Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am delighted to speak to this motion from the member for Leichardt. The member for Leichardt and I have been on a journey together to protect the dugongs and turtles of the Great Barrier Reef. We have been inspired by the work of people such as Colin Riddell and Rupert Imhoff, and there are many others within the traditional community with whom I have spoken who have taken strong and courageous steps. They have been very impressive. The Turtle and Dugong Task Force, led by Larissa Hale, has been an exemplar in taking steps forward. The Indigenous Advisory Committee, led by Melissa George, has been an exemplar in taking steps forward for protecting dugongs and turtles within the reef area.

Let me begin with a statement of what we are doing on the dugong and turtle front, and then turn to the broader issues with regard to the Great Barrier Reef. In relation to dugongs and turtles: we have a $5 million Dugong and Turtle Protection Plan, something which fills a gap which we inherited. That includes $2 million for an Australian Crime Commission investigation into poaching that is underway. It brings the full force of the law with an investigation at the highest level. Secondly, there is $2 million for specialised Indigenous ranger programs for turtle and dugong protection. This is not just training rangers directly. It is training the trainers as well, so as to expand the number of capable, qualified Indigenous rangers who are committed to action and who are then going to be backed with the support of the law, of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority and of the Queensland government in fearlessly seeking out those who misuse the good name of traditional owners. Many traditional owners have come to me and said that they have been horrified that poaching has been done in their name. They are supportive. They are strong. They are clear that this poaching and transportation of meat is completely unacceptable.

We have also provided $300,000 for expanding the role of the Cairns and Fitzroy Turtle Rehabilitation Centre. This money has been provided. And in relation to marine debris clean-up, there is a total of $700,000. We are currently working with the community, but what I want to see most of all is money allocated to ensure that where there are ghost nets and marine debris that there is physical work in the ocean to protect our dugongs and our turtles from these swirling nets of death.

More than that, we have legislation before the Senate to triple the penalties for the taking of dugongs and turtles illegally—for that poaching.

I say thank you to the Greens, who have been supportive of this, and I would urge the ALP not to filibuster but to work with us to ensure that these measures are passed. We have seen them filibuster in the past, which was simply extraordinary. I can only say that that must have been a disconnect between the senior leadership and the Senators on the floor.

I now turn to the reef more broadly. We have done things which no other government has ever done. We have worked with the previous Queensland government—hopefully still current Queensland government, but events on the ground will determine that. They have put forward a proposal for the Abbot Point spoil—which was going into the water under the previous state and federal Labor government—to go on land. We have ended the fact—

Mr Albanese interjecting—

No, it is a fact. You attended. The member for Grayndler attended Abbot Point and said that it was one of the prime industrial sites in Australia. I have that quote and I am happy to table it.

Mr Albanese interjecting—

That was your plan, my friend.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My point of order is that he should withdraw. I never, ever supported it. He cannot point to any comment supporting dredge spoil—

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Grayndler, I heard you use an unparliamentary phrase that I could ask you to withdraw. Please sit down. There is no point of order. Please resume your seat, Member for Grayndler.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Very clearly, we have ended the five projects which we inherited which would have had large-scale dredge disposal in the marine park and we are moving legal force, regulation, to ban dredge disposal in the marine park forever. (Time expired)

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Great Barrier Reef is not just an environmental asset; it is important to our economy as a tourism asset as well. It is already worth some $5.7 billion to the Australian economy, resulting in the direct employment of some 65,000 people, including many Indigenous Australians. There are 1.6 million visitors per year, and it is a key drawcard for our major markets in China, India and Malaysia. Tourism is the ultimate sustainable industry and has been nominated by Deloitte as a key driver of jobs and prosperity over the next 20 years.

Voters in the Queensland election sent a very clear message up and down the coast to save the Great Barrier Reef. The LNP know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Queensland Labor listened and committed important funding—$100 million for the reef package to improve water quality and $40 million for a tourism plan to lift demand and create jobs. Campbell Newman just had a plan to reannounce infrastructure funding for tourism roads. There was no reef plan for the future.

The member for Leichhardt's motion is important but it cannot stand alone. Climate change is of course amongst the biggest threats to the Great Barrier Reef, and we must address this in conjunction with other measures, which has been made very clear. The government's position is very clear. President Obama spoke in Queensland and said on 15 November last year:

The incredible natural glory of the Great Barrier Reef is threatened … I want to come back and I want my daughters to be able to come back and I want them to be able to bring their daughters or sons to visit. And I want that there 50 years from now.

Did the current federal government acknowledge that praise for the pristine Great Barrier Reef? No. They condemned President Obama's statements as an attack on our national sovereignty—showing how backward they are. This reaction from the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the trade minister shows that they simply just do not get it. It does not matter who is in charge of the LNP; only Labor is committed to a strong environmental policy that recognises that our natural environment is not only important for the quality of our life but also a major driver of economic activity.

