Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in this matter of public importance debate on the environment. I am proud to do so as part of the Labor government, which deeply believes in protecting the environment. To demonstrate this fact we only need to look at the scorecard of our latest achievements on the environment. Just last week Minister Burke announced a two-year ban on the supertrawler to allow an expert committee to assess the environmental impacts of large-scale fishing. Earlier this month Minister Burke announced that the government would recognise the Indigenous national heritage values of the Wet Tropics of Queensland in the existing Wet Tropics of Queensland National Heritage Listing. The Wet Tropics of Queensland were added to the National Heritage list in 2007. The Chair of the Australian Heritage Council, Professor Carmen Lawrence, said that she was delighted that the Indigenous heritage of the Wet Tropics had been included. She said:

The national Indigenous heritage values of the Aboriginal Rainforest People encompass a unique cultural heritage including dreamtime and creation stories, traditional food gathering and processing, and land management techniques.

The stories and traditions passed down from the ancestors of the Aboriginal Rainforest People enabled Rainforest Aboriginal People to survive in a difficult and challenging environment and continue to be valued today.

I commend Minister Burke for acknowledging the importance of the national Indigenous heritage values of the Wet Tropics of Queensland and for ensuring they are protected by their inclusion on the National Heritage List …

That is just one example of what we are doing up in the tropics in my home state of Queensland. Based on my experience with Indigenous elders up on the cape—I have conversed with the likes of David Claudie about that area and heard what he considers important for Indigenous people on the cape—I have to concur with Professor Carmen Lawrence's view.

Last week the minister announced the marine bioregional plan. We have the third largest marine area in the world with a $44 billion marine economy. The plan will ensure we protect this beautiful asset and that future generations can experience a healthy marine environment. However, on 16 November Campbell Newman's Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, the Hon. John McVeigh, said that the plan 'will destroy Queensland jobs and local businesses'. That is consistent with the rhetoric we have heard within the chamber today on this subject. He went on to say:

The impact across our fishing communities will be enormous.

These claims need to be disputed. I cannot work out why Campbell Newman's government hates the ocean so much. They argue about protecting the reef and now they are opposed to national parks in the ocean. From these comments, you can only assume they are opposed to their own buyouts, the ones they announced two days ago.

The no-fishing zones are many hundreds of kilometres off the Queensland coast. They are areas which most recreational fishers would never reach in a lifetime of angling. The Newman government's comments are extreme, bizarre and wrong. It would certainly take an effort worthy of The Guinness Book of Records for someone to cast a line from the coast to reach the Queensland exclusion zone, which is 300 kilometres out to sea.

Let's not forget the climate change policy this government implemented, a policy which was supported by the Greens in the end—after they had initially embarrassed themselves by voting with the Liberals and Nationals to oppose this important legislation to protect our environment. So do not come in here and make sanctimonious comments about our party being lukewarm on the environment and compare our policies to Mr Abbott's environmental policies. You are way off the track there.

I was really amazed to hear Senator Macdonald's contribution—his comment about Labor state governments not putting money into national parks. Just recently there was an announcement about jobs in the environment and national park areas of the Queensland government being terminated. How are they going to put money into national parks in Queensland if they are sacking workers—14,000 or more? And they are talking about us having no commitment to national parks. It is an absolute joke.

I will move on to what we are doing as a result of what came out of the April 2012 COAG meeting. We are going to prioritise the development of bilateral agreements, with frameworks and standards to be developed by December 2012. Those bilateral agreements are to be finalised by March 2013. In December, COAG will receive an update on the progress of discussions on bilateral agreements. Negotiating bilateral agreements is not about rolling back environmental protections; it is about reducing unnecessary duplication and time-consuming processes while lifting the states up to provide the same level of environmental protection currently provided by the Commonwealth.

In some respects, I have some empathy for the views embodied in this motion. I accept the point that Senator Waters makes about having concerns about the current Queensland government and their commitment to the environment and to national parks. In doing so, I refer to an article in the Courier-Mailnot always a paper you can rely upon, but in this case I will. The article is headed 'Newman government plan to open national park areas to logging and grazing'. It says:

Newly allocated national parks could be reopened to commercial logging and grazing under controversial Newman Government plans to revive the state's struggling agricultural industries.

It goes on to say:

Mr Dickson—

that is, national parks minister Steve Dickson—

told The Courier-Mail about 875,000 ha of state forest and former cattle stations recently gazetted as national parks were likely to be the first to be rescinded.

That certainly is a concern. I am personally concerned about that, given the beauty of my state of Queensland and of the many national parks I have been fortunate enough to be able to visit, to take my family along to and to camp in and enjoy.

One thing we are going to do through COAG is to bring the states into line with us—to make sure they are involved and on-board in accepting their responsibility to protect the environment. We will retain overall responsibility for providing protection on matters of national environmental significance. The aim is to focus on setting the national environmental policy agenda, including influencing the state outcomes, and landscape scale and strategic approaches to environmental conservation and investment.

A strong insurance framework is being built into the bilateral agreements under discussion with the states and territories. If they do not or will not accept their responsibilities, environmental decisions will remain with the Commonwealth and the environment minister. That is the relevant point here—it is about having the overall responsibility. If the states will not comply, it comes back to the Commonwealth and to the environment minister. That is consistent with my opening remarks, which clearly demonstrated this government's commitment to the environment. Our commitment is undisputed. No-one can come in here this afternoon and have a go at this government about our commitment when it comes to the environment.

On a personal note, I have on many occasions been fortunate enough to travel to the cape to see firsthand some of the areas which need protection. There was a debate in this chamber, before Senator Waters and some of the other Greens came into this place, about a bill to prevent mining on the Wenlock River, that beautiful pristine river.

The Wenlock River owes its existence and ongoing sustainability to several perched bauxite springs, which not only supply the river but also provide habitat for rare fauna and flora.

These are the areas that we need to ensure are protected, especially when you have a Liberal National Party state government like we have in Queensland considering opening mines in the cape hundreds of kilometres in size. They would cause enormous environmental vandalism to the likes of the Wenlock River. This is why we need to make sure, when we are having debates and discussions with state governments, regardless of whether they be Labor or Liberal National Party, that they are on the same path as us. Hopefully I will have an opportunity once again to go up there and enjoy beautiful environmental areas like the Wenlock.