Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Aged Care, Disabilities and Carers) Share this | Hansard source

I am speaking this afternoon to take note of the appalling response that we heard today to the questions I asked Senator Ian Campbell about the future of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority—the entity which is charged with the management of the most significant environmental icon in this country. The government has allowed its future management intentions for this significant piece of environmental infrastructure to languish. Not only is the Great Barrier Reef an important environmental icon but also it is the most significant economic icon in this country. The Great Barrier Reef is worth more than $5 billion to the Australian and Queensland economies. That is why I took the opportunity today to ask Senator Ian Campbell a very straightforward question: what have the federal Howard government got in store and what are they are planning to do about the future of the authority? There have been rumours in North Queensland since the last election and today was the opportunity for the minister to set us straight.

The other motivation for today’s question was the fact that in today’s Courier Mail there was an article which described Mr Rob Messenger, the coalition shadow minister for the environment in Queensland, calling for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to be abolished and for control to be handed over to the state of Queensland. Senator Ian Campbell spent a lot of time in his response to my question—I cannot call it an answer—talking about stark contrasts. He was actually talking about a completely different matter; he was not answering my question at all. Mr Messenger’s policy is in stark contrast to the coalition candidate for the Queensland state seat of Whitsunday, who yesterday called for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to be abolished and for its powers to be handed to the federal Department of the Environment and Heritage.

We have in the paper today two candidates for the same coalition—in fact, the same party—calling for completely different responses to the management of the Great Barrier Reef, so I thought it was quite timely to ask a sensible question: what do you intend to do about it, Minister? He talked for 3½ minutes and two people had to take a point of order before he got anywhere near talking about the authority. He did that for half a sentence and then still did not take this opportunity. This was an opportunity that we had given the minister to give some certainty and surety to the people of North Queensland, the science community and the tourism industry about what the government intends to do about the management of this incredibly significant environmental icon, and he did not take it. He missed that opportunity.

There is very strong concern in North Queensland about what is going to happen to the Marine Park Authority. Following the adoption of the Representative Areas Program there was consternation, and the Fishing Party did a deal with the National Party in the lead-up to the 2004 election that they would transfer their preferences to the National Party—in the Senate, particularly—if there was a review of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority and its operation and consultation process leading up to the establishment of the Representative Areas Program. That happened; that is a fact and it is out there.

So the deal was done on preferences, and we got the Borthwick review. For all of that time the authority and its future have been in limbo. People do not know what is going to happen in terms of the management of this absolutely significant icon, and they are still waiting. The minister had the opportunity today to clear the air and tell us who is going to manage the authority; whether or not a cabinet submission is going to go to cabinet next week, or in a few weeks time; and what the government intends to do—to leave it as it is or for the powers to be assumed by the Department of the Environment and Heritage, where decisions about management can be politically manipulated. That is not the way it was established. Decisions about the authority should be made at arm’s length from the political process. It is that important, and that is why an authority type structure is the appropriate way to go.

Can I also put on the record for the minister—because he uses all the time he can to attack the Labor Party—that, in its coastal policy, to quote the policy itself, Labor is committed— (Time expired)

Question agreed to.