Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be able to make a contribution to this debate. I want to thank the people in the Library for their Bills Digest which gives us all the information we need to be able to make a meaningful contribution. It is a technical piece of legislation which opens up for other uses the Woomera Prohibited Area. The bill provides for the making of the Woomera Prohibited Area rules by the minister which will include, amongst other things, zones which are to be demarcated within that area. It creates a permit system for access to and use by non-Defence users of the Woomera Prohibited Area. It introduces offences and penalties for entering the Woomera Prohibited Area without permission, for failing to comply with the conditions of a permit, and provides for compensation for acquisition of property from a person otherwise than on just terms that results from the operation of the new part VIB of the Defence Act 1903.

I want to talk about an example of what the Woomera Prohibited Area can actually facilitate. I was sadly and very unfortunately given my marching orders out of this place by the people of the Northern Territory in 1996 for a relatively short period of time. I was back again in 1998. During the intervening period, one of the jobs I had was working with a legal firm and a company called Kistler Aerospace, negotiating native title over Woomera on their behalf so that they could launch rockets from Woomera. The idea was to have rockets which would be returned to earth. Sadly, it never eventuated, but it demonstrated to me the enormous value of this property in terms of Defence and other interests, and there was its special location in terms of space programs. As a former minister in the Defence portfolio, I am aware of the use of the Woomera Prohibited Area for research purposes. I could name a number of research programs that have been held there. A very important capacity for the Australian nation is provided by this Woomera Prohibited Area.

This bill is designed to open up the capacity of the area to be used by other users and to facilitate, potentially, access to its mineral wealth most particularly. But I think the people of Australia need to understand that here we have a real jewel in developing our defence capacity and our national security. I do not think it is commonly understood. I want to pay tribute to the people in Defence who have the responsibility of managing and administering this particular area.

As you know, Mr Deputy Speaker, I live in Alice Springs, which is a little bit up the road. It is common ground, in a sense. As you know, if you fire rockets out of Woomera and they head north, they will come across, potentially, south-east Queensland or the Northern Territory. What happens at Woomera could eventually impact upon communities right across northern Australia, but most particularly, in my case, in the Northern Territory.

There has been a long history of engagement with the community by Defence over this Woomera Prohibited Area. It is the largest overland, long-range weapons testing facility in the world, having been operational since 1947, and it covers 127,000 square kilometres of northern South Australia. It is no small bit of property, but, like other parts of Australia which are being used for Defence purposes—and I speak of ranges in the Northern Territory used principally for the Army, but also for the Air force and potentially for the Navy—these areas are of great value to us. I think that, when we are having discussions around our national security and the development of options for our national security, we need to understand the importance of these areas of land and the need to look after them properly in the first instance, to make sure we are good environmental guardians, to make sure we are good neighbours to and partners with Aboriginal people who might be the traditional owners or the native title holders for those areas, and to make sure that we facilitate the use of those areas in a way which is in line with our national interest. I note that this piece of legislation does precisely that.

So I think it is a pleasing piece of legislation. I note that it was prepared during the course of the last parliament, and was developed largely in response to work which had been initiated by the former defence minister John Faulkner, who called for a review to make recommendations about the best use of the Woomera Prohibited Area in the national interest. The final report of that review of the prohibited area—which was undertaken by Dr Allan Hawke, a former very senior public servant and adviser to former governments out of the Defence portfolio—was published on 4 February 2011 and made 65 recommendations. Within its numerous recommendations it outlined a coexistence model so that, whilst Defence maintained primacy over the WPA, non-Defence users would have clarity regarding their access to specified areas of operation incorporating both the available location and time of use.

Recommendation 14 suggested the division of the WPA into three zones: a red zone for exclusive Defence use, an amber zone for regular Defence use and a green zone for occasional Defence use. By implementing a zonal timeshare arrangement, Defence was able to allocate exclusion windows throughout the year limiting the non-Defence use of the prohibited area. And that makes sense because, as I say, it is 127,000 square kilometres—it is a large area of land—and, whilst there are parts of that property which could not be and should not be used by other users, there are other parts of the property where people should be able to have access to that use.

