Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, upon notice, on 16 March 2011:

With reference to Operation Talisman Sabre 2011:

(1) In regard to the Talisman Sabre exercises, what will be the actual cost to the department of the exercises, for example, clean-up operations, monitoring, herding dugongs out of the live fire area etc.

(2) In regard to the AECOM public environment report (PER) concerning the exercises, for which the public comment period closed on 10 December 2010:

(a) how are the unlikely scenarios for which the exercises are intended to prepare the Australian Defence Force (ADF), such as nuclear warfare, weighed up with the actual damage done to the marine and terrestrial environment;

(b) to what extent has the projected or potential impact on the area in which the exercises are to be conducted and, in particular, Queensland's Shoalwater Bay region, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and the Coral Sea, been assessed;

(c) who conducted the assessment in paragraph (b);

(d) what were the outcomes of the assessment in paragraph (b);

(e) what assessment has been carried out of the impact of the floods in Rockhampton and the cyclone around Cowley Beach;

(f) if no assessment has been carried out in relation to paragraph (e), why not;

(g) to what extent have the impacts of the floods and cyclone in Queensland altered the planning for the exercises; and

(h) based on the understanding that the Great Barrier Reef and other marine environments have been damaged by the recent extreme weather conditions and given the intense naval activity associated with the exercises, will the department consider postponing the exercises in order to give the region an opportunity to recover; if not, why not.

(3) In regard to the rights of traditional owners:

(a) to what extent has the department, representatives of any other government agency, or the ADF consulted with the Darumbal people, the traditional owners of the Shoalwater Bay area, on the use of Shoalwater Bay for these exercises or any other training exercises;

(b) if there has been consultation, what was the outcome of that consultation; and

(c) if there has not been consultation, why not and will the department consult with the Darumbal people prior to the commencement of the exercises.

(4) In regard to nuclear and chemical risks, the PER acknowledged that live firing can cause environmental contamination:

(a) are military activities exempt from the Commonwealth's Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999?

(b) what guarantee can be given that contamination of the natural environment will not occur as a result of the exercises;

(c) will toxic materials such as red phosphorus marine markers, seawater ballast containing introduced species and ship-board waste be introduced into the environment in connection with the exercises; and

(d) will depleted uranium armaments be used during the exercises.

(5) In regard to the use of white phosphorous and explosives that contaminate groundwater, and given that perchlorate, the primary ingredient in rocket fuel, has been found to have contaminated groundwater in 20 United States of America (US) states as a result of its use at rocket test site, military bases and production plants, that it has been linked to thyroid conditions, birth defects and problems with newborn development and that reports indicate it has contaminated food supplies in some parts of the US:

(a) will perchlorate be used during the exercises;

(b) what measures will be taken to ensure perchlorate does not contaminate the marine environment or groundwater in the surrounding area;

(c) what testing has been done to monitor whether the groundwater at Waterpark Creek, Queensland, has been contaminated by perchlorate;

(d) will white phosphorus, TNT or RDX be used in the exercises; and

(e) to what extent will heavy metals, including mercury and lead, be dispersed into the environment during the exercises.

(6) In regard to sonar risks, the PER notes that active and passive sonar will be used:

(a) can it be confirmed that mid to low frequency sonar is associated with whale beaching, brain haemorrhaging, and disruption to breeding cycles;

(b) given that the PER states that 'Australia and the United States are committed to environmental stewardship and take the need to protect marine mammals from the effects of underwater sound sources very seriously' – can the Minister confirm that the US Navy has exemptions from US legislation designed to protect endangered species and to allow their use of sonar virtually anywhere;

(c) is the Minister aware that in 2008 environmentalists in the US took the US Navy to the US Supreme Court to try to stop them using sonar during the Talisman Sabre 2007 exercises in Hawaii because intense sound waves can harm or even kill 37 marine mammals, including sea lions and endangered whales;

(d) what guarantee can the department provide that sonar use during the exercises will not have adverse affects on marine life, including the beaching of whales, brain haemorrhaging in cetaceans and disruption to breeding cycles;

(e) how will the impacts of sonar on whales and mammals be measured during the exercises;

(f) how can the Minister guarantee the war games have not killed or injured cetaceans unless affected animals wash up on shore;

(g) what measures will be taken to mitigate any detrimental impacts of sonar on marine life during the exercises; and

(h) measured from the vessels in yards, how far can the sonar currently being used in the exercises travel, given that the PER proposes that sonar will be suspended if a whale is sighted within 1000 to 4000 yards from a ship.

(7) In regard to the PER, which states that the exercises will destroy 2 hectares undersea in Shoalwater Bay and create significant noise and residue, and that 'the risk of psychological harm to marine fauna' is of concern:

(a) what is the anticipated psychological impact on marine fauna; and

(b) what resources and services will be provided to address the concerns for psychological harm to marine fauna.

(8) Given that Shoalwater Bay is home to the east coast of Australia's biggest endangered dugong population, the PER states the animals will have to be moved away and that during the 2010-11 Supplementary Budget Estimates hearings of the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee it was described that large marine animals would be ushered out of the area:

(a) how many dugongs live in the affected area;

(b) what percentage could reasonably be expected to be ushered out of the area; and

(c) what other measures are being undertaken to protect marine life from the effects of excessive sound caused by the exercises.

(9) In regard to noise and impacts on the local community:

(a) what has been done to protect the community of Byfield, Queensland, near the designated live firing range, or any other community in the area, from the risk of fire being caused in nearby forest;

(b) what measures will be taken to avoid excessive noise in habituated areas;

(c) will the US and Australian military honour edicts regarding flight paths to avoid excessive noise in habituated areas; and

(d) can a guarantee be provided that 2 hectares is the maximum area that will be directly affected.

(10)    In regard to waste and water dumping, what measures will be in place to ensure that:

(a) ballast water carrying introduced species will not be dumped in the marine environment; and

(b) shipboard waste, which can starve, amputate, maim and infect marine life, will not be dumped in the marine environment but be disposed of properly.

(11) In regard to social or political impacts that question the rationale behind the exercises:

(a) do the exercises require state or federal environmental impact statements or assessments to be formally assessed by the Commonwealth or state governments;

(b) what independent mechanisms of assessment on the conduct of the exercises are in place;

(c) will the department conduct an analysis of the social impacts of the exercises; if not, why not; and

(d) will the department conduct an analysis of the potential political impact of the exercises in the region in the current geo-strategic environment; if not, why not.