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

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that the Great Artesian Basin:

(a) is unique, only one of its kind in the world;

(b) is the world's largest underground potable water source;

(c) covers 22 per cent of the area of Australia, 79 per cent of Queensland and 1.7 million square kilometres;

(d) is estimated to carry 65,000 cubic kilometres of water;

(e) is a vital resource for the agricultural industry and regional communities;

(f) supports significant Indigenous cultural values; and

(g) sustains a range of groundwater-dependent ecosystems; and

(2) calls on the Government to protect Australia's water aquifers and oppose Glencore's CTSCo Project to sequester carbon dioxide (CO2 hypercritical fluid) into the Great Artesian Basin.

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

I second the motion.

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

I move this motion on behalf of agriculture, on behalf of the farmers and graziers and rural communities in Australia that rely on the Great Artesian Basin as their principal water source. The Great Artesian Basin is unique. It is the only one of its kind on the planet. It is the world's largest underground potable water source. It covers an area of something like 1.7 million square kilometres over three states and one territory in Australia. It is estimated to carry 65,000 cubic kilometres of water. It is the eighth wonder of the world, if you like!

As we all know, there was a proposal by Glencore, through their subsidiary company CTSCo, to pump 330,000 tonnes of hypercritical CO2 fluid into the precipice sandstone water aquifer of the Great Artesian Basin. This was a trial at Moonie, in Central Queensland. If it was given approval, they intended to take that to industrial scale, and, according to their EIS statement, pump 730 million tonnes of hypercritical fluid into that precipice sandstone water aquifer. The precipice sandstone water aquifer is the deepest and best water aquifer of the Great Artesian Basin.

When this proposal was examined by the Queensland environment office, they found that what would happen is the pH value of the water would be lowered and the water would become acid. As such, it ran the possibility of eroding the geological formations down there and releasing heavy metal such as lead and arsenic into the water. It also found the precipice sandstone was not a confined aquifer. In fact, if you live in Central Queensland, where I come from, all the way along the Central Queensland escarpment is the precipice sandstone. That geological feature, those enormous great big white cliffs—that's where they come out of the ground, and that is where the precipice sandstone springs are. That's where all that water in the springs originates from, deep underground. The further south you go, the deeper it gets.

The Queensland government, in their wisdom—and kudos to them—moved some legislation to effectively ban carbon capture storage in Queensland. One of the problems we've got is that this issue is not finished. We need to make New South Wales, South Australia and the Northern Territory follow suit. As I said, the Great Artesian Basin covers all those states and territories, and it's really important we recognise the waters of the Great Artesian Basin for what they are—a geological feature that is extremely important to agriculture.

There was a Senate inquiry into the whole issue, and it made two recommendations. One:

The committee recommends that states and territories consider a legislated ban on CCS activities across the GAB to ensure this important natural asset is uniformly preserved.

and two:

The committee recommends updating the water trigger in the EPBC Act to include onshore CCS.

This is what we are asking the Minister for the Environment and Water to do.

Late last year the National Party moved amendments in the lower house to enable the water trigger through the EPBC Act to put some protections around the waters of the Great Artesian Basin in respect of carbon capture storage. These amendments were defeated by both the government and the Greens. It is absolutely outrageous; it is staggering hypocrisy from the government and the Greens not to support those amendments. The Great Artesian Basin is the world's largest underground potable water source. It deserves to be protected at all costs for future generations and for agriculture. Australia is the driest habitable continent. It is absolutely outrageous that somebody would even suggest we use it as a suppository for industrial waste.

I'll leave it there. I hope the minister is listening, and I hope she follows through.

Zoe McKenzie (Flinders, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

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

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Albanese government welcomes the member for Flynn's moving this motion. I've got to say it's wonderful to see his newfound interest in the environment and Indigenous cultural values. We certainly agree that the issue of carbon capture and storage is important, and protection of the Great Artesian Basin is very important also. But this motion just highlights that the coalition has been all over the shop on this Glencore proposed Carbon Transport and Storage Corporation project. They're a hopelessly divided rabble on this issue. The Liberals have been against the Nationals, the Nationals against each other, and they're against each other individually and personally.

The reality is that the member for Flynn is calling on the government to do something that's premature, because there's no matter before the government to oppose or approve. If there's anyone he should be taking this issue up with, it's the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. That's because we know that, during the former Morrison government, she was the environment minister when a delegate in her department decided the issue was not a controlled action—that is, it would not require approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, leaving environmental assessments to the Queensland government.