I go back to the issue of Woomera being used as a rocket-launching facility, for example. Had that proceeded, it would have meant Australia getting access to technology for rocket launching which it currently does not have. It would have meant Australia getting access to technology, via the United States, in terms of a launch facility that would have been unique to us. Sadly it did not proceed but, nevertheless, it just shows that this property is of great intrinsic value and that we need to make sure that it is used for the purpose for which the Commonwealth acquired it in 1947 and has used it since then. But at the same time we need to understand that there is not necessarily any essential conflict between that primary purpose and the objectives of providing other people with the capacity to use it.

I note that the shadow minister and his contribution in the main chamber talked about Woomera Prohibited Area overlapping a major part of South Australia's potential for significant minerals and energy resources, including 30 per cent of the Gawler Craton, one of the world's major mineral domains; and the Arckaringa, Officer, and Eromanga basins for hydrocarbons and coal. And, of course, we know that Olympic Dam is adjacent to the Woomera Prohibited Area and is part of the same geological formations. The South Australian government has assessed that over the next decade about $35 billion worth of iron ore, gold, and other mineral resources are potentially exploitable from within the Woomera Prohibited Area.

That is all well and good and I hope that they are able to develop some of those resources and are able to get the value out of them. But I just want to re-emphasise the importance of this place for science and as a property to use for the development of new ways of doing business. I want to commend the work that is being done there on a continuing basis by the Defence Science and Technology Organisation. The work they do is so vital for our national interest but goes below the radar, if I might put it like that in this context. It is often and mostly unrecognised by the general community but vital to developing our national defence capacity and looking after our national security interests. This gives me an opportunity to say to those wonderful people at the Defence Science and Technology Organisation how much we value your work, how much we know that you do on our behalf through dint of your brains and by working collaboratively with people from other nations in developing new ways of doing business, exploiting new technologies and using Woomera as an integral part of that space for testing, for demonstrations and the like. I could speak on this for a long time; I know it would bore many. It does not bore me—though perhaps I could put myself to sleep, and people say I often should. Nevertheless, I do want to applaud the government for bringing forward this legislation and putting it through the parliament. It is an important piece of legislation, but I do want to make sure that we emphasise the vital national interests that we have in this Woomera Prohibited Area.

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Defence Legislation Amendment (Woomera Prohibited Area) Bill 2013. Like the member for Lingiari, I have personal and practical experience with this area. I know the Woomera defence range facilities and the surrounding region very well. As the member for Lingiari quite rightly points out, Woomera offers a world-class live range facility, particularly for rockets and associated large propellant weapons. But it is equally and increasingly attractive to a range of diverse stakeholders. For obvious reasons, this means that the legislation, rules and protocols that delineate its use must be made lawful, clear and relevant to changing circumstances, particularly for the protection of competing and multiple users.

This amendment bill gives effect to the recommendations of the 2011 Hawke review of the Woomera Prohibited Area. Regrettably, this was followed by two years of inaction, no bill was produced and I think it is fair to say there was less than adequate consultation. So this bill is very welcome indeed and is about finding a sensible middle ground in relation to the current and future use of Woomera by both military and non-military users. Achieving this will improve the management of the Woomera Prohibited Area in a way that meets Defence's equipment testing requirements while also giving greater certainty of access, particularly for the resources sector.

Accordingly, the purpose of this bill is to amend the Defence Act to establish a framework which allows access to the Woomera Prohibited Area by non-defence users on a controlled, conditional basis. The general purpose of the bill can be reduced to four key objectives: first, to provide for the making of the Woomera Prohibited Area rules by the minister which will include, amongst other things, zones that are demarcated within the area; second, to create a permit system by which non-Defence users can access the WPA; third, the introduction of offences and penalties for entering the WPA without permission and for failing to comply with the conditions of permit; and, fourth, to provide compensation for an acquisition of property for a person otherwise than on just terms that results from the operation of the amended Defence Act 1903.

The lineage of this bill includes two previous versions. The first was introduced by the former Labor government on 30 May 2013 and that bill lapsed when the 43rd Parliament was prorogued on 5 August 2013. The second version, effectively an equivalent mirror iteration of the first, was introduced by ALP Senator Don Farrell as a private senator's bill on 12 December 2013 and that second version of the bill does not appear to be proceeding. This current bill differs from those earlier versions, most particularly in proposing and elaborating in detail on the Commonwealth's intended adoption and regulation of a coexistence model of intended future use.