Of course, the current government have cut all domestic tourism funding. They argue that domestic tourism funding is the business just of state governments. That particularly hurts Queensland. They have of course cancelled Australia's membership of the United Nations World Tourism Organization—a minimal fee for involvement on the global stage. Once again we saw the isolationism that led those opposite to oppose the ratification of the Kyoto protocol and the engagement in those international forums for so long.

Only Labor governments will protect the reef. We will take real action on climate change, not the absurd response that we have seen from those opposite, who either support the policy that Malcolm Turnbull denigrated so effectively or, as Malcolm Turnbull himself has done, backflip on their own views in order to try and win votes for the ongoing leadership battle that is occurring in those opposite.

As tourism shadow minister, I, with Mark Butler, announced—in November last year that Labor would put a ban on dredge spoil dumping in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage area and that we would continue our work investing in the reef. The former federal Labor government invested $200 million in Reef Rescue—cut by those opposite. That, together with Queensland Labor's commitment, was one of the reasons that the LNP were rejected so resoundingly in the Queensland election and why Australian voters are continuing to reject the Abbott government.

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no doubt that the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is an icon for everyone, a tourist top-of-the-list visit for anyone, both Australian and from overseas, but I want to highlight the important issue of balancing economy, environment and the native title rights of Indigenous land and sea holders to hunt in those areas. That has always caused some confusion to Australians, who regard it as pre-eminent above all things that endangered species should be protected, but we have acknowledged the rights of native title holders in those areas to hunt, usually with a combination of traditional and non-traditional means.

My first interest in this area was in 2005, when I lobbied the then coalition environment minister that they should not be using contemporary and modern-day tools for these purposes and that, if they were truly hunting traditionally, it should be done with traditional tools. There are of course two sides to that debate because we have to look at the humanity and the compassion of using traditional tools, sometimes leading to the injuring of animals rather than a quick kill that is achieved with modern-day equipment. We also have the issue of being able to pursue animals using motorised vessels until they are exhausted, which is also a concern to many.

That is only a piece of subtext to the Environment Legislation Amendment Bill 2013, which increases the penalties for those who do not have those exemptions under the EPBC Act. Those are the people who are engaged in killing, poaching and transportation, often for trade or commercial purposes. No-one in Australia would support our most valued dugongs and turtles being subject to such a fate, so that bill is very simple. It is supported, I think, by everyone that the killing, injuring, taking, transporting, moving, poaching or keeping of any of these products of turtle or dugong should be not only prohibited but dealt with by tough penalties.

Of course, we have had the Queensland election, where the signal was also very, very clear from voters that, above all else, they want to take an absolutely precautionary principle approach to the Great Barrier Reef and take no chances. For any Queensland government, in balancing up port expansion, the economy and local jobs with an absolute, no-exceptions protection of the Great Barrier Reef, both the marine park area and the conservation region around it, we have to be making sure that we take no chances with dredging.

The first thing that I want to see is those limits to dredging and very careful disposal of what is dredged, because obviously, for larger and larger vessels to access our major ports, there is going to be an element of that. We need to be constantly monitoring water quality and ensuring that those improvements are achieved, and I have no doubt that that is occurring. We need better strategic planning. With port development, we need to be looking for the least impact, the least footprint, the least ecological and hydrological impact on our local foreshores as possible, and of course we need to be reinvesting some of the proceeds of a strong economy into protecting the reef.

That all makes common sense. That is part of both the coalition and the state LNP's approach, and I want to see that that is not in any way imperilled if there is to be a change of government when government in Queensland is decided.

Where we go from here is quite simple. We respect the role of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to make independent assessments of how we are going on the Great Barrier Reef. Not only is it one of the greatest natural wonders of the world, it is also probably the best protected. No place on the planet has more environmental investment in keeping it in its pristine condition than the Great Barrier Reef. On any technical appraisal of the work that we have done here in Australia we can make a very strong case internationally that we are doing the right thing for our park and that its world heritage status should not be considered to be in danger.

We have got an outlook report and we have the state party report, which importantly was done independently, as I have said, by the marine park authority. Those contributions make a very strong case for us to be able to fend off a number of environmental groups that are working very hard to have that endangered status supported internationally. What we can do with these reports is show (a) that we are doing more than anywhere else in the world, (b) that we are investing more money than anywhere else in the world to look after this pristine asset, (c) that we are doing the monitoring that will give us the early warning if anything is going wrong, and (d) that we truly, unlike anywhere else in the world, can perfectly balance the needs of a local economy in job creation and the exploitation of our natural resources for the benefits of Australia together with protecting the Great Barrier Reef.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very grateful to speak on this motion put forward by the member for Leichhardt. I note some of the contribution from the member for Bowman, who was able to rope in the election results from Queensland last Saturday, which is quite amazing because I can go back three years to the last state election, an election in the lead up to which former Premier Newman gave an assurance to the Australian Conservation Foundation that the environment had nothing to fear under an LNP government. That was publicised far and wide. Then on the Sunday, the day after the election where the Liberal National Party was swept into power with the biggest electoral majority in the history of the Westminster system, the very next day, the former Deputy Premier, Jeff Seeney, the member for Callide, said, 'By the way, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park needs to be smaller.' Fair dinkum, he said that the next day, the day after the election.

