Among these two groups are an acute awareness of the pressing need to progress the sustainability agenda and as such a strong desire to adopt more sustainable practices. In fact, a wealth of research, strategies and technologies already exist to support progress in this area and some of these are discussed in the report. Despite high levels of industry and community interest in advancing sustainability, progress is deemed to be slow. The committee has identified that in Australia there is a need for stronger government leadership on sustainability, as well as increased efforts by government and greater uniformity in its approach. A sustainability charter, supported by a sustainability commission and commissioner, will provide guidance to public and private efforts to build a more sustainable future. In this report the committee recommends the Australian government establish a legislative framework for the proposed national sustainability charter, commission and commissioner.

The great level of industry and community support for this inquiry reflects a strong interest in advancing sustainability in Australia. I thank those who contributed to the inquiry by providing evidence and note also the efforts of the committee members and secretariat staff. I commend the report Sustainability for survival: creating a climate for change: inquiry into a sustainability charter to the House.

Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In speaking to this report, Sustainability for survival: creating a climate for change: inquiry into a sustainability charter, I wish to make some general comments as well as to support the comments of the Chair of the Standing Committee on Environment and Heritage. On 8 October 1987 I was appointed to the House environment committee and it has been my good fortune to serve nearly 20 years on the committee in its various guises. It is the longest standing portfolio committee of the House. If we look back over its history, we see it has done a lot of very good work. It has been involved in all environmental debates over that period since its inception. It has been an agent to bring parliament to the community. It has always had great cooperation from those people in the community that have had a real interest in the environment.

I can remember only one inquiry of this committee that was in any way controversial. That was not because it concerned the environment; that was because we had Arts and Sport under the banner of the committee’s portfolio and there was a discussion about decisions made on whiteboards. In everything else we have had a bipartisan way of going forward and the work of the committee in the 41st Parliament has seen exactly the same situation. The honourable member for Moore, through his leadership, encouragement and ability to allow us to discuss things, has allowed all committee members to be able to make a contribution to the work of the committee. The professional secretariat staff that we have now has worked at the same level that I have witnessed over the last 20 years. The committee has always been well served by those who have assisted it in its endeavours.

This report is really about the way forward, and I hope that those opposite do not think I am being overly political in saying that it is really a little bit disappointing that, while the committee has moved forward from its last body of work—the sustainable cities inquiry—it has not had a government response to that report, which was tabled over two years ago. But the important thing is that the committee has decided to continue to go forward. The way in which we have had the cooperation of the people in the community who have come before the committee and given us their ideas is an indication that the committee’s work is relevant to what Australians see as being important in our challenge to achieve sustainability in a world bedevilled by environmental problems, the greatest challenge of which is, of course, climate change.

The other thing that the House environment committee has been able to show through its work is that you do not have to be wedded just to your portfolio area. Many of the problems that confront us as a nation need a holistic approach. If you look at the items that we believe should be in the scope of the charter you will see that they are, of course, environmental in nature and include the built environment, water, energy and our ecological footprint. They then go to the way that the environment can meet the way that people operate, and this includes transport, economics and waste, and then we go to social equity, health, community engagement and education.

Those last two things are very important because, if government is not engaged with people and if government does not have an understanding of a person’s wellbeing, our policies are not worth while. So in this proposed sustainability charter we very much see that the way forward is to bring people with us. That is why the committee unanimously agreed that the charter should be aspirational in nature and that it should be in simple language that does not confuse people but brings them forward with us. But we stress that, underpinning that, there must be definite targets that will enable government, industry and others to know that we are proceeding, that we are going forward.

I hope that we might get a response to the sustainable cities inquiry, but I urge government to respond to both inquiries at the same time. It is urgent that we go forward. This matter will require action from all spheres of government, plus the community and industry. We have to make the decision to embrace a sustainability charter, as recommended by the committee, so that it will enable us as a nation to go forward in environmental matters. (Time expired)

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Does the member for Moore wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a future occasion?

I thank the member for Scullin for his wise words, and I move:

That the House take note of the report.

In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour this day.