For those who are unfamiliar with Woomera, I would like to briefly provide some key background and links to the provisions in this bill. The 127,000 kilometre expanse of northern South Australia which is known as the Woomera Prohibited Area is the world's largest overland long-range weapons testing facility and has been operating since 1947. However, since the 1980s, areas have been made increasingly available to non-defence users, including the resources sector. Local Indigenous groups and pastoral lease holders also have an enduring presence across much of the WPA, and clearly this competition between diverse and legitimate interest groups for land at Woomera could not continue unchecked. To this end, on 17 May 2010, the then Minister for Defence, Senator John Faulkner, called for a review to 'make recommendations about the best use of the WPA in the national interest'.

This brings us to the present day and this amendment bill: the latest iteration of an extensive process of consultation and review which is aimed ultimately at providing fair access to Commonwealth land at Woomera by diverse parties for disparate purposes, both civil and military alike. In short, Woomera is big, but so is business at Woomera, both civil and military, and this amendment bill seeks to make it more productive, efficient and safer.

In particular, three additional issues warrant the chamber's attention. They are, first, the actual review process itself and its outcomes leading up to this bill; second, future administrative arrangements that complement these outcomes; and, third, the financial implications of proposed action, including compensation for the acquisition of private land by the government. I will talk first about the review process. As the member for Lingiari said, the most recent review was lead by Dr Allan Hawk who, as a former secretary of the Department of Defence, was eminently placed to do so. His report, The review of the Woomera Prohibited Area—final report, was published on 4 February 2011, made 65 recommendations, including perhaps most importantly the common sense and practical benefits of moving to a model of coexistence, whereby Defence continues to retain primacy of the WPA but non-Defence users are provided greater clarity regarding access.

Dr Hawk's work proposed the division of the WPA into three zones: a red zone, which is for exclusive Defence use only, an amber zone for regular Defence use, and a green zone for occasional Defence use. By effectively implementing a zonal time share arrangement, Defence is allocated exclusive windows throughout the year, thereby limiting the non-Defence use of the WPA. Let me reiterate that the new framework maintains the primacy of the Woomera Prohibited Area as a national security and Defence asset.

Access by non-Defence users would be allowed in a number of ways. For new non-Defence users, total exclusion within the red zone, to up to 56 exclusion days in the green zone, pending appropriate notice. The excluded red zone comprises only about eight per cent of the WPA, while the vast majority, some 75 per cent, is in fact designated as the most accessible green zone. Importantly, the Hawk review further recommended that 'existing mining operations, environmental organisations, Indigenous groups and pastoralists with an extant presence on the WPA should continue to operate under their current access arrangements unless they choose to be administered under the proposed coexistence model'.

This bill also protects existing Woomera Prohibited Area users, including Indigenous groups, pastoralists, the Tarcoola-Darwin railway operators and owners, and existing mining operations. The practical administrative arrangement proposed to complement stakeholder coexistence is equally sensible and straightforward. This bill creates a system for the administration of access via a permit system for the different types of non-Defence users and this will require increased management and coordination by Defence. Furthermore, the bill provides that the Woomera Prohibited Area rules may provide for the introduction of a cost recovery model at some point in the future so that Defence can recover costs incurred in managing non-Defence access to the WPA. In at least the short term, the estimated $5 million annual cost associated with the new administrative arrangements will continue to be borne by Defence.

Finally, when the issue of compensation is concerned under proposed section 72TK of the Defence Act, the Commonwealth is liable to pay a reasonable amount of compensation in the event of an acquisition of property other than on just terms. This is consistent with section 51 of the Constitution. In addition, proposed section 72TL of the Defence Act provides that the rules may limit amounts payable by the Commonwealth for loss or damage in the WPA which may arise from a breach of duty of care in or during the testing of war materiel at this location. These proposed compensation stipulations are reasonable and sensible and are in keeping with longstanding Commonwealth convention and precedent. To conclude, Woomera is, and will remain, an important location that is unique in Australia—not least because of its long-standing contribution to national and regional security and stability—but Woomera is increasingly under threat by overuse by competing interest groups. This amendment bill seeks to make such access and use—and the rules, regulations and policy which underpin it—in equal parts fair, transparent and clear. Doing so will make a strong contribution to deconflicting the future use of Woomera, and make the conduct of diverse activities there inherently more productive, efficient and, above all, safe for all parties and stakeholders. On this note, I commend the Defence Legislation Amendment (Woomera Prohibited Area) Bill 2014 to this chamber.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This bill gives effect to the recommendations made in the government review of the Woomera Prohibited Area, which was conducted by Dr Allan Hawke between 2010 and 2011, to investigate how to use the area in a way that ensured that its full national security and economic potential was realised. The review recommended that a system be established to improve the coexistence of Defence and non-Defence users of the area, including miners, pastoralists and traditional owners.

