Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to take note of the answer to the question I asked of the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage regarding the proposal by the Queensland government to build a dam on the Mary River just south of Gympie. The aspect that I particularly want to emphasise in regard to the answer is that there is a legal obligation on the federal environment minister to ensure that no proposal, particularly a major proposal or activity, will impact negatively on the species that are recognised as endangered or on World Heritage values. There are a number of other matters, but certainly those two are particularly relevant for this proposed dam.

I make the point of emphasising the responsibility of the federal environment minister here in part because the Premier of Queensland, Mr Beattie, has made a number of statements indicating the determination of his government to go ahead with building this regardless of public opposition and concerns about it. He gives every indication to me of simply being absolutely determined to build this for political reasons, to show that his government is acting in regard to water issues. Water is certainly an important issue in south-east Queensland. I am well aware of that, as is virtually everybody that lives in that region. But the simple fact is that Queensland, economically, environmentally and socially, has been damaged in the past by dams and related big infrastructure projects being built predominantly for political purposes. It is very disappointing, disheartening and concerning to see the potential for this to happen again. Clearly a political need is very heavily influencing the attitude of the Queensland government.

The call I make to the federal environment minister and note in response to the commitment given by the person representing him today in the Senate, Senator Abetz, is to ensure that he lives up to his responsibilities under the federal environment act. It is not just a power that he has to use if he feels like it; it is actually a legal responsibility of his to determine that a particular action will not unduly affect endangered species or World Heritage values. Once this project, as it inevitably will be, is recognised as a project that triggers obligations under the federal environment act, he will need to ensure that there is a full and proper environmental impact assessment. Again, from the statements made, particularly by Premier Beattie, there is a real concern that the desire of the Queensland government is not to do that but to basically do a fast-track assessment to get on with starting construction as quickly as possible.

I focus on the environmental aspects here because that is the area where there is a clear federal responsibility to act. The federal environment minister has acted somewhat controversially in regard to a wind farm development in Victoria because of the endangered species the orange-bellied parrot. The lungfish and the cod in the Mary River do not have orange bellies as far as I know but they are certainly endangered, and this is one of their last remaining habitats. It is very important that that is not put at risk.

There are wider consequences. This will have downstream consequences that will significantly impact on recreational and commercial fishers in the region because of its impact on fish breeding grounds. It will certainly have economic impacts in the region because at least 900 rural properties covering about 7,600 hectares will be resumed. The Queensland dairy industry has indicated that around 10 per cent of the local dairy industry in the Gympie region will be removed from productivity, which will have a significant flow-on effect. There is also the impact on those that are removed from their homes and on the towns that are affected. There will be the cost of resumptions, which, there have been suggestions, may be as much as $1 billion, and the probable redirecting and rebuilding of the Bruce Highway, part of which will be inundated if the dam is put where it is suggested is most likely. Again, that would be enormously expensive. This is going to be a massive expenditure just to be seen to be doing something that, from everything that history can show us, is far from certain to fix the water problems in south-east Queensland anyway.

Question agreed to.