I might add that the Miles Labor government recently announced a ban on carbon capture and storage in the Queensland section of the Great Artesian Basin. I noticed the member for Flynn thanked them for it. I would have thought that he would have put it in the motion because it was a decision that was made a while ago. So it just seems that this motion is largely redundant and little more than virtue signalling.

Back to the Morrison government—before finalising its advice, the environment department sought feedback from several ministers at the time, including the then National Party leader and minister for regional development, the member for New England; and the Nationals member and then Minister for Resources and Water, the member for Hinkler. The Nationals leader's office didn't respond, while the then Minister for Resources and Water actually endorsed the department's decision. In a recent statement, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition referred to this consultation, pointing out to her Nationals comrades that they were 'fully aware of the decision at the time'. She said:

No objections were raised and in one case, a minister's agency wrote back in agreement.

In a complete about-face and a sign of disunity, the current leader of the National Party, the member for Maranoa, and his party room have been publicly bagging the Deputy Leader of the Opposition over this. In May the Nationals leader said the decision was wrong and said this:

It was a desktop review done by the environment minister at the time, Sussan Ley, and she didn't get it right.

It wasn't on her radar to the extent it should've been.

The trouble is, before the election, the Nationals were all for the project, and after the election they were as well. In June 2022, in an interview on the ABC's Insiders program, the Leader of the Nationals, whose electorate this project is in, said this:

… you can look about 60km west of where I'm sitting now and carbon, capture and storage has been implemented on a coal-fired power station from Millmerran. That's the investment we—

the Morrison government—

made.

He even posted on his Facebook page the following statement: 'Proud to be investing $5 million in carbon transport and storage company at Millmerran'—contrary to the motion here today.

Now the Nationals want to pretend they have nothing to do with the project and are trying to walk both sides of the street on this. Last year, the minister for the environment took our first tranche of the nature repair environmental legislation bill before the House, and the Nationals moved an eleventh-hour amendment, basically having a bet each way on carbon capture and storage in the artesian basin. But do you think they gave the government a chance to even look at it? Absolutely not. It was never going to pass.

So just what is the Liberal and National parties' position on this? You just have to look at the Leader of the Nationals' Insiders interview just over two years ago, when he was spruiking the project because it not only protects gas but also protects 'our coal industry as well as carbon capture and storage', contrary to the motion here today. That's the position of the leader of the National Party two years ago on a number of projects, and before the election and after the election.

And here we have the member for Flynn putting a motion before the chamber today that is completely at odds with the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and his own leader. This is nothing more than the Liberal and National parties duking it out in the Federation Chamber. I'll be surprised if the Liberal Party hasn't got someone in to back the member for Farrer, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, against this. What a circus the coalition is on this—a complete fiasco.

I welcome the member for Flynn. Comrade, if you want to come over here and support us and be on this side of the chamber, I'll issue you with a Labor Party membership ticket. But don't stay over there, because they're full of disunity. You can't work out what you want. You're fighting amongst yourselves—fighting internally in the National Party. Have a yarn, by the way, with the Leader of the Nationals and see what his true position is.

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

I'd like to wish the member for Blair all the very best in the forthcoming preselection, where his own party will give him the boot, because, apparently, he's not of the right gender. That is a shame!

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

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

If you look at the actual chemical make-up, you've got carbon dioxide and H2O. CO2 and H2O will give you carbonic acid, which, of course, is H2CO3. With that, you get the acidification of water at a pH of about 3.75 at 25 degrees Celsius. Then we have a capacity for leaching of materials, especially with, as my good colleague has said, things such as arsenic and lead coming into the water. We might also note—this is why we have a concern—that, once the pH of water gets below around 6.5, cattle are less likely to drink it. In fact, they get a condition called acidosis. Acidosis means their capacity to convert feed is dramatically reduced.

In Western areas, what we see is that the Great Artesian Basin underwrites and underlies the country and economy. It also underwrites the capacity for towns to exist out there. When I was living in Western Queensland, in Charleville and Saint George, running out of hot water was never a problem; running out of cold water was. That's because the water temperature was between 30 and 100 degrees Celsius. We also note that this goes right back to the Pliocene era. Some of the water that comes up is between thousands and two million years old. That's when it was absorbed by the Great Artesian Basin. That is a completely different epoch. It's from an epoch from way before the land bridges. It's an epoch when Australia was a lot wetter. We're borrowing from a time millions of years ago. For a political and policy view, and for a tiny little fraction of that two million years, we're willing to put it all at risk. We haven't got another two million years to fill up the Great Artesian Basin.