The Woomera Prohibited Area is 127,000 square kilometres. It is an enormous expanse of northern South Australia. It is larger than Tasmania and is, in fact, larger than many states in Europe. As we all know, the area is incredibly important for the Australian Defence Force. It supports Defence's testing and evaluation requirements and Australia's national security needs. It is, in fact, the world's largest overland long-range weapons testing facility and has been operational since 1947.

This bill will maintain this important role for Defence. Defence will remain the primary user of the area, but it will also allow users to access this land, opening it up to numerous possible future uses. The bill will authorise the Minister for Defence, with the agreement of the Minister for Resources and Energy, to make the area rules prescribing certain matters, including defining the Woomera Prohibited Area and the zones to be demarcated within that area. It will create a permit system for access and use by non-Defence users of the Woomera Prohibited Area. It will introduce offences and penalties for entering the area without permission and for failing to comply with the condition of a permit. An infringement notice scheme and demerit points system will apply to the offence of failing to comply with a permit condition. It would allow appropriately trained and qualified Defence security officials to apply the security powers of the Defence Act 1903 to ensure the safety of all users of the area.

The history of this piece of legislation goes back to the inquiry chaired by Dr Allan Hawke. The inquiry was called for by the former Minister for Defence, Senator John Faulkner. The Hawke report examined the impediments to changing the rules regarding Woomera so that it could have dual use. The Hawke review was published on 4 February 2011 and made 65 recommendations. The Hawke review outlines a coexistence model, whereby Defence maintains primacy of the area, but non-Defence users have clarity regarding their access to a specified area of operation, incorporating both the available location and time of use. Recommendation 14 suggests the division of the area into three zones: a red zone for exclusive Defence use, an amber zone for regular Defence use and a green zone for occasional Defence use. By implementing a zonal timeshare arrangement, Defence is allocated exclusion windows throughout the year, limiting the non-Defence use of the area. This ranges from new non-Defence users' total exclusion within the red zone to up to 56 exclusion days in the green zone, pending notice.

The excluded red zone comprises about eight per cent of the area while the vast majority, some 75 per cent of the area, is designated as the most accessible, green zone. Importantly, the Hawke review recommended that existing mining operations, environmental organisations, Indigenous groups and pastoralists with an extant presence in the area should continue to operate under the current access arrangements unless they choose to be administered under the proposed coexistence model.

I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Senator Farrell, not just for this piece of legislation, but for his service to parliament, to Labor, to South Australia and to the nation. He has made a significant contribution in a range of areas, particularly in the Defence area and in the veterans area. I pay tribute to that and acknowledge his incredible achievements. I also wish him and Nimfa and his family the best for the next phase of his career.

This bill was first introduced by Labor while we were in government, and it was then referred to a committee, and so did not pass the parliament before the election. After the change of government, Senator Farrell reintroduced this bill as a private members' bill, and he worked hard to ensure it had support from the government and the opposition, as well as the South Australian government.

The introduction of the bill by Labor while in government reflected our desire to improve coexistence in the area. The coexistence model provides greater certainty of access to the area for non-defence users, including the resources sector, traditional owners and pastoralists.

The bill gives the resources sector greater confidence and certainty in an area that is highly prospective, with a potential for an estimated $35 billion of resource developments possible over the next decade. As we all know, this future resource development will be incredibly important for South Australia and South Australia's future. The closure of Holden, the postponing of the expansion of Olympic Dam, and the uncertainty over the future of South Australia's shipbuilding industry have left a cloud over South Australia's employment and economic prospects, which is why this bill is so welcome; it provides part of the solution. It will provide the opportunity for further exploration, and it will provide the opportunity for South Australia to replace declining economic interests with new ones.

A key feature of the new legislation is the new management framework, which includes a timeshare model based on exclusion zones, determined according to defence requirements. The legislation also contains provisions relating to non-defence user access rights, an access permit scheme, compensation and cost recovery arrangements, enforcement provisions and appeals processes.

Importantly, this bill recognises that the area contains significant Indigenous sites, and that Indigenous groups have native title rights and interests in most of the area. All permit holders under this legislation will be required to respect the rights of Indigenous groups and comply with all relevant laws pertaining to native title and the protection of significant Indigenous sites. Indigenous groups will retain their current access arrangements, and will not require separate permission under this proposed legislation. The coexistence scheme established by this bill will only apply to new users of the area.

