Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the amendments be agreed to.

When Labor came to government, we promised to protect more of what's precious, restore more of what's damaged and manage nature better for our children and our grandchildren. Today the House has the chance to pass two more crucial environmental reforms. Firstly, this legislation establishes a new nature repair market in Australia, the first of its kind in the world. It is legislation that will encourage good environmental work, making it easier for businesses, philanthropists and other groups to invest in projects that protect and restore nature. Crucially, it will guard against the threat of greenwashing. This is not to replace government effort but to reinforce it. This means landholders, farmers and First Nations groups will be paid to improve nature on their properties. It will guarantee that the money invested does what it intends to do: restore habitats, improve our soil, eradicate feral species, protect our beaches and make our land more resilient to droughts and floods. The market will be strictly monitored by the Clean Energy Regulator to ensure full transparency and integrity in the system. This is part of Labor's mission to build a nature-positive Australia. We need effective national laws, we need active government investment and, wherever possible, we need the support of private money and philanthropists.

Secondly, the Nature Repair Market (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2023, with its amendments, will update the water trigger in our national environmental laws so that new unconventional gas projects will be assessed for their impact on water resources. Labor promised this change before the election and today we are delivering it. It's a commonsense reform providing businesses with certainty and the community with confidence that water resources are properly regulated and protected.

I want to take a moment to thank the member for Lingiari. The member for Lingiari has fought passionately for this change for her community since not just her election to this place but long before. I'd also like to acknowledge the member for Mackellar. The member for Mackellar introduced a private member's bill on this subject earlier this year. Three expert reports over five years have recommended making this change. The water trigger already applies to coal seam gas, but now it will include types of unconventional gas such as shale gas and tight gas. Most new projects will be unaffected by the change as coal seam gas production is already covered by the existing water trigger and the changes do not apply to conventional gas production. Existing gas projects that are in production and have already been approved are also unaffected by this update. Projects regulated by NOPSEMA, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority, are also unaffected by this update. This will provide certainty for business and ensure continuity of gas supply.

Last week we passed our bill to rescue the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, and today we are, I hope, passing two more important pieces of environmental protection. I encourage all members of this House to support the bill and deliver more environmental protection in nine days than the previous government did in nine years.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendments be agreed to. For the benefit of the members of the House, I'm going to call the Leader of the Nationals. I understand he has amendments to these amendments. Under the standing orders, this is the time to move amendments to the Senate amendments. Moving forward, so all members understand the process—

The member for Wannon will cease interjecting.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order! The Leader of The Nationals definitely has the call.

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) and (2), circulated in my name, to Senate amendment (3) together:

(1) Senate amendment (3) (proposed new definition of unconventional gas development in section 528 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999), omit the definition, substitute:

unconventional gas development means any activity involving unconventional gas production or carbon sequestration that has, or is likely to have, a significant impact on water resources (including any impacts of associated salt production and/or salinity):

(a) in its own right; or

(b) when considered with other developments, whether past, present or reasonably foreseeable developments.

(2) Senate amendment (3) (proposed new definition of unconventional gas production in section 528 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999), omit the definition, substitute:

unconventional gas production or carbon sequestration means extraction, recovery, injection, or intentional release, (whether by drilling, hydraulic fracturing or other means) of methane or carbon dioxide from or into:

(a) coal seams or beds; or

(b) layers of shale rock; or

(c) tight gas reservoirs; or

(d) aquifers.

The coalition requests that it make a simple amendment to the amendments that it moved as a result of the bill passing through the Senate yesterday—the one around carbon sequestration. There was an amendment to the EPBC Act—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of The Nationals will pause. The minister for infrastructure and the member for Wannon will not be interjecting. No-one will interject during this process—trust me. The Leader of The Nationals has the call and will be heard in silence.

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, thank you. The Senate made amendments to the Nature Repair Market Bill 2023 that addressed the EPBC and gas extraction. The Nationals and the Liberals believe that this is an opportune time to also pursue an opportunity to look at carbon capture, storage and sequestration, particularly on shore. At the moment, there is a development in my own electorate where a carbon capture and storage project will collect carbon from a coal-fired power station and inject it into the Precipice. That goes through the Great Artesian Basin, the biggest potable water source for this country. It services stock and domestic use right across the Great Artesian Basin.