The Great Artesian Basin is about 3,000 metres at its deepest. That's over 9,000 feet. It is vastly deeper than Mt Kosciuszko is high. This is the biggest aquifer in the world. I find it peculiar that we're willing to put it at risk. Putting swindle factories and wind towers everywhere—that's okay. Knock over whatever you want. Painting fields photovoltaic black is okay; you can do that. Strip clearing 28,000 kilometres for transmission lines—that's okay. Tearing up environmental laws to put all this in place—that's okay. Changing the pH of the Great Artesian Basin—that's okay. But, if you graze country in certain areas, that's a criminal offence. If you take down timber in certain areas, you need a logging permit, or it's a criminal offence. This goes to show the conversion and confusion that has happened because of this cult-like activity surrounding climate policy. It is a cult. It has left logic behind and become a cult.

Something the previous speaker, the member for Blair, brought up, was: 'What are we talking about?' I put it back to the member for Blair, if he's still there after the preselection. If he thinks everything is fine, then he should be able to change the legislation so that anything pertaining to the Great Artesian Basin becomes a controlled action. It's not a controlled action at present, and that is the issue. For some unknown reason in this cultish behaviour, we've left the Great Artesian Basin out as a controlled action, so it should come in as a controlled action under the EPBC Act. There are so many thing I would want out of the EPBC Act, but I'd actually want that in.

In closing, I'd like to thank the member for Flynn, because he has been the champion of this. If it hadn't been for his [inaudible] approach within party rooms and his absolute dedication to this cause, I genuinely believe this issue would not have been addressed. The changes we have seen in Queensland and at the federal level would not have happened. There are few things a person does in their political career which they can hang their hat on, and I think the member for Flynn, who is sitting beside me at this moment, can talk in his annals about what he did to save the Great Artesian Basin.

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

I rise to speak on the motion concerning the Great Artesian Basin, moved by that well-known environmental champion, the member for Flynn.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Absolutely! You got that right!

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

I take that interjection by the member for Kennedy. We're heading into election season and there's a bit of an odour of desperation wafting across the room from those opposite. When it comes to grasping at straws, the member for Flynn has a walk-on role in the next Wizard of Oz remake.

This motion is criticising a decision made not by this Labor government but by a delegate of Sussan Ley when she was the Minister for the Environment in the former Morrison coalition government—unbelievable! I remember seeing a photo of the member for Flynn holding up a sign saying, 'Save the GAB!'—the Great Artesian Basin—but it looked incomplete to me. What it should've said was: 'Save the GAB from my own environment minister!' This motion has nothing to do with the Albanese government. Labor supported the Senate to conduct a review into the matter, and earlier this year AgForce, too, sought a review of the decision made by the now Deputy Leader of the Opposition's delegate in the federal court. The federal court dismissed the case, so I won't comment further on such matters, but I will say that there is no decision before the government to oppose or reject. I repeat: no decision before the government to oppose or reject. What the member for Flynn is asking the Albanese government to do is not possible and would be unconstitutional. The time to review the decision has long passed. If there's one thing those opposite have shown in recent weeks, though, it's that deadlines aren't really their strong suit.

What is the state of the Liberal and National parties these days? It's just one stuff-up after another. First they announced some half-baked nuclear policy—the most expensive electricity on earth—then they couldn't get nominations in on time for local government, and now the member for Flynn is bringing a motion critical of his own deputy leader. He should've just handed it to her in the party room. The truth is those opposite are an absolute mess. They couldn't organise a rock fight in a gravel pit, really. They've got no alternative vision for this country, and this impotent motion by the member for Flynn is supposed to distract people from the train wreck of his political party.

The member for Farrer isn't the only person the member for Flynn is criticising with this half-baked motion. He's also attacking the Leader of the National Party, the member for Maranoa, who not only supported the project but talked it up publicly. The member for Maranoa said that he was 'proud to be investing up to $5 million in the carbon transport and storage company at Millmerran'. The member for Kennedy knows that Millmerran is in the member for Maranoa's own electorate; he knew what he was saying. Then, once the Nationals leader realised it was going south, he changed his tune and immediately threw the deputy opposition leader under the political bus. He said:

It was a desktop review done by the environment minister at the time … and she didn't get it right.

