Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Environment and the Arts, I present the committee's report incorporating a dissenting report entitled Managing Australia's biodiversity in a changing climate: the way forward together with the minutes of proceedings.

The fact that the earth's climate is changing is well documented. Australia and other countries have long run data showing a marked change in the earth's temperature. Although we can be certain that climate change is occurring, its effects on Australia's environment, in particular on biodiversity, is unknown beyond the models and theories that are being used to make informed projections.

Australia has a rich biodiversity and many species are only found here. The committee quickly learnt during the enquiry that climate effects varied greatly across species. For some, the increase in the earth's temperature and related effects will diminish their habitat reduce their numbers perhaps to extinction. For others, the changing climate will be to their advantage and their population will increase.

The committee received 89 submissions, four supplementary submissions and 60 exhibits. As befitting a national enquiry, the committee held site inspections, briefings and public hearings in each of Australia's states and territories. In the course of these site inspections, the committee received extensive and valuable evidence on the effects of climate change on nationally important ecosystems. As a result, two interim reports were published in May and November of 2012. The interim reports provide a useful platform for this final report.

During its investigations, the committee received a great deal of support from not-for-profit environmental groups, natural resource management bodies, state government agencies, research institutions, and landholders. All these organisations and individuals were very generous with their time and expertise and they made important contributions to the report.

The committee found that important information is being collated about our biodiversity, that it can better be coordinated and the funding for it should be long term. The policy for coordination is already partly in place through the National Plan for Environmental Information. What is needed is quicker progress for a project that is, admittedly, very challenging due to its innovative nature and broad scope.

The Council of Australia Governments can also contribute. The committee would like to see it help develop national environmental accounts as well as a central national biodiversity database which can be scientifically accredited and to which information can be uploaded.

The committee received consistent evidence that the usual three-year funding cycle for environmental projects is too short, because it does not allow researchers to build up a baseline for a process that is continuing over decades.

The committee heard evidence from an organisation that had to reinvent their project at each funding application so that they could also continue their long-term work. This is counterproductive, and the committee believes that agencies should be able to extend their funding periods when warranted.

The committee recognises the important of natural resource management organisations. These bodies have the advantage of operating at the local level and delivery of many NRM programs. However, they have different origins, depending on the state or territory in which they are located. This has resulted in a significant variation in their consistency, standards and quality. The committee supports the regional delivery model but believes there is scope for improvement and has made recommendations in relation to NRM bodies' skills, standards and funding.

As in most research areas, there is considerable demand for funding but only limited resources are available. The committee was mindful not to propose a large increase in funding for biodiversity action. Much of the baseline research that would inform this work still needs to be done. However, the committee did make some funding recommendations where the quality and value of the work warranted it. An example is the Atlas of Living Australia. The committee believes that the atlas would be a natural repository for the digitisation of Australia's biological collections and that the Australian government should work with the atlas to develop a sustainable funding model for it.

I thank the organisations that assisted the committee during the enquiry through submissions, participating at hearings or assisting the committee at its briefings and inspections. I also thank my colleagues on the committee and the secretariat for their contributions to the inquiry and report.

While I am on my feet, I also express my personal concern that some state governments appear to be relaxing state laws which restrict activities in national parks that were purposely introduced to protect natural environmental assets and the biodiversity values of national parks. Lifting restrictions such as to allow cattle grazing and hunting in national parks further puts at risk efforts to conserve biodiversity and create biodiversity corridors and refuges for flora and fauna that are already at risk.

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

It is my pleasure to support Mr Zappia, the member for Makin, on what he has just said. I will not repeat the report, but because I am retiring in a few weeks I will say this: I have been on the environment committee since 2004, which is a reasonable length of time. I was originally chair, then I was deputy chair for a couple of parliamentary terms. We have had some excellent chairs since then: the former member for Throsby, Jennie George, and now Mr Zappia from Makin. I also served on multiple other committees—and I will not go through the whole list of them—but I think the most exciting of all was the environment committee, which has changed its name over time from the Committee on Environment and Heritage, originally, to the Committee on Climate Change, Water, Environment and the Arts, and then to the Committee on Climate Change, Environment and the Arts.

The beauty of the committee system is that despite differences in policies committees have a bipartisan focus which allows us to find a common ground and build awareness of national issues. The government plays a key role, as we know, but all members can participate in the committee system. Creating a sustainable future needs to be a priority for all Australians. Australia can lead the way internationally in this area. Thanks to all involved for those many productive inquiries.

People ask: what is the benefit of the committee process? The parliament moves amongst the people, so we interrelate with the people, and that is important. Committees in this parliament have a good reputation and people know that they have had their stories heard. These are put into records as a time capsule for what people have told us. We have legacies to celebrate—certainly, committees influence policy. The member for Fairfax, who normally sits behind me, takes claim that the blame game report on the health relationships between federal and state governments, for example, was a platform for the Labor Party's health reforms. He is very proud of that, and the Labor Party did a very good job in taking up the recommendations.

Committee reports also raise awareness and they set agendas. We get great bipartisan cooperation, and it is very different to question time. The effects of a hung parliament have been mellowed by good committee cooperation. The problem is: are we going to get adequate funding in the future for committees so they can travel, and will we work more with Senate committees? I have many memorable stories that I will not tell you about the committee system, but the friendships developed on a bipartisan basis are the most important aspects.

In the 43rd Parliament the committee reported on Managing Australia's biodiversity in a changing climate: the way forward, which the chair has just spoken about. In the 42nd Parliament we released the report Managing our coastal zone in a changing climate: the time to act is now, which was a very good report. That was when Ms Jennie George, the former member for Throsby, was chair. We did a lot of travelling to look at the seriousness of climate change, sea levels rising, and the effect on our coastal zones, where most people live. In the 41st Parliament, when I was chair, we looked at sustainable cities. The committee provided an excellent report, and everyone agreed with that. It was not reported back on by my government at that time, but a lot of ideas were picked up and taken from that report, and utilised wisely. We also had a sustainability for survival charter, in which we recommended the establishment of a sustainability commission; that did not happen, unfortunately, but it should have.

In the last few seconds I have left, I want to especially thank the wonderful Julia Morris. I want to do that, because she was going to be very angry if I did not mention all the secretariat members for the great work and great help they have given me and all the others who have worked on the committee. Chair, I am very proud of what we have done. We have developed some great friendships. Quite frankly, I am going to miss you all.

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for statements on this report has expired. Does the honourable member for Makin wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a later occasion?

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with standing order 39(d), the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.