We obviously support carbon capture and storage, but it has to be in the appropriate place. The technology is emerging, and we support that technology, but it has to be done at an appropriate place where we have confidence in the approvals process. At the moment, the Queensland government will be the ones that will make that determination, and what we feel is that this is a national environmental asset that should also trigger the water trigger under the EPBC Act to ensure that proper approval processes are taking place and there is oversight by all levels of government, to give confidence to those primary producers and to our communities who rely on the Great Artesian Basin for their water supply. This is a commonsense solution to what is an emerging problem in understanding the science and the technology, which we do believe we should invest in. We don't walk away from the fact that carbon capture and storage will play a very important part in reducing our emissions, and we should continue to make those investments, as the Biden administration has, with over $1.2 billion worth of investment in reducing US emissions. But with that comes a responsibility for us as legislators to protect our environment, our way of life and Australian agriculture.

Appreciating the size of the Great Artesian Basin, the sheer magnitude of the area which it covers and the reliance on it by agriculture and our communities means that it is beholden on us, not just for now but for the future, to protect these communities and to protect the environment for future generations. As the technology and science evolve, the opportunity for these companies to make these investments will continue to provide itself there. But, until that's proven on technology that is new to the world, particularly in this form in this model that is being proposed in south-west Queensland, it poses too many risks. As legislators, we should propose the precautionary principle to make sure that we make a sensible decision here in this parliament to protect our environment, protect these communities and make sure that we work with the science and the technology at a methodical pace that gives everyone confidence. This is the opportunity for this parliament today to give that confidence and greater investment confidence for carbon capture storage into the future, and to do that in harmony with Australian agriculture, our environment and particularly our communities.

We believe that this is a sensible amendment that posed itself as an opportunity when there was an amendment in the Senate to the EPBC Act. We believe that acting responsibly in understanding the impact on the Great Artesian Basin and making sure that this legislation would give that protection of another lens of oversight would give confidence to our regional communities not just in my electorate but across the Great Artesian Basin that could be impacted by this. We think this is a sensible amendment that gives everyone confidence to move forward, that gives approval-process certainty and that gives the community certainty. I ask the House to accept this amendment as a commonsense approach to protecting our environment and nature.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the Leader of the Nationals for moving this amendment to the Nature Repair Market (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2023. I really appreciate his concerns about the Great Artesian Basin. He is absolutely right in saying that this is a vital water resource for Australia and that it must be protected. I thank him for the intent of the amendment that he has moved.

Given that the government have only just received notice of the amendment, we're not in a position to support it today, but I would say that we are very keen to work with the Leader of the Nationals on the intent of his amendment. Certainly, as we advance our reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act next year, I would be very pleased to work with him on making sure that we can give these assurances for the Great Artesian Basin, and more generally for the impact that carbon capture and storage would have on water resources.

The intent behind expanding the water trigger, as we have done, is to ensure that new unconventional gas projects will be assessed on their impact on water resources. That has been a longstanding commitment of our government, and it's a very commonsense reform. It makes sure that coal seam gas is covered by the water trigger. Other types of unconventional gas were not really contemplated when the original water trigger was written. We're expanding the water trigger to cover those other types of unconventional gas. This has been recommended in a number of inquiries: the Northern Territory government's Pepper scientific inquiry, the 2018 Senate inquiry into water use by the extractive industry and the Senate inquiry into oil and gas exploration and production in the Beetaloo basin. All of these recommend that the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act water trigger be expanded to unconventional gas.

As I say to the member for Maranoa, while we're not in a position to support this amendment today, I would be very happy to work with him next year as we further develop our EPBC reforms. That will give us the opportunity to consider the science and to work more broadly with industries, farmers and other affected people—the water users of the Great Artesian Basin—and make sure that we get any details of further amendments correct.

Colin Boyce (Flynn, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make a contribution on the Nature Repair Market (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2023 and our further amendments that have been circulated. What we're proposing to do here is include 'carbon sequestration' in the unconventional gas development definition, and to add 'carbon dioxide into water aquifers' to give some protection around Australia's greatest underground water assets. These include the Great Artesian Basin.