I also want to acknowledge that there have been many parties involved in the development of this bill. I have mentioned, of course, my former colleague Senator Farrell, who has been a driving force, and Defence has also consulted extensively with the Department of Resources Energy and Tourism. Consultation was also undertaken with the Department of Finance and Deregulation; Treasury; Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet; Department of Families, Housing, Community Services, as it was then; Indigenous Affairs; and the Attorney-General's Department. An extensive consultation was also conducted with the South Australian Department of Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy and Defence SA. Of course, we now also have bipartisan support for this bill.

This bill is an example of how state and federal governments and opposition can work together to achieve a result. It is also a bill that demonstrates that Defence can work with other groups—with farmers, with traditional owners, with resources developers—while looking after our national interests, and I commend the bill to the chamber.

Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is my pleasure today to speak on the Defence Legislation (Woomera Prohibited Area) Amendment Bill 2014. I would like to concur with the member for Canberra on her speech. This is an important bill, and she has essentially fleshed out the reasons for this bill as a coexistence model. But I need to say at the outset it has taken some time for this bill to eventually reach this parliament, and for that reason, I want to say that Senator David Johnston, the Defence Minister, should be applauded for bringing this forward and making it a priority.

I also concur with the member for Canberra about former Senator Don Farrell. He was a driving force. As a South Australian, he should be congratulated on making sure that this bill and this inquiry did not die. I hope that Senator Farrell, as a private citizen in South Australia now, will be able to continue his interest in this particular issue by being involved and working with the South Australian government to see that both federal and state governments pursue this bill in a way that will see it come to fruition as soon as possible for the benefit of South Australians in particular. South Australia is an economy that is under some stress so it does need to be prioritised.

This bill—I am obviously going to repeat some of the things that others have said—is a result of the investigation by the Hawke review. This Woomera Prohibited Area is in the national interest, as has been explained in the Hawke review. Let us just set the context. Here I am, a Western Australian member of parliament, speaking about an area in South Australia. I note on the speakers list that there is not one South Australian speaking on this bill, which is quite strange when it is for the benefit of South Australians in particular. It is in the national interest, but in terms of a South Australian project this is massive.

We have already been told that $35 billion worth of potential mineral wealth will be uncovered in this Woomera Prohibited Area. Yet on either side—and I do not want to reflect badly on our colleagues—I find it passing strange that no South Australian member in this house is speaking on this bill today. I hope there is more interest shown when it gets to the Senate. I hope there is more interest shown when it eventually arrives at the footstep of the South Australian government because it is particularly in their interests. In putting that on the table, I want to alert people to the fact that this is a national parliament but you would have thought some South Australian would be involved.

Ever since I was a child I have been aware of this huge area of South Australia that had been a no go zone to everybody except Indigenous people. In some respects it was made a no go zone for the Indigenous people of South Australia when we had the atomic testing at Maralinga. Australia has been the place that has been used by the British in particular for testing some of their weapons. The atomic testing done at Maralinga certainly degraded the area in terms of its atomic fallout. The Montebello Islands is an area that was a no go zone for Australians for a long period. I noticed an article not so long ago which says that people are now going back to the Montebello Islands. Coral is growing back again after this area of Australia was also used for atomic testing by the British some time ago.

The half-life of uranium does not go off in 60-odd years, but it certainly makes it easier for us to re-enter those areas for short periods of time. Because of the long-term effect of the use of uranium in its weapons testing, this area is being sectioned off. I know that even the Indigenous landowners were not allowed near that degraded area, for obvious reasons. There were reports about Indigenous people who went back there and were having certain health issues—burns et cetera. That needs to be taken into context here. The green zone, as the member for Canberra pointed out, is 75 per cent of this massive area, which is now going to be made available to a whole range of people, whether it be for tourism or other land use, but particularly for mining.

We will not know what particular wealth is in this area until it has been drilled, but we do know that it is next door to the Olympic Dam area. The Olympic Dam is one of the treasure troves of minerals in Australia. Casey Gavin and Ted Mayman once wrote a book called The Mile That Midas Touched in terms of Kalgoorlie. It is a golden mile. There is Broken Hill, founded by a stockmen rounding up cattle, which turned into one of the other great mineral towns of this country. It is still going after all this time. Mount Isa is the other town. Potentially, this area of South Australia could be another one of those massive minerals deposits, which will benefit South Australians in the nation in particular.

