Kerry Nettle (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

It is with great pride that I stand here today to speak on the Migration (Climate Refugees) Amendment Bill 2007. It is the first time I have had an occasion to have my own private senator’s bill debated in the Senate, so it is a very exciting opportunity for me. I am really pleased about the opportunity to talk on this issue in particular—the issue of climate refugees. Right now we as a planet face a great threat: climate change. Climate refugees are a very important component of the challenge that climate change presents us as a global community. In March 2004, the Pacific Conference of Churches met on the atoll island nation of Kiribati. They discussed climate change and its likely effects for Pacific nations. Out of this came the Otin Tai declaration. That declaration begins this way:

Here on the small atoll islands of Kiribati, the impacts of human induced climate change are already visible. The sea level is rising. People’s homes are vulnerable to the increasingly high tides and storm surges. Shores are eroding and coral reefs are becoming blanched. The water supplies and soil fertility are being threatened by the intrusion of salt water. Weather patterns are less predictable, posing risks to fisherfolk and farmers.

Kiribati is not alone in its plight. Many other island nations in the Pacific are experiencing similar impacts of human induced climate change. Our peoples, who number about 7 million, are already suffering and are vulnerable to more impacts in the future.

This declaration from Pacific island nations went on, requesting that highly industrialised countries such as Australia do seven things. The seven things they request of us are:

1.

Acknowledge [our] special responsibilities for the effects of climate change—take action immediately because the Pacific people are suffering, crying and dying right now

2.

Reduce fossil fuel production/consumption and increase use of renewable energy.

3.

Provide scholarship funds to students of the Pacific for higher educational level studies on the issue of climate change.

4.

Ratify and implement the Kyoto Protocol

5.

Increase budgets for adaptation programs in the Pacific

6.

To implement the reduction targets specified in the Kyoto Protocol within the first commitment period

7.

To relocate and compensate the victims of climate change as requested by Pacific countries.

This piece of legislation that we are debating today, the Migration (Climate Refugees) Amendment Bill 2007, addresses this last point on the issue of climate refugees. Climate change induced environmental refugees are likely to be a big issue this century as the impacts of climate change occur and make many more places now inhabited uninhabitable for various reasons. We are perhaps now in the calm before the storm. The World Bank say that sea levels rising could displace hundreds of millions of people within this century. In a report released in February of this year, they concluded:

… the overall magnitudes for the developing world are sobering: Within this century, hundreds of millions of people are likely to be displaced by [sea level rise]; accompanying economic and ecological damage will be severe for many. The world has not previously faced a crisis on this scale, and planning for adaptation should begin immediately.

…            …            …

To date, however, there is little evidence that the international community has seriously considered the implications for population location and infrastructure planning in many developing countries. We hope that the information provided in this paper will encourage more rapid action on this front.

The Nicolas Stern report concluded that there could be between 150 million and 200 million climate refugees by 2050, and a recent Christian Aid report suggested 200 million to 250 million people will be displaced by climate change. Oxford academic and expert in this area Norman Myers predicts that by 2050 up to 150 million people may be displaced by the impact of global warming. This is a looming issue for Australia and the international community. Not many people have been directly displaced by climate change yet, but how we prepare for the challenge is an indication of how seriously we take the issue of global warming.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has already identified climate change as one of the factors in the tragic Darfur conflict. He wrote recently in the Washington Post:

Amid the diverse social and political causes, the Darfur conflict began as an ecological crisis, arising at least in part from climate change.

Many climate refugees will be internally displaced. Some will be able to relocate and settle within their own country. This will place stress on infrastructure and may create social tensions and divisions. However, many will not be able to remain in their countries, and this Greens bill that we are debating provides a mechanism to assist them.

Alan Dupont and Graeme Pearman, in their report called Heating up the planet, for the Lowy Institute, state:

New migrants, regardless of whether or not they cross borders, can impinge on the living space of others, widen existing ethnic and religious divides and add to environmental stress in a self-sustaining cycle of migration and instability.

They continue in their report on how they see climate induced migration playing out:

First, people will move in response to a deteriorating environment, creating new or repetitive patterns of migration, especially in developing states. Secondly, there will be increasing short-term population dislocations due to particular climate stimuli such as severe cyclones or major flooding. Thirdly, larger scale population movements are possible that build more slowly but gain momentum as adverse shifts in climate interact with other migration drivers such as political disturbances, military conflict, ecological stress and socio-economic change.

In the Pacific, the small islands are especially vulnerable to rising sea levels associated with melting ice caps, the thermal expansion of the ocean and stronger storm surges—all part of climate change. Already the Carteret Islands of Papua New Guinea are being evacuated. The Pacific island nations of Tuvalu and Kiribati are already starting to drown. Kiribati’s chief climate negotiator spoke to New Scientist in 2000 about the plight of his country. He said:

Apart from causing coastal erosion, higher tides are pushing salt water into the fields and into underground fresh-water reservoirs. In some places, it just bubbles up from the ground. This is making soils too salty for root crops and is polluting drinking water. We often have to bathe in salt water. You’ll know all about coral bleaching in waters which are getting warmer. But for us, this is not just an issue of biodiversity tourism. The reefs are where we get many of our fish. If the reefs die, so will our food.

Eight or nine house plots in the village that my family belongs to have been eroded away. I remember there was a coconut tree outside the government quarters where I lived. The beach all around it was eroded, and eventually it disappeared. But erosion is not the only problem for trees. The droughts are much worse than they used to be. We can go more than six months without rain these days. Now the new row of coconut trees is withering, too. Our elders say we have never had droughts that last so long. The droughts may be because of El Nino. But if the El Ninos are stronger, that must be part of climate change.

It is not just Tuvalu and other atoll islands in the Pacific that would be affected by climate change. Even mountainous Fiji will face a crisis when the sea level rise becomes severe. Much of Fiji’s productive land and urban areas will be flooded, which could lead to increasing ethnic conflict. The President of the Marshall Islands said in a speech in May of this year, ‘It won’t be long before our country is completely inundated.’ Again, the Kiribati chief climate change negotiator said in 2000: ‘Imagine standing on one side of these islands, with waves pounding on one side and the lagoon on the other. It is frightening.’

It is not just rising sea level that has the capacity to create climate change refugees in the near future. As the earth warms, precipitation patterns will change causing catastrophic floods in some areas and in other areas turning currently cultivatable land into desert. Monsoons may change direction and strength and could fail to water the world’s breadbaskets. Mountain glaciers around the world are already shrinking at an alarming rate. The glaciers of the Himalayas are the source of major rivers such as the Indus, the Yangtze, the Mekong and the Ganges that currently sustain half the world’s population.

Alan Dupont and Graeme Pearman say that Australia should take the issue of climate refugees more seriously. In their report they say:

Australia and regional states need to give this issue more serious attention since three of the areas most vulnerable to sea  level rise globally are in Asia and the Pacific (South Asia, Southeast Asia and low lying coral atolls in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific) and six of Asia’s ten mega cities are located on the coast.

This piece of legislation proposed by the Greens, which we are debating here today, equips Australia with the formal mechanisms to accept and process climate refugees. Many in this place may say that the effects of climate change are too far off to worry about now or that the scale of future climate refugees is too big for Australia to deal with alone. But Australia must and can set an example for the world. By supporting this legislation, we would indicate that we take the issue of climate change refugees seriously and that we are implementing mechanisms to deal with the issue. It enables us to do our part and we must do our part. Many in this place might think that sea level rise this century may only be measured in centimetres. Dr James Hansen, who is NASA’s chief climatologist, wrote in last month’s New Scientist:

I find it almost inconceivable that ‘business as usual’ climate change will not result in a rise in sea level measured in metres within a century

There is not a sufficiently widespread appreciation of the implications of putting back into the air a large fraction of the carbon stored in the ground over epochs of geologic time. The climate forcing caused by these greenhouse gases would dwarf the climate forcing for any time in the past several hundred thousand years.

I have asked questions at the last three Senate estimates inquiries about whether the Department of Immigration and Citizenship is doing any work on the issue of climate change refugees and the answer is consistently no. The Greens are concerned that the government is not taking this issue seriously. The governments of Tuvalu and Kiribati have approached the Australian and New Zealand governments on several occasions to request that we work with them to put in place a plan for the migration of their populations to Australia as their homelands become uninhabitable.

In 2001, the then minister for immigration, Mr Philip Ruddock, refused to meet with Tuvalu to discuss this matter. At around the same time the New Zealand government implemented its specific access category under which 75 people from Tuvalu and 75 people from Kiribati can migrate to New Zealand each year. That enables them to play a constructive role in actually taking on board the entire population of Tuvalu and Kiribati over a protracted period of time as a part of a way in which they can contribute to these Pacific island nations dealing with the issue of climate change and climate change refugees—climate change for which we have been so responsible and refugees created in our region in the Pacific. A senior Tuvaluan official said that, while New Zealand had helped out their neighbours, ‘Australia on the other hand has slammed the door in our face.’ This is the situation that we face.

The Greens’ climate refugee bill would help us to address these problems. It creates a new class of visa under the Migration Act called the climate change refugee visa. It grants the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship the power to assess an environmental disaster that has displaced people and to make a climate change induced environmental disaster declaration. Such a declaration may only be made by the minister personally. When considering whether or not to make such a declaration, the minister can give consideration to the geographical scope of the disaster; the possibilities for adaptation and the long-term sustainability of the area; the capacity of the country and neighbouring countries to absorb displaced persons; and other international efforts of assistance.

Such a declaration may include setting the number of visas that will be issued to people displaced by a declared disaster and the criteria as to how such displaced people would be accepted as climate refugees. This is the standard procedure by which we create new visa categories under the Migration Act in Australia. The Department of Immigration and Citizenship told the Senate estimates committee hearing that Australia would be able to accept people who were displaced by environmental disasters through the existing migration law.

This piece of legislation formally recognises and implements specific mechanisms by which Australia would assess and accept climate change refugees. Australia should be able to take several hundred climate change refugees per year from the Pacific island nations of Tuvalu and Kiribati if we look to the example that New Zealand has set us and consider our larger size. This would ease the pressure on these nations and prepare the way for their eventual evacuation as the ocean claims their countries.

Under this bill the minister for immigration would have the power to make a declaration that Tuvalu is suffering a climate change induced environmental disaster due to rising sea levels and more intense storms. The minister could, for example, set a limit and say that 300 Tuvaluans could be accepted into Australia as climate change refugees per year and could set out the process by which they apply and the criteria against which applicants would be assessed.

Climate change refugees are currently a minor problem, but they could become a major global crisis. Australia should raise the issue of climate change refugees within the United Nations. We should work with other nations to form a new international framework to deal with climate change refugees in a just, efficient and fair manner. The United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees has provided a framework for the treatment, assessment and resettlement of refugees. Millions of people around the world have been provided protection, safety and the chance of a new life under this convention. Climate change refugees are not refugees under the definition that currently exists in the UN refugee convention. They seek refuge not from persecution—although that may be a consequence of climate change—but from an environmental disaster or are otherwise displaced by climate change. The Australian Greens have long held the position that the refugee convention should be expanded to include a category for environmental refugees. This would, of course, include the climate change refugees we are talking about today.

The Greens hope that this bill assists in providing some guidance and leadership towards a multilateral framework to deal with the issue of climate change refugees. Our priority must be to stop climate change by moving quickly towards a low-carbon economy. We know that our Pacific island neighbours do not want to lose their cultural connection to their land and do not want to be displaced as a result of rising sea levels due to climate change and be transferred en masse or in part to Australia or neighbouring countries in this area. We know that they would like to continue their connection with their land. Many people may stay until the last moment. We need to play a constructive role as the wealthiest country in our region and as a country that is responsible for producing so many greenhouse gases. We are one of the highest emitters of greenhouse gases on a per capita level in the world. We are the world’s largest exporter of coal. We need to take on the responsibilities that come with that of working in our region to ensure that there is a future for our Pacific island neighbours. That is what this legislation is about: it is about putting in place a process so that we can deal with the people who will lose their homes because of the contribution that we as a country have made to the global warming that is occurring. This is an issue of morality. This is an issue of responsibility. This is an issue that we, as a leading country in our region, need to grasp with both hands.

We need to play a constructive role in ensuring that there is a long-term future for our Pacific island neighbours. We need to assist them in the activities that exist in their countries now. But we also need to provide them with an avenue, a mechanism and an opportunity—in which we can support them—by which they can leave their country when the time comes that they have to. We are already seeing Pacific island nations like the Carteret Islands being evacuated as rising sea levels drown people’s homes. We need to be putting in place now a process by which we can help our Pacific island neighbours as this occurs over this period of time. This piece of legislation provides us with the opportunity to do that. I am proud to be introducing this legislation and debating it on behalf of the Australian Greens. I ask the Senate to support it. (Time expired)