I've just heard the minister very piously say that she is protecting properly the water assets of Australia. Now, the minister knows very well that the current EPBC Act offers no protection whatsoever to the waters of the Great Artesian Basin in respect of carbon sequestration. That is because it is not deemed to be a coalmine or a gas operation. The minister knows this very well.

As David Littleproud, the member for Maranoa, has pointed out, in Central Queensland at the moment there is a proposal to possibly pump hundreds of millions of tonnes of industrial waste into the Great Artesian Basin's waters. In their EIS statements, the proponent who is doing this has said that they will compromise the receiving ground water. They have also said that they cannot meet the current environmental protocols surrounding it, of the Queensland government, so they need those environmental authorities changed to be able to proceed.

The minister stood up there and said that she is protecting the underground waters. She is not, and the EPBC Act, as it currently reads, does not do this.

What we are asking here is to include carbon sequestration—the injection of carbon dioxide and these other things into the waters of the Great Artesian Basin, in particular—so as to give those waters some protection in respect of future developments. I urge you all to support these amendments—otherwise, you are just hypocrites.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's been a big week at the end of a big parliamentary year, with some lows and some highs. This week, there was a high. The Greens secured significant environmental reforms, to protect our environment from greenwashed habitat-destruction and dangerous fracking. After months of pressure, the government has finally agreed to scrap their controversial offsets from the Nature Repair Bill and to establish new environmental protections from climate-wrecking, environment-wrecking and community-wrecking gas-fracking projects. This agreement, secured by the Greens, is a major blow to climate-bomb projects in places like the Beetaloo Basin and the Kimberley. It's a win for the climate, a win for the environment and a win for First Nations communities.

Prior to this—and unbelievably—the minister was not required to assess fracking projects for their impact on the environment. Let that sink in. Yet, as most thinking people know, fracking can have absolutely catastrophic impacts for our critical water resources.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Ryan will resume her seat. I call the Leader of the Nationals on a point of order.

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, we are debating the amendments, so I don't believe the member is being relevant.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is some latitude given. Just to remind all members: as I explained at the beginning of the debate, we are dealing with the amendments to the Senate amendments moved by the Leader of the Nationals. Whilst the member has been able to reflect on the broader Senate amendments, I'll ask for her shortly to get to the Leader of the Nationals' amendments. The member for Ryan has the call.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For a decade—and this is all relevant to this—the Greens and environment and First Nations groups have been campaigning for an expanded water trigger, to ensure these projects are assessed.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Page will cease interjecting.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Therefore, we will not be supporting the amendments. The passage of this legislation will close the loophole which currently gives gas-fracking corporations a licence to drill without any federal environmental water assessment.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Nationals will cease interjecting.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is going to throw sand in the gears of climate-bomb projects like the Beetaloo Basin and throw a lifeline to water sources you're concerned about, like the mighty Roper River in the Northern Territory.

The original inclusion of offsets in a scheme to ostensibly 'repair' nature was a huge red flag. Allowing corporations to pay to destroy nature is obviously not nature positive. With offsets—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, the member for Page! The member for Ryan will pause. Just so that every member is clear: this is not a debate about the bill. We are dealing with the Senate amendments and the individual amendments by the Leader of the Nationals. So, to be clear, you can talk about the Senate amendments, and/or preferably the Leader of the Nationals' question, not the general bill. The member for Ryan can continue. Just reflect on that.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We're explaining why the original amendments should stay in their original form and not be amended.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Ryan can continue.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

With offsets in the bill, this would have been a scheme to effectively greenwash to facilitate nature destruction. Now, as a result of strong opposition from the Greens and stakeholders, Labor has agreed to completely scrap biodiversity offsets from the bill. The original Nature Repair Market Bill—and I note that it's still called that on the screen—will now be renamed the Nature Repair Bill, as it will provide a voluntary system, as the minister mentioned, for private investment and philanthropy to protect and restore biodiversity on private land without offsets. Our water, our environment, our climate, are all one precious, interlinked ecosystem. Scrapping those dodgy offsets that would facilitate the actual destruction of nature and ensuring that damaging projects undergo proper environmental assessment are both critical to meaningfully restoring biodiversity and protecting our climate and our communities. Thankfully Labor has finally heeded Greens calls, and this recrafted bill will effectuate the delivery of these significant environmental reforms. Make no mistake: the environment minister has the power to stop gas mines and fracking, and we will be watching closely and doing everything that we can to ensure that Labor actually uses these powers to stop the climate-destroying, catastrophic Beetaloo and Burrup Hub projects. Our future depends on it.

Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the original amendments before the House, being the amendments from the Senate, which essentially expand the water trigger to this legislation, and the further amendments by the member for Maranoa, which essentially seek to, at this last minute, introduce carbon capture and sequestration and the consideration of its impact on water. Whilst in principle I think that is absolutely necessary, I am concerned at this very last-minute attempt to put this in without any explanation or discussion. It seems to be a very last-minute discovery by the member for Maranoa of the procedure in this place, or the ability to move amendments to improve legislation.

I commend the government for supporting the amendments in the message from the Senate when it comes to expanding the water trigger and updating its definition. I note it was a commitment prior to the election. It is really important for this to happen. It was only in October that the member for Mackellar, who unfortunately can't be here today due to illness, introduced a private member's bill to that effect. I had the pleasure of seconding that private member's bill to expand the water trigger to include all forms of gas extraction, to ensure consideration by the minister of the impact of projects on water.

We know that, for traditional owners, water is an incredibly important part of culture. We also know, through our warming planet and climate, that our water resources are going to come under more and more pressure. We know there are expected reductions in water tables and amounts of rainfall per year. We know that, for communities, water is an incredibly important resource. We really need to distinguish between the use of water by projects—in particular, when it comes to all forms of gas fracking—and maintaining water as an essential element for sustaining human life and for traditional owners, in relation to their cultural association and recognition of it.

I think it's incredibly important, and I thank the crossbench in both houses—in particular, the Greens—for having pushed the government to accelerate this amendment. I acknowledge it was a commitment, but the delay had been concerning, because it's incredibly important that the impact on the water table of projects like the Beetaloo basin is part of that environmental approval. We know the Northern Territory government had green-lit gas production in the Beetaloo basin—the region between Katherine and Tennant Creek that has big reserves of shale gas. It's incredibly important for those communities and elders who travelled down to Canberra—and I hope many in this place actually took the time to listen to them—to talk about the importance of the impact on their water and their communities. It's incredibly important, from the Pepper inquiry into fracking in the Northern Territory, to note the deep concern and the strong opposition to development of any onshore shale gas industry on their country.

I welcome the amendments. I would like to see further information from the Nationals in relation to their last-minute amendment because I think that would assist the procedure in this place. I certainly welcome any legislation that increases scrutiny of the use of nature and resources and water in relation to mining, gas extraction and, in particular, carbon capture and storage.

Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The effectiveness of biodiversity markets rests on whether or not they reward stewardship that really benefits biodiversity or whether they rely on offsets that harm biodiversity elsewhere. When we first saw the Nature Repair Market (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2023, we were concerned about its potential for commodifying nature and about the scheme's integrity around its interaction with our national environmental laws, particularly given its offsets provisions. So it was with great joy that I and others on the crossbench saw, two nights ago, the use of biodiversity certificates for offsetting specifically excluded by the Senate. It is a vast improvement to this legislation that it is now clear that biodiversity certificates cannot be used to meet offsetting requirements under Commonwealth, state or territory legislation. This markedly improves the integrity of the system, and I congratulate the government on this achievement.

The aspect of this bill that sparks the greatest joy, however, is that the government has now, in response to sustained pressure from the crossbench in both chambers, revised the water trigger in the EPBC Act. What this means is that the Minister for the Environment and Water must now consider the impact of all forms of conventional and unconventional gas development on local water resources. Unconventional gas projects are not currently covered by the water trigger but rather are assessed and approved by relevant state and territory legislation. Sadly, we have seen that the states and territories cannot be trusted with responsibility for our environment. In recent months, we've seen the Northern Territory government falsely claim implementation of all recommendations of the Pepper inquiry. It has given the green light to fracking in the Beetaloo basin, a process which could well compromise the safety of 90 per cent of the water relied upon by Territorians. It could well cause irreversible damage to the natural environment in an area the size of Victoria.

