James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Macdonald; I appreciate that. He made some very interesting comments in an article by Graham Lloyd published in The Australian in June this year, in which he absolutely acknowledged some damage done to the reef but also condemned the alarmist language being used by some in this debate. The article states:

"This is a frightening enough story with the facts, you don't need to dress them up. We don't want to be seen as saying there is no problem out there but we do want people to understand there is a lot of reef that is unscathed."

Dr Reichelt said there had been widespread misinterpretation of how much of the reef had died.

"We've seen headlines stating that 93 per cent of the reef is practically dead."

"We've also seen reports that 35 per cent, or even 50 per cent, of the entire reef is now gone."

"However, based on our combined results so far, the overall mortality rate is 22 per cent — and about 85 per cent of that die-off has occurred in the far north between the tip of Cape York and just north of Lizard Island, 250km north of Cairns. Seventy-five per cent of the reef will come out in a few months time as recovered."

He was particularly critical of Dr Flannery's language in this debate, as Senator Roberts has been. He characterised it as 'dramatic' and 'theatrical', and said:

… his prognosis, although of concern, was "speculative".

I think that is an important middle-ground recognition that, although we have issues in this area, it is not something that should be overdramatised.

As I highlighted earlier in my remarks, climate change is one important factor which does affect the health of the reef, and water temperature is one important contributor, but, as we all acknowledge and understand, it is not the only one. The other ones which affect the reef are ones which the government is able to have more direct impact on than on climate change. The Australian government on its own certainly cannot halt global average temperature increases. If we shut down Australian industry tomorrow, we would not be able to do it on our own. But one thing which we can do is influence the important issue of water quality and how that affects the reef. I refer to an article written by Josh Frydenberg, my friend from the other place, only a few weeks ago in The Courier-Mail, where he talked about some of the important initiatives that the Turnbull government has undertaken to address this issue:

For example, in the area of water quality, we are working with farmers to reduce nitrogen and sediment run off into the Reef. Adopting a market-based, competitive tender process, farmers are being financially incentivised to develop their own nitrogen targets and implement them.

In just the last year, trials in the wet tropics have prevented 86 tonnes of nitrogen from otherwise flowing into the Reef and this is just the start, as the goal is to reduce nitrogen run off by 80 per cent in the catchment area by 2025.

Reducing this run-off is important because the crown of thorns starfish, a coral-eating predator, has been breeding in rapid numbers as increased nitrogen flows into the water. During spawning, large females can produce up to 65 million eggs each as plankton blooms from more nutrients in the water, providing food for the starfish.

Indeed, the Institute of Marine Science documented how more than half the cover on coral reefs has been lost to crown of thorns outbreaks. While additional efforts have been taken to tackle the crown of thorns, including the commissioning of a new vessel staffed with indigenous rangers, minimising nitrogen run off is also key.

He goes on to outline a range of initiatives introduced by the government to address this, which I will also talk about now.

It is important to recognise how important the Great Barrier Reef is, how unique it is in the world and how important it is to Queensland and its tourism industry. I think the tourism industry, along with the 70,000 jobs it supports, is reason enough why we should both take this issue seriously and speak in a measure, responsible and mature way about this, not overdramatise it and send signals to the rest of the world that there is no Great Barrier Reef for them to come here and see; of course there is, and there are many parts of the reef that are very healthy. The Turnbull government has already invested $461 million in reef funding, which is part of a broader $2 billion 10-year plan focused on three key priorities: (1) reducing nitrogen runoff by working with farmers, (2) reducing gully erosion through landscape restoration and better grazing practices, and (3), as I mentioned, culling crown-of-thorns starfish.

This stands in contrast to the record of our predecessors. In their six years in office, part of which was almost in coalition with our friends from the Greens, there were five massive dredge disposal projects planned in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. During that time the World Heritage Committee put the reef on their in-danger watchlist. When the coalition came to office in 2013, we were determined to improve the health of the reef and get it off that list, and that is why we took unprecedented action to address that. For a start, we ended all five dredge disposals and put in place a ban on future capital dredge disposal projects in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Thankfully, as a result of this government's actions, the World Heritage Committee removed the reef from the in-danger watchlist and praised Australia as a global leader in reef management. I particularly recognise the work of another colleague of mine from Victoria, the former environment minister Greg Hunt, who is incredibly passionate about this issue and worked very diligently on this issue for many years in his previous portfolio. He needs to be credited for that important development.

We have our Reef 2050 Long-Term Sustainability Plan, which has been endorsed by the World Heritage Committee. It guides the work of our community, scientists, industry, farmers and others to boost the reef's resilience. A more resilient reef will be better equipped to deal with stressors such as climate change, the recent coral bleaching and cyclones. The reef 2050 plan brings together for the first time all of the work, expertise and investment necessary to manage the reef into the future and is based on the best available science.

We are already in the process of implementing the reef 2050 plan and we have established an independent expert panel, chaired by Australia's former Chief Scientist, and a cross-sectoral reef advisory committee. Importantly—and I suspect my Senate colleague Senator Macdonald will address this in a moment—we have created a new $1 billion Reef Fund which will support progress in tackling two of these biggest challenges, which are climate change, as I mentioned, and water quality.

In conclusion, the Turnbull government takes the health of the reef very seriously. We also take very seriously the need to not overly dramatise and be negative about the health of the reef as well because of the important role it plays in the Queensland tourism industry.