So the member for Bowman did get something right: the people of Queensland rejected his party's approach to the environment and their betrayal of the Great Barrier Reef. The protection of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is of concern not only to the people of Queensland, not only to the people of my electorate, but all across Australia and all across the globe because the reef has that international status because it is an international icon—the largest living organism—and as elected representatives we must work to protect this natural asset. I say that not just because I am married to someone from Cairns and I do spend my holidays, when I can, not only up with her in-laws but also in one of the greatest places in the world: Cairns and the area abutting the Great Barrier Reef.

This current government, sadly, is intent on destroying these assets and has been a bit of an embarrassment on the world stage when it comes to responding to climate change and the impacts that will have on the Great Barrier Reef. The Great Barrier Reef is known to divers throughout the world and to tourism operators as the largest coral reef in the world. It stretches from the tip of Cape York Peninsula, nudging Papua New Guinea, to just north of Fraser Island, covering some 347,000 square kilometres. As people know, Queensland is a lure for tourists from all around Australia and the world who want to see the Great Barrier Reef, and it is a great boon to our economy, obviously. It is great for the Queensland economy and great for the Australian economy. At least 65,000 Australians owe their livelihoods to the reef, and it generates around $6 billion in economic activity every year. It is not something that is dug out of the ground, never to be seen again. It is an environmental and economic resource that can generate income year after year if we look after it.

The science of marine sanctuaries is actually quite settled. They are critical to restoring the abundance and diversity of marine life and to preserving the health of our oceans. The Labor Party is committed to the sustainable management of Australia's marine resources and we are a strong, proud defender and manager of these oceans and those who use them.

This motion from the member for Leichhardt is very timely following the state election in Queensland, where a Liberal government had actually shown by its actions—not by its last-minute words but by its actions—that it was determined to destroy the reef through dredge spoiling. And what did the people of Queensland say? They said, 'See you later—sayonara.'

When it comes to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, those opposite and I have very different views on how to protect this World Heritage site for future generations. We can see some desperate lobbying from Minister Hunt, trying to conceal the true facts about how much in danger the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is. But the reality will come out and UNESCO will give a clear ruling on the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, and that will be a shameful legacy to hang around Prime Minister Abbott, the current Prime Minister. If we do not do what we can to protect the Great Barrier Reef for our future generations, our names will be blackened in the history books, and I do not want to be associated with that shameful legacy.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of this motion by the member for Leichhardt, and I thank him for bringing it to the attention of the House. There is no disputing that the Great Barrier Reef is a natural wonder of the world and deserves the best possible protection. The reef brings two million tourists a year to Australia from all around the globe. It supports 69,000 jobs and generates $5.6 billion in revenue for Queensland and Australia. Anybody who suggests, therefore, that the government is not serious about protecting the reef is, quite frankly, delusional.

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is managed using a zonal system. The whole of the park—all 344,400 square kilometres, an area larger than Victoria and Tasmania combined—is divided into one of seven zones from general use to preservation. The zoning of a particular area determines the type of activities permitted in that area. For example, trawl fishing is only allowed in the general use zone. I believe this is part of the perceived problem that the Greens have with the way the park is managed. The general use zone covers approximately 95 per cent of the park, and the Greens and their alliance partners think that it should be less. The zones for the marine park were based on the application of systemic conservation techniques—science. Yet those opposite say that the science is wrong and that they know better. This is such an extraordinary irony: Labor and the Greens, of all people, who extol science when it suits them, rejecting it when it does not. The zones protect the most delicate areas of the reef from damage by commercial and recreational activities. They were selected for special protection by the science as the most vital parts of the reef. These areas are the breeding and spawning grounds, nursery areas and refuges for endangered species, all of which help to boost the number of species on the reef and the abundance of fish.

The Queensland LNP government has a proud history of protecting the reef. The LNP government immediately acted to cut the Bligh Labor government's plan to dump 38 million tonnes of dredge spoil in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park by 90 per cent and developed a better plan to dispose of dredge material on land. The UNESCO World Heritage Committee has publicly recognised the significant work and progress made by the Queensland government in managing and protecting the Great Barrier Reef. The Newman LNP government introduced the toughest laws ever to protect the Great Barrier Reef, increasing penalties for serious environmental harm to the reef to over $3.5 million in fines or five years in jail.