Concerns were raised recently by climate scientists from the Territory who found methane bubbling in hot springs in the Territory, suggesting that exploratory fracking was already impacting the integrity of its aquifers, springs and rivers, including the iconic and beautiful Mataranka hot springs and the Roper River. Last week I met with representatives of First Nations communities potentially affected by this process in the Territory, and I heard their distress about the potential contamination of their country. Expansion of the water trigger was a pre-election commitment of this government, and I congratulate the environment minister and the members for Lingiari and Mackellar for delivering on that commitment. It is time for Australia to lead the way out of the climate crisis, so I and many of the members on the crossbench will be glad to see this bill passed today with the improvements generated with our input.

I commend the bill to the House.

Marion Scrymgour (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to stand here and speak on the Nature Repair Market (Consequential Amendment) Bill 2023, and I applaud the Minister for the Environment and Water. This has been a major win for the Australian Labor Party. Whilst we hear the Greens and others take credit for the water trigger, a water trigger for non-conventional gas can be delivered only by a Labor government. I thank the minister for the environment and the cabinet. I was just thinking back to my maiden speech, where I talked about how mining is a big contributor in the Northern Territory. We had the large mines in the seventies. Anyone who knows the landscape of the Northern Territory knows it's not about saying that we don't need mining. But it is about saying we need strong environmental laws. That is what is important here. I know that firsthand from talking to Aboriginal people and to other communities in the Northern Territory, because it's not just Aboriginal people; there are pastoralists, there are people living on small outstations, and everyone as a collective needed to be spoken to in relation to the non-conventional gas or fracking that was being proposed in the Northern Territory.

There were a number of concerns coming from a lot of the Aboriginal groups, but there was one thing that was uniting all of the Aboriginal groups, and that was water. The minister has listened. The government has certainly listened. I, too, have spoken to many of the groups in my electorate, and they said very clearly that they wanted the delivery of a water trigger.

This has been a Labor government that has delivered on this—not the Greens, not the crossbench. We've needed that support, and I thank the Greens for their support. I also thank the member for Mackellar, because I know that there were conversations, and I did have some conversations with the member for Mackellar when various groups came down to talk to members of the crossbench and our government about these issues, particularly in relation to water. It would pay for some of those members not just to stand in this place but also to come out and have a look at what needs to be done in these communities.

One thing we can't do is lock up our communities. If anyone has read the Pepper review in the Northern Territory, they'll know it isn't about locking up the Territory. There were two critical recommendations that were in the purview of the Commonwealth government. The former government ignored those two recommendations. The former Chief Minister of the Northern Territory put a moratorium on that report until such time as we could work through and understand fully what the Pepper review entailed. It is pleasing to be part of a government who has been strong enough, courageous enough, to take the water trigger and put it in the Nature Repair Bill. I want to thank the minister's staff, who have worked very closely with me and with my office to have a look at how we can proceed with this. This is important for the Northern Territory. This is important for water resources into the future. But it's not about locking the Northern Territory up away from projects. There's a lot of mining activity, like critical minerals, that needs to happen and that we still need to proceed with, but this will go a long way.

I was sitting here before I stood up thinking in particular about a lot of my constituents in Elliott—many of them on renal dialysis—who have been waiting for this to happen. I'm hoping that, when I go back up there, I'll do a trip to Tennant Creek, Elliott, Katherine, Mataranka, Jilkminggan and all of those communities, not just those feeding into the Roper River but all of the other parts. The artesian basin, which people might talk about in Queensland, does come through Central Australia. (Time expired)

Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Nature Repair Bill 2023 and the amendments that have been added by the Senate. I want to reflect that this parliament has a supermajority for action on climate change and the environment across this House and across the Senate. I think that this bill is a reflection of that supermajority. It is a reflection of the government working constructively with the crossbench in this House and in the Senate to deliver something that the Australian people are asking for, which is to make sensible protections for our environment so that we can safeguard those for future generations.

I would like to firstly say thank you to the minister and to my colleagues here and in the other place for the constructive negotiations on this. I'd like to thank the member for Lingiari and also the member for Mackellar for their absolutely wonderful advocacy on this because they have done a brilliant job.