He added:

It wasn't on her radar to the extent that it should've been.

I know the Olympics are over, though the Paralympics are about to start, but Simone Biles would be jealous of that backflip from the member for Maranoa—no accountability and no shame. The Leader of the Nationals talks a lot about character in this place, but he doesn't have the character to face his constituents and say: 'I'm sorry. I got it wrong.' Instead, he ducks for cover and throws the deputy opposition leader under the political bus. This is indicative of the even bigger backflip that the entire National Party is doing on the environment.

I know the member for Flynn is proud to announce to the world that he's a climate change denier. He has openly suggested that environmental progress furthers the 'socialist agenda'. I am glad that at least this issue has brought out the environmentalist within him. I look forward to seeing him vote with the government on further environmental and climate reforms in the future. He can start by calling up his friends in the Senate and demanding they vote for our Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024. It's time for them to support these measures and say yes to the benefits of the strong and independent Environment Protection Australia. It's time to agree with tougher penalties for those who break environmental laws. It's time to recognise that better environmental data will inform future planning and decision-making, and it's time to give the green light to more programs, projects, policies and actions to create a nature-positive Australia, instead of moving ridiculous motions like this. This motion is nothing but a cheap political attempt to cover the fact that the Nationals stepped in a Liberal bear trap and should never be taken seriously again.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member is obviously a member of the old Country Party, as I myself am. We've reconstituted that. It's called the KAP, and we invite him to join us.

This is one of the most extraordinary decisions I have ever witnessed in my life. It took me three weeks to actually believe that this had been agreed to by a Liberal-National government or by any government on earth. One-fifth of this nation is only occupied by human beings, kangaroos, wallaroos and birds because of an underground aquifer. There are maybe 30,000 windmills pulling that water up from under the ground and putting it in troughs so that areas that had never seen a kangaroo in 30 million years suddenly saw kangaroos and birds.

On the other side of the coin, I went to the anti-wind-farm rally at Chalumbin. They're putting a wind farm right beside the jungle. I'm in favour of wind farms. Hughenden is the peak spot in Australia. The professor who was giving an address to the 200 people at the rally said, 'What is happening here is that our beautiful nature wonderland is being replaced by an industrial wasteland.' There's only 20 years—there's 15 years in the windmills and 20 years in the glass. Is anyone going to go out there and replace that rotting disgrace and aberration in the environment? No. The answers are very clear. If you put that poison into the Great Artesian Basin—and the speaker before last spoke very well on the dangers of doing that—you will contaminate the artesian basin and one-fifth of Australia will be sterilised. Every single form of life will die. It's costing us $8,000 million to send some electricity out to Mount Isa. It will take a hell of a lot more than that if you want to pipe water out to any of these areas.

The cattle and sheep that have been removed by this imbecilic place that I have to come to, thanks to the people of Kennedy—God bless them. This place has removed three-quarters of the entire sheep population. For 200 years the nation's income came from wool, and in 1990 we got Keating. The Labor Party was formed to deliver arbitration, not just to the working class, or the employee class, but to the farmers. Keating came in and withdrew the arbitration. He undermined the arbitration for the employees, I might add, but he withdrew the arbitration for the 276,000 farmers. He only did one industry: wool. The rest of it was done by the National Party. They deregulated every single industry. The history books will condemn and spit upon that political party. And I was in that party when it was done, to my shame.

Let me go back to the artesian basin. Some 10 million tonnes of CO2 was being pulled out of the air by the cattle and sheep that were in these areas before deregulation. Due to a combination of various antifarming actions, the deregulation of free markets and all that sort of rubbish—ideology—10 million tonnes of CO2 is going into the atmosphere that was previously being absorbed by the cattle and sheep. A moo-cow might put on 100 or 200 kilograms a year, and that of course is carbon pulled out of the air. With the removal of trees by the industry—Queensland has removed more trees than any other state in recent memory to make way for glass. Trees have been replaced by glass—is this a lunatic asylum or what? Put the cattle and sheep back and that's 10 million tonnes. Put the trees back and that's another 10 million tonnes. That's 20 million tonnes a year, which is more than the combined efforts of both parties in this place over the last 10 years. And it also makes us wealthy. (Time expired)

Zoe McKenzie (Flinders, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Sitting suspended from 13:30 to 16:00