We know that South Australia has suffered some setbacks economically. One of the setbacks during the GFC and other factors saw the Olympic Dam expansion not go ahead. That was going to be worth billions of dollars, particularly to the South Australian economy. I notice that the member for Brand is here, so I will have to be a little bit gentle in relation to my comments about the mining tax. That is because there is no doubt in our minds that that was a negative factor for any expansion of mining ventures anywhere in Australia. As much as it has been denied and counter denied, the expansion of Olympic Dam would have been a factor.

We have moved on since then and we hope to get rid of that tax in this parliament probably not this week but shortly, thanks to the changes in the Senate make-up. It is unfortunate that the Labor Party did not see the error of their ways and the error of having a mining tax that did not really collect any money and actually was a disincentive for people to be involved in this sector. Exploration was one of those areas. That is one of the downsides at the moment. This parliament needs to address it through such things as flowthrough shares or some other mechanism, because at the moment exploration in Australia has taken to a sudden halt. We have seen today on the stock exchange that Boart, a mining services company, is under pressure because there is a lack of work for them. Drilling rigs lie idle and those involved in exploration need an incentive, because the lag time between finding of resource and producing it could be decades. I understand that Century zinc is called Century zinc because it took 100 years to bring it on. What we are doing in parliament today, in terms of this Woomera Prohibited Area, is trying to bring on a resource that could take years to develop. We will only know what is there once they start doing exploration work.

Other areas that have been mentioned, and I will just reconfirm them, are that there are going to be a lot of checks and balances which allow people to access this area. There will be penalties for those who access the area without permission, but the permission will be made far easier to access. The area contains recognised traditional owners, recognised areas for traditional owners and significant Indigenous sites. Under the bill, permit holders who gain access to the Woomera Prohibited Area will be required to protect these sites and comply with all relevant native title and Aboriginal heritage laws. Indigenous groups with current statutory access rights expressly retain these rights. They will not need to apply for access permission under this legislation, which does not disturb existing rights.

Section 400 is part of Maralinga Tjarutja lands was the site of atomic testing, as I said before, in the fifties and the sixties. In other words, access to the traditional owners—the Maralinga Tjarutja people—will not only be maintained but also will be enhanced. As I said, Defence has made it quite clear that the access through this area will come under the Minister for Defence and his department. They will take the necessary steps to excise section 400. Once completed, it will no longer be subject to the access restrictions that have applied under Defence Force Regulations 1952.

There is no point in repeating a whole lot of material that has been said by others. It gives a very good coexistence model. This is jointly sponsored; it is a bipartisan piece of legislation that, as I have said, will enhance not only the South Australian people and Australian economy but will protect the rights of land owners. There will be a compensation regime in place for other land users. It will give miners greater surety to go in and spend the massive number of dollars to do exploration, which will be in the national interest.

As I said before the member for Grey came in and I will say it again, because the composure of this chamber has not changed, I find it passing strange that there is no South Australian here speaking on this bill. You would have thought that this was something exciting for those in South Australia. However, I understand that the member the Brand was born in South Australia, so there is some link there. It is a long bow, but I congratulate all those that are involved in supporting this bill and I recommend the bill the House.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was going to add to the member for Canning that my parents met in Woomera. My grandfather was in the army and my father was there working at Maralinga.

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am tempted to suggest that if you parents met at Woomera, that must have been on the occasion that the various rockets were taking off and sparks were flying through the air!

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is exactly right!

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the member for Canning reflects, I did grow up at Whyalla. I still remember evenings when we would go out, look into the horizon and know that a Skylark rocket was taking off in the 1960s. It was the original testing bed for those British-Australian cooperative rocketry research programs through the 1960s and 1970s. I also recall the great importance of the original discovery in the early 1970s of the Olympic Dam uranium find, which is one of the great finds that demonstrate the quality of Australian geophysical survey work and also shows the massive contribution to our economy—and in particular the South Australian economy—of that wonderful and innovative enterprise of Western Mining, which was under the leadership of Arvi Parbo. It found resources in remote parts of our country and helped build the magnificent, robust, reliable and innovative resources economy that we have today.