I want to really highlight that this legislation, as other members have noted, will expand the water trigger under the EPBC Act. This is a matter that I and many others on the crossbench have been pushing for. Those amendments are absolutely critical for safeguarding Australia's environment, and they ensure that unconventional gas projects such as those proposed for the Beetaloo basin will be properly assessed for environmental impacts. The lack of a water trigger was a major flaw, and I'm so pleased to see that being rectified. This is what can be achieved when the parliament works constructively together on the issues that matter most to Australians. I thank the House.

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

I rise today to acknowledge that there are a lot of people who are very deeply committed to this legislation and very deeply committed to moving us forward when it comes to environmental practices. I never thought I would hear these words coming out of my mouth, but it seems to me that the amendment that the Nationals have moved makes sense. It makes this legislation stronger. As somebody who grew up in north-west New South Wales, I'm very aware of the importance of the artesian water basin.

I think that, with respect to my colleagues from the other side of the House, this legislation has gotten better and better because the minister was willing to listen to everyone in this process. The first draft of the legislation that was brought in had many of us concerned. I think it has been the combined efforts of everyone and the minister's willingness to listen and engage that has meant we have gotten closer to a very excellent piece of legislation. Is it the best it can be? No. I think the minister still knows that and, indeed, she's acknowledging that today by standing and extending an offer to the Nationals to work with them when it comes to improving this legislation.

I want to stand today to say that that should be the process with this legislation and with every other piece of climate and environmental legislation that we intend to move through this place in the next 12 months to two years or three years, because we will never get it right the first time. If we adopt the attitude that we are getting it right the first time, we will be failing our communities. I commend the Nationals for identifying this as an opportunity to improve this legislation. I support its movement in the House and encourage the minister and her team to continue to explore adopting it, because, ultimately, we must be united. We must move beyond bipartisan politics and party politicking if we are going to create sustainable change in our environmental laws.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As someone who has lived in Charleville, St George and Moree, it is incredibly important for me that people clearly understand that you have concerns about the water that comes out, but you've also got concerns about what goes in. An unknown quantity is what this can do to the world's largest potable water resource. Without the Great Artesian Basin, you basically have economic devastation everywhere that relies on that water source. You have the capacity to create a toxic plume. You have the capacity to change carbon dioxide; you have a form of mild or carbolic acid that can be created.

We've got to be incredibly cautious about this. It's new technology that's being brought to the fore. It's basically untested and untried. If we don't have a precautionary process now, we won't be able to unwind what happens next. It'll be too late. I remember, and I'm sure the member for Maranoa is aware, when Linc Energy had the great idea to start burning coal underground for the creation of commercial gases. It turned into a complete disaster. It turned into a thing that infected and affected bores all around the area and basically made the place, as far as the groundwater went, a wasteland. We don't want to double up on that.

Now, I acknowledge that there are a few times when we have points of agreement. I acknowledge that, across the chamber, and with the teals and the Greens, there are areas where, generally, you can pick it every day—that they'll be on different sides of the fence. But I ask you, on this one, to really consider this.

I hear that people say that it's a last-minute amendment. The member for Flynn has been working on this for months; I'd say, for—I don't know—even a year. He's been—

Honourable Member:

An honourable member interjecting—

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you've actually got to follow the media. He's been in the media. He's been everywhere on this. He mightn't have been in the media circles that you listen to, but he's certainly been in the media circles of western Queensland and other areas. We need to pay respect to that. It's hard to break into Sydney media from Gladstone. But this is an incredibly poignant thing.

I rarely speak to amendments. But I'm speaking to this one today in the hope that, at this stage, you consider exactly what you're doing.

It is going to look—I'm being very polite—confusing. And I warrant that you have great concerns about the water issues in one area. But this is exactly the same thing; it's a water issue. The only difference is the direction the water is going. We're not talking about taking water out; we're talking about putting water in. But if we foul the resource, it won't really matter what you do with the water—whether you take it out or not—because it'll be unusable.

Also, there's a sort of commercial nuance behind this. If you actually look at what Glencore can make out of this, they can make, basically, billions of dollars—billions of dollars, out of something that could be to the detriment of, and could cause the destruction of, a large section of the Murray-Darling Basin. They'll basically get paid a credit for what they're going to be putting into the Great Artesian Basin. I think it was a really neat trick by some big corporate minds and big corporate accountants to come up with this, but they've come up with this at the behest of those getting a return. This will leave bereft the people of western Queensland and western New South Wales, and others, right down into sections of South Australia and up into the Northern Territory.

So just really think about this. You're about to go on the record, and you don't want to be on the wrong side of history.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Give me a break! The member for New England, in the previous government, presided over some of the most destructive water policies that this country has seen for decades! Under the previous government, we have seen the Murray-Darling being starved of water. We saw the previous government put its hands in taxpayers' pockets to fund fracking—to fund the expansion of the gas industry, with all the threat that that poses to farmers and the water table.

They had a whole decade to bring in this reform that they've decided, at the last minute, is suddenly so critical. It's so critical they couldn't show it to anyone, so we could have a chance to have a look at it, to work out whether it does the thing that they're saying. It's so critical that they couldn't even be bothered circulating a paper copy of it in the chamber—the usual practice—so that people could look at it. It's so critical to them that they couldn't even be bothered coming to anyone else before this vote and saying, 'Would you mind supporting this one because it's a good idea.' It's so critical that, when the debate was happening in the Senate, they didn't even bother moving it there, where it might have had a chance of getting passed.

So give me a break! When the member for New England stands up here and, in honeyed tones, tries to convince the parliament and the nation that he somehow cares about the water table, after a decade of being the most destructive water minister, at times, that this country has ever seen, well—pardon me—I don't accept that for one minute. There might be some merit in an amendment that the Leader of the Nationals wants to approve, but when the member for New England gets up and says, in hand-wringing, unctuous tones, 'This is the best thing that ever happened,' when he never bothered to bring it to parliament over the last decade, no-one believes it for a moment.

The previous government, the coalition, had a decade to act to protect farmers. What did they do? They backed the frackers every time—every time. Every time we tried to say: 'Give farmers the right to lock the gate. Give farmers the right to protect the water table against the destructive influence of the gas industry,' the National Party, a wholly owned subsidiary of gas and coal corporations in this country, picked coal over crops. They always pick gas over farmers, every time. Now, as they see themselves dwindling further into irrelevance, they come in here with a last-minute stunt and expect people to take them seriously. Give me an absolute break! Even the member for New England can't hide a smile, because he knows it's a con that he's trying on here. He had years to do something about it and presided over the destruction of this country's water table.

We will look carefully and seriously at any amendment that actually protects water in this country, because that's what we have tried to do. We have fought the Nationals when they have backed the gas industry against farmers every single time. If they have a good suggestion, of course we're prepared to look at it. But give people time to have a look at it, come here and at least keep a straight face while you're trying to do it. You're not trying to hide the smirks that you have at the moment, after a decade of delivering for the gas industry and driving farmers into the ground. Don't come in here with a last-minute stunt and pretend you care.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This amendment put forward by the Leader of The Nationals, the member for Maranoa, merely aligns the approvals required for industry activities for both gas extraction and carbon sequestration to the same standards, ensuring that, where there is the potential for a significant impact on water resources, the injection and permanent storage of carbon dioxide underground will meet the same scientific standards through the approval process as part of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. That's what we're talking about here.

We just heard a rant from the member for Melbourne. He asks and calls to give him a break. I tell you what: Australian farmers won't just give him a break; they'll give him the food on his table, three times a day every day. He should thank farmers. He shouldn't come into this place, as he and his coterie so often do, and malign our farmers, who are the best in the world. If they were left at the behest of the Greens, our farmers would not even be in existence. We hear so often from the Greens about the Beetaloo basin, about our farmers and about the Murray-Darling Basin. I challenge the member for Melbourne, the Greens leader, and his cohort to actually leave their capital cities, leave the confines of their ivory towers, come into regional Australia and see some real work being done, to see the farmers who, with the sweat of their brows and the work of their hands, are getting dirt under their fingernails to produce the food on limited water.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Member for Melbourne.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Melbourne should just be quiet. He just might learn something.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think that's my job to tell him that; not yours.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He just might learn something about our farmers. He talks about the Murray-Darling Basin. I appreciate that this is about the amendments brought to the chamber by the member for Maranoa, but our farmers aren't the only ones who are going to be affected by the changes that Senator Sarah Hanson-Young and the water minister, who I quite like, have brought to this place.

Honourable members interjecting—

I do, and she knows it—and it's mutual.

Honourable members interjecting—

I know it's mutual. The member for Lyons can laugh all he likes, but I've got a lot of respect for the water minister. That said, when Labor and the Greens get together on a motion, on a piece of legislation, it's not just going to affect our farmers. It's going to affect the cafes, the hairdressers, the schools and everyone else in the Murray-Darling Basin. This is sensible environmental policy, brought to you by the National Party, brought to you on behalf of our farmers. The member for New England is right when he talks about that wonderful underground inland river system called the artesian basin. We have to protect it. We have to look after it.

We had a decade. That's more than what I hope you ever get, member for Melbourne. Let me tell you: when the leader of the Greens in the ACT wants the Greens to have cabinet spots in the federal parliament, I worry, I shake, I shiver with fear, because you could just imagine Senator Shoebridge in charge of justice. You could just imagine Senator Hanson-Young being in charge of agriculture. They're enough to make our farmers fear. They're enough to make our communities worry, to keep them awake at night.

This amendment will not keep Australians awake at night if it is approved. I appreciate the water minister saying she would look at it in the future. I hope they do more than just look at it in the future; I hope they vote with us today, because we have to look after our artesian basin. We have to make sure that the potable water is there not just for present needs but for future generations, because, once destroyed, we will never get it back. That's why these are sensible amendments. That's why the member for Maranoa has put forward these amendments to the amendments coming back from the Senate.

The member for New England is also right when he talks about what the member for Flynn has put forward. The member for Flynn has been working on this for months. He is a passionate Queenslander. He understands better than anyone the benefits of the artesian basin and the need to protect it. He comes to this place with experience in that regard. He was a former Queensland member of parliament. He understands how important mining is. He understands how important Gladstone harbour is. He understands how important farming is because he actually runs a farm, owns a farm, works a farm—more than I can say the member for Melbourne ever will.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise in support of the amendment moved by the member for Maranoa and the Leader of The Nationals. Water is our most valuable resource, and we need to have safeguards around the use of water to protect the resource for future generations. It doesn't mean we should prohibit the use of that water—it's a resource, and I firmly believe that these resources are to be used to the benefit of the whole of society—but we need to have safeguards. I think this is a sensible amendment.

But what we have seen today in this debate is the tale of two members of parliament: the member for Flynn, who is a man of the land whose family still produces beef and grain in a sustainable manner in the electorate of Flynn, and the member for Melbourne, who has turned one of the great rivers of Australia into a concrete drain. When the member for Melbourne comes in here and starts talking about restoring the Yarra to its original condition, maybe talks about the businesses in the CBD of Melbourne turning their lights off when they go home at night-time, maybe stops flying around in jets to climate change conferences all over to globe, maybe I will take some notice. I've said in this place, and I'll repeat it: my dung beetles have done more for the environment than the member for Melbourne!

We see a lot of talk in this place from people in the leafy suburbs of the capital cities. In the last debate we had here, two weeks ago about the Murray-Darling Basin, we had the members who represent those communities and who are fighting for those communities debating people who were reading from prepared speeches on ideological background. They've got no skin in the game. The member for Flynn has skin in the game. He lives on top of the Great Artesian Basin, as does my electorate, as do the farmers in my electorate who rely on this water, and they have for a long time.

I support this amendment. It's important that we protect our resources. But, unlike the Greens, I don't oppose extractive industries. The Greens are opposing the industries that keep their lights on. How does the member for Melbourne think Melbourne was built? Did the good fairies come in and build those concrete, steel and glass structures? Somewhere in Victoria there is a hole in the ground where the raw materials came from that built that city. Somewhere in regional Australia the people, as we're speaking here today, are out there producing the food for the residents of the member for Melbourne's electorate. Somewhere out in regional Australia coalminers are digging up coal to keep the lights on for the member for Melbourne. It drives me absolutely to distraction in this place when people want to bite the hand that feeds them. I support this amendment. It's common sense, and we should support it.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendments moved by the member for Maranoa be agreed to, and I call the minister.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

Question agreed to.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Maranoa to Senate amendment (3) be agreed to.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question before the House is that the Senate's amendments be agreed to.