What did Labor do? Labor had a chance to support these laws but voted against them. The Queensland LNP's reef protection package provided more than $155 million for practical reef initiatives, including new funding of $17.1 million for the Great Barrier Reef Foundation's eReefs project and increased vessel tracking to protect our reef. What we have in those opposite are Great Barrier Reef deniers—those who fail to accept the science and think they know better. They fail to look at the dreadful record of their own party and cannot recognise the good management when it is presented to them. Their status as Great Barrier Reef deniers is settled, because they have delayed the Environment Legislation Amendment Bill 2013, which would triple the penalties for those people poaching turtles and dugongs on the reef. As usual, they offer no actual solution; they just sit back and criticise everyone else. While those opposite harp and complain, they are proving themselves yet again to be the problem and not the solution. They are continuing to block the budget measures even on their own savings bill, and they refuse to pass the environment legislation so they can continue to blame others.

The Labor opposition's record of stewardship of the reef is a disgrace. How is it that the reef has deteriorated when Labor were in government in Queensland for the vast majority of the last 23 years if they are such good stewards? The simple answer is that they were not and they neglected the reef. It is time for them to get out of the way of those who want to take positive, direct action. I thank the member for Leichhardt for his motion and I commend the motion to the House.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Great Barrier Reef is the largest coral reef ecosystem in the world. It is one of the world's most unique and biologically diverse ecosystems, of which Australia is the international custodian. As an environmental asset it is priceless. Yet regrettably, like so many other environmental assets around the world, its preservation is being jeopardised because of the influence of big business and because of short-term economic gains all too often driving government policies.

In 1975 the reef was declared a marine park, and in 1981 the reef was placed on the World Heritage List, in recognition of the reef's unique status and the serious risks it faced. Since then, even with all of the protective actions taken, the health of the reef continues to deteriorate. The combined effects of human activity and climate change are taking their toll. Yet the Abbott government and the ousted Queensland Newman government remain in denial, pretending that all is well, boasting about their commitments to the reef and how they are protecting it, and yet fiercely opposing the UNESCO listing of the reef as being 'in danger'. Indeed, the Abbott government is furiously lobbying to ensure that the 'in danger' listing is not applied to the Great Barrier Reef by UNESCO, because the Abbott government does not want any additional barriers placed in the way of proponents of large-scale developments in the reef area. On 30 January 2015, Environment Minister Greg Hunt wrote to Kishore Rao, Director of the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO, stating:

… Australia firmly believes that the property does not warrant inclusion on the list of World Heritage properties in danger.

Minister Hunt may speak for the Australian government, but he does not speak for all Australians, many of whom simply do not agree with him, nor are his conclusions supported by many environmental experts. The minister draws on a report prepared for him jointly by his own environment department and by the Australian and Queensland government agencies prior to the recent Queensland state election. My view is that the Newman government's woeful environmental track record significantly contributed to the demise of the Newman government in the recent Queensland elections. Quite simply, if the reef were not in danger, there would not be any need to spend a purported $2 billion over the next decade to protect it, as Minister Hunt claims that his government will be doing. Even the government's own assessment shows that the reef is in danger. The state party report says:

… the property continued to face a number of significant pressures. It concluded that the overall outlook for the Reef is poor, has worsened since 2009, and is expected to further deteriorate in the future; and that greater reductions of all threats at all levels—Reef-wide, regional and local—are required to prevent the projected declines in the Reef and to improve its capacity to recover.

Simultaneously, we see the Abbott government supporting further industrialisation of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park coastline, which, even with all the pretentious safeguards, can only add to the risk and possibly the ultimate demise of the reef. Warming ocean waters and ocean acidification, combined with cyclones and hurricanes, are compounding the risk to what is already a very fragile ecosystem. Adding more shipping, dredging and ports to the area, even with the best-laid-out management plans, can only be bad for this unique environmental asset.

My understanding is that currently over 4,000 bulk carriers pass through the Great Barrier Reef each year and under future plans the number could increase to 7,000 ships per year. More ships mean increased risks because, regrettably, shipping accidents do occur—not to mention water disturbance that obviously occurs. The risks become even greater as larger ships are used.

The motion is nothing but an attempt by the member for Leichhardt to portray the Abbott and former Queensland LNP governments of being proactive in protecting the Reef when, simultaneously, those governments are allowing the greatest risk to the Great Barrier Reef to become worse. Interestingly, the motion makes no mention of the in danger listing nor the Abbott government's attempts to block the listing. Right now what the Australian people see as the pressing issue—and they will not be fooled or sidetracked by other matters—is ensuring that the Reef is listed as in danger as is proposed. I understand that later on this year UNESCO will be considering the in danger listing.

The Great Barrier Reef, as other speakers have pointed out, covers 348,000 square kilometres— (Time expired)

Debate adjourned.