This piece of legislation, which opens the Woomera Prohibited Area for further minerals exploration and then potentially exploitation, is particularly important. It is particularly important in Adelaide but it is important to our economy, as the mineralisation that we know exists through the Gawler Craton—which is expressed at what we now know as Roxby Downs, which is sometimes referred to as Olympic Dam—and those finds like the Carrapateena discovery in 2006 are all significant finds. They are all believed to be richly embedded in a uranium environment and all potentially highly productive for the South Australian economy and for our national economy.

This legislation saw its roots in a substantial piece of work commissioned by my predecessor, Martin Ferguson, and by the former Minister for Defence, Stephen Smith, in cooperation with the South Australian government. If I can just advise, I will speak for a short period of time to allow the member for Grey to speak on his own backyard. The work which had been done cooperatively and jointly in order to best utilise the highly prospective ground that formed the WPA is work that saw collaboration between the Department of Defence, the Department of Finance and the then Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism.

It is unfortunate that the final passage of that legislation through the Senate did not take place in the previous parliament. As we have been learning in recent weeks, and as I fear we will discover over the course of the next couple of years, the Senate can be a difficult place. This legislation was deliberately held up in the Senate in the previous parliament for no good purpose. We now see it here today and it is the fervent desire of the opposition to see this legislation enacted and receive royal assent as soon as possible in order for the best framework to be put in place cooperatively with the Department of Defence, the South Australian government, traditional owners and communities in this area of northern South Australia so that its mineral potential can be realised, so that that mineral potential can be understood and so that future companies can make decisions to extract those minerals and export them through the ports of South Australia.

It is highly likely that the minerals that will be discovered in this area will be metalliferous, it is highly likely that there will be uranium based metals, it is highly likely that there will be a lot of copper and it is a near certainty that there will be a lot of iron ore. But what is also certain is that the importance of this economic development to South Australia underwrites future generations of South Australians in employment and in wealth generation. So I commend this bill to the House. The opposition wholeheartedly supports this bill.

I will conclude by making one final point. All Australians were disappointed in 2012 when BHP announced that it would not be progressing with its then scheduled expansion of Roxby Downs. It was argued at the time that the overheated construction economy and the Japanese response to Fukushima had reduced the spot price of uranium to very low levels—and the uranium price today is less than half of what it was in those days of 2012. The reasons that were given were the high cap ex, the decisions in Japan on nuclear fuels demand and the overheated resource economy. It is our fervent hope that, at a time when the resources construction economy has substantially cooled, it will be possible to seek an expansion of Roxby Downs, further extraction of copper and uranium ores, further employment and further wealth creation. The Woomera Prohibited Area, the WPA, being brought into the exploration environment is a good thing for South Australia and a good thing for our nation. I commend this bill to the House.

Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Brand for his comments and welcome the fact that this bill, the Defence Legislation Amendment (Woomera Prohibited Area) Bill 2014, has bipartisanship support. I would suggest that perhaps the member for Brand might read Senator Fawcett's speech on the hitches to the progress of this bill in the Senate. I do not think you will find they were of a partisan nature; in fact, it was more about Senate mechanisms than about any particular intent to hold this legislation up—because you are right, Member for Brand, this is very important for South Australia.

Unfortunately, South Australia leads the charge as the worst-performing state economically in the Commonwealth at the moment. As a South Australian, that is a great concern to me. I remember well when South Australia housed a number of the top 20 companies in Australia that had their headquarters in South Australia. There was a time when South Australia was looked to for innovation and leadership throughout the nation. Unfortunately, our population growth has declined—and, in fact, in 2004 we lost another federal electorate. We went from 12 to 11. Unless population predictions change, we will lose another one in the next 15 years. That is not because our population is not growing; it is just not growing as fast as the rest of Australia.

You have to ask yourself why this is. Largely, we had industry based around manufacturing, where it is increasingly difficult for us to compete around the world—and when I say 'us' I mean Australia generally—and we relied on our agricultural products. Our agricultural industries are going well and still expanding and I think they offer great opportunity for the future. But it is in the mineral industries where South Australia, until relatively recent times, remained an unknown quantity. The geologists tell us now that the bulk of South Australia is covered by about 500 feet of sand and that has made it rather difficult to see what lies below. With the advent of magnetic surveys and other modern mineral detection methods we have found that in fact South Australia has a large number of very important resources. Quite often they are difficult to mine and expensive to get to because we have that overburden. The member for Brand mentioned the shelving of the expansion at Roxby Downs as an example of the impact that has had on South Australia and the disappointment it has caused, and that is true. Part of the reason for that is we have the best part of a kilometre of dirt to shift before we get to the ore body at Roxby Downs and that makes it a very expensive operation.

