John Madigan (Victoria, Democratic Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I seek leave to speak for 20 minutes.

Leave granted.

During the last 12 months, many people have shared their concerns with me about industrial-scale wind farms in their neighbourhoods. They include farmers, conservationists, Landcare members, field naturalists and others. In my experience, most of the people upset by inappropriate, industrial-scale wind farm developments are not climate change sceptics. They are not deriding the need to reduce carbon emissions but rather trying to bear witness to the reality of industrial-scale wind farms in their neighbourhoods. The have learned that wind turbines are not a neutral technology. Large-scale wind farms can and do cause a range of serious problems. The planning of wind farms must be done very carefully. Without due care, inappropriate wind farm developments adversely impact the people living nearby, can severely damage the biological environment and impair the visual landscape. In order to assimilate these truths, based in common sense and sound conservation principles, we must stop thinking about wind farms in an ideological way and start paying attention to the facts.

When politicians and government officers embrace the orthodoxy that 'wind farms are intrinsically good in all situations', their decision making becomes distorted. They stop seeing and hearing the facts. Their critical faculties become impaired as do the assessment processes under their control. Whole communities of people and wildlife are now being stranded by processes that are not working properly and are not assessing the facts in an objective, impartial manner. A striking example of this orthodoxy is the highly controversial and totally inappropriate wind farm proposed for Bald Hills in South Gippsland. This proposal was approved in 2004-06 by the Commonwealth and Victorian governments after a contracted battle starting in 2002. The site for the erection of 52 large wind turbines, up to 135 meters tall—that is, 52 turbines each taller than the Sydney Harbour Bridge—is right in the middle of a significant wetlands and flora conservation area on the South Gippsland coast. The site directly abuts the Cape Liptrap Coastal Park, the Bald Hills Nature Conservation and Wetlands Reserve and the Kings Flat Nature Conservation and Flora Reserve.

Mr Acting Deputy President, I seek leave to table a 1982 letter from the then Victorian Department of Conservation, Fisheries and Wildlife Division to the local Shire Secretary. It supports the Shire's application for National Trust funding to purchase land parcels to help establish and extend these nature conservation areas. I quote from the letter:

… without doubt—

this land—

can readily be converted to a wetland of great importance to a wide range of waterbirds. The location is on a flyway used by many species between eastern and western Victoria and will attract many birds as it will be one of the few wetlands in this region. … The proposed wetland is close to the Tarwin River and Andersons Inlet, both important feeding grounds for water birds and will create a safe roosting and breeding site which, at present, are very scarce in this region.

After thirty years of continuous efforts by local people and organisations to protect this high value conservation area, home to numerous species of birds, the message from today's Victorian and Commonwealth governments is: 'Bad luck. Who cares if an established roosting and breeding site becomes unsafe? Who gives a damn about birds, wetlands and flora conservation when we're in the business of approving wind farms?' Who gives a damn, indeed? Who cares about the 296 recorded bird species living, roosting, breeding and flying around Bald Hills, Anderson's Inlet, Cape Liptrap and Waratah Bay? Who cares that 21 are threatened species in the Cape Liptrap area; 31 are listed species under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act; 97 are listed as migratory under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act and that two of these are listed as endangered, including one critically endangered and one vulnerable; 40 are listed under the Chinese-Australian Migratory Bird Agreement, or CAMBA, for short; 45 are listed under the Japanese-Australian Migratory Bird Agreement, or JAMBA, for short; and three are listed under the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species?

Mr President, I seek leave to table a list of the 296 bird species identified in this South Gippsland area and their status under state, Commonwealth and international laws and agreements. It was prepared in 2006 by local conservationist and wind farm objector, Mr Andrew Chapman.

Is the Commonwealth environment minister, Tony Burke, concerned that the continuing government approval of the Bald Hills wind farm is causing Australia to breach its international obligations to protect migratory species listed under JAMBA, CAMBA and the Bonn Convention? I have written to Minister Tony Burke expressing my concern, asking him to 'call in' this project and stop it. I have also advised him that I have written to the Japanese and Chinese governments about Australia's apparent breach.

I now stand beside that long list of objectors to the Bald Hills wind farm development, running to many hundreds of individuals, as well as the following organisations: the Australian Conservation Foundation; the Westernport Bird Observers Club; Bird Observers Club of Australia; the Prom Coastal Guardians Inc.; Tarwin Landcare Group; the National Trust of Australia; the Victorian National Parks Association; Parks Victoria West Gippsland District; South Gippsland Conservation Society; Tarwin Valley Coastal Guardians; Latrobe Valley Field Naturalists Club; Australian Plants Society Victoria; Kilcunda-Powlett River Foreshore Committee Inc.; South Gippsland Shire Council; and Inverloch Residents and Ratepayers Association.

Back in 2004 the Victorian assessment panel heard so-called expert evidence from an environmental consultancy firm hired by the then wind farm proponent. The consultants identified only 81 bird species, using field surveys conducted between 8am-ish and 5pm-ish. These observation times do not happen to coincide with the hours kept by many birds. The consultants limited their observation to 24 days, in the 12 months of a long drought period. A conflicting opinion made to the panel by another expert witness was that eight to 10 years of bird survey work was needed to develop a robust understanding. The panel criticised the consultancy's reports, concluding:

This is a body of work that is approaching the threshold beyond which it cannot be used for effective, rationally based public decision making.

… at this stage insufficient information to allow proper assessment against the criteria of no impact on species listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act or the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act.

Regardless, the then Victorian Minister for the Environment, Mary Delahunty, approved the wind farm proposal. When the federal environment minister at that time, Ian Campbell, intervened to 'call in' the proposal on bird protection grounds, he found himself on the end of a good public kicking by the then Victorian Attorney-General, Rob Hulls. Here we have dodgy assessments approved by some politicians pushing the belief that wind farms are intrinsically good in all situations. Anybody who gets in the way is stomped on.

Since 2006, the original proponent has sold on its approval to build the wind farm to a wholly owned subsidiary of Mitsui and Co. Will a wind farm at Bald Hills significantly reduce Mitsui's carbon footprint? Mitsui and Co. are joint owners and operators of five coal mines across Queensland and New South Wales, exporting coal to Japan and elsewhere as fast as they can dig it up and ship it out. Mitsui are major developers and exporters of gas, part owners of Woodside offshore petroleum and other developments. Mitsui were party to the catastrophic failure of the BP rig in the Gulf of Mexico. In the 2011-12 financial year, Mitsui and Co. energy businesses generated some $A20.78 billion in income. On their website, Mitsui describe some of their energy business goals:

Our Energy Business Unit 1 aims to maintain a well-balanced energy resource portfolio and to enhance its trading and marketing activities while establishing a stable supply system to meet growing energy demand.

Mitsui's core oil and gas assets for exploration, development and production are based in the Middle East, South-east Asia, Oceania and the Americas. In Oceania, we have operations in the Enfield and Vincent oil fields. In the coal business, we have been developing and expanding our coal mining holdings in Australia, and have been increasing total production volumes. We are pursuing the stable supply of nuclear fuels in view of the long-term need for nuclear power generation. We are also pursuing development of non-conventional energy resources including shale gas/oil, and new technologies such as commercialization of clean coal technology.

I may be just a blacksmith, Mr President, but Mitsui does not sound too concerned about reducing the carbon footprint of its energy businesses. Quite the opposite. A wind farm at Bald Hills will not reduce Mitsui's carbon footprint. However, it may mislead some people by green-washing the fact that Mitsui's carbon footprint seems to be getting bigger.

I would like to conclude with some comments drawn from submissions made by a local South Gippsland ecologist called Lucas Bluff. In his 2004 objection to the Bald Hills wind farm he said:

The effects of climate change on the living world are very difficult to predict. However, the changes will be dramatic and they are already beginning to occur. Species will need to disperse freely in order to survive the effects of climate change.

He cites a number of scientists, already expressing concern about species being driven harder by climate change to migrate 'through landscapes that human activity has rendered increasingly impassable'.

The pressures of climate change on species are driving them away from the heat. We saw evidence presented last week of tropical fish species appearing in Tasmanian waters. We need to think about the same plight of migratory birds: more birds moving south along their flyway and directly into the proposed Bald Hills wind farm. I call on the federal government and Minister Tony Burke to intervene and to stop this harmful project.