Roxby Downs is adjacent to the Woomera Prohibited Area—it is very close indeed. All the geologists believe there will be another Roxby Downs within the confines of the Woomera Prohibited Area. Already we have successfully mined Prominent Hill and three other iron ore mines with a significant upgrade at the moment of Southern Iron's, or Arrium's, northern province. About six million tonnes a year is currently being mined there and shifted by rail to Whyalla, where it is placed on barges and taken out to Cape-size vessels, adding to the six million tonnes that Arrium currently mines out of the Middleback Ranges.

I was very pleased when Dr Allan Hawke came to me, as the local member for the Woomera area, about two years ago and asked my advice on how we should open up this area for exploration and mining. I had met him and spoken to him about the review. He was very thankful that I was able to bring to the table, for the first time, the concerns and operations of the local pastoralists. We think about mining and sometimes forget about the people who are already making a living out of the land. In fact, he said some of the best advice he had came from the local pastoralists, who were able to tell him things about the land usage that others had not. So I was very pleased to be able to get their side of the equation into the argument.

The review sets up three different areas, which I think is a civilised and responsible way to give us an opportunity to open up new wealth for South Australia. As I said, we certainly need them. It seems that Defence has reached a very comfortable position in this area. There will, of course, be ongoing negotiation between those that choose to first explore the resource and then mine the resource, but we have a working paper from which we can launch ourselves forward. I hope it is going to lead definitely to more iron ore, because this is one of the keys to South Australia's future. I have mentioned the Arrium barging operation at Whyalla, but what we really need in South Australia is a genuine deep-sea port and we do not have one. Currently there is a large proposal on the Eyre Peninsula which has the ability to produce 20 million tonnes of ore a year and there is a proposal to build a port there. The rail system already runs past the Woomera region and the Braemar region, which is back up towards Broken Hill, all on the standard rail. If we can hook that back down to a new port development on the southern Eyre Peninsula we may have an iron ore industry in South Australia capable of producing between 60 million and 80 million tonnes a year. That is not the Pilbara, but let me tell you it is a pretty seriously big pile of iron ore.

The opening up of the Woomera area actually feeds into that greater possibility for South Australia. As I said right at opening, it is difficult to see where South Australia is going to expand its economy if it is not going to come from the resources sector. Certainly we will continue to grow our aquaculture and agricultural sectors and we will learn to make more money out of what we already do. In fact, we will be able to downstream process and further add value to our agricultural products, but there is no doubt that the resources sector will play a very important part in South Australia's future. In my belief, the Woomera Prohibited Area will play a very important part within that.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In summing up the debate on the Defence Legislation Amendment (Woomera Prohibited Area) Bill 2014 I thank the members for their contributions today, especially the member for Grey—the only South Australian to have spoken here today about one of the major areas for expansion of the South Australian economy. It is great to see South Australia being so ably represented by my good friend and colleague the member for Grey, Rowan Ramsay.

The Defence Legislation Amendment (Woomera Prohibited Area) Bill 2014 gives effect to the recommendations of the Hawke review. The aim of course was to investigate the best use of the world's greatest rocket range in the national interest and how two parties, defence and non-defence users, can coexist. I think the bill has arrived at a sensible, negotiated outcome. It is an outcome where defence can continue to operate a rocket range longer than the British Isles—the biggest one in the world—in support of the work that we do.

This legislation recognises existing users and it preserves existing users' right, which is important for those who already have a stake in the area. It establishes a framework for those non-defence users to actually come within the WPA and gives a level of certainty over what we in defence will do and how the non-defence users can work within that so that they can account for sensibly in a commercial manner the restrictions that will be provided—and the restrictions are small and they are not onerous. It allows users to make sensible commercial decisions with assurance of when we will ask them to leave the area—because, frankly, defence is using it to test weapons. Lastly, it protects the safety of all users in the WPA and ensures that the appropriate national security protections for an area that are used to defence capability are indeed in place.

It is a good, negotiated outcome between defence and non-defence users. I think it will be good for South Australia. I thank the member for Grey for his astute comments in terms of the South Australian economy and his continual work in improving the South Australian economy and what it is doing. I hope this bill will go some way to assist him with the great task that he has ahead. I therefore commend the bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment.