Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to give the Greens' perspective on this piece of legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Junior Minerals Exploration Incentive) Bill 2017. I note the previous speaker's statement that Labor will be supporting the government on this legislation, so clearly it will pass. Nonetheless, I put on record the Greens' opposition to the legislation, partly because we believe that, as with the original mechanism that it's replacing, it won't operate particularly well, it's likely to be an inefficient use of public funds and it's not the best use of public funds given the investment that is needed in community infrastructure. It's estimated that this proposal will cost over $100 million over the forward estimates, and the Greens don't believe that it is a good, effective use of public funds. There were clearly many significant problems with the exploration development incentive, which this scheme basically replaces, and, whilst this bill may seek to reduce some of those problems, we believe that some of them still exist.

The Greens recognise and support the contribution that appropriate, sustainable mining makes. Indeed, as I hope all senators noticed, just in the last week or two the Greens announced a comprehensive policy, via my colleague Senator Rice, with regard to dramatically accelerating Australia's use of electric cars. Clearly, enabling that to be done—enabling the expansion of our electric car fleet in Australia—requires exploration and mining to provide the resources. Similarly, there are significant parts of the mining industry where there is the opportunity for employment, in our own country as well as elsewhere, and for revenue to be raised out of these public assets, because of the significant boom in, and therefore the demand for, renewable energy. The significant expansion of the renewable energy sector is something the Greens have played a key, practical role in through ensuring the provision of a legislative structure backed by appropriate amounts of public resourcing. In my own state of Queensland we've seen thousands of jobs created as a direct result of the Greens' efforts in this parliament in the renewable energy space. It is creating ongoing, long-term employment opportunities in regional Queensland as well as in many other parts of the country. Of course, renewable energy—whether it's solar panels or whether it's batteries—requires resources that are extracted through mining, so mining is a key part of bringing about the policies the Greens support. What we don't support is taxpayer money being provided, particularly in an inefficient way, to prop up exploration and to enable people basically to have a pay-back for their tax write-offs.

As I said at the start, this bill is going to pass—we recognise that. But one thing we do want to ensure is that this bill, when it does pass into law, doesn't make available any of these subsidies for exploration for thermal coal, and I'll be moving an amendment to that effect in the committee stage of the debate. This legislation already exempts the junior minerals exploration incentive from being made available for exploration for petroleum and shale, so the principle that a particular mineral or resource can be exempt from this new scheme is already there in the legislation. What the Greens will propose is simply that thermal coal also be exempt from this exploration incentive.

This is something, of course, that is the topic of hot political debate around the country, but particularly in my own state of Queensland, where there is continuing pressure and where, as we speak, the state Labor government is offering up another round of tenders for thermal coal exploration in Queensland. There is continuing pressure to open up new coal deposits in Queensland, even though that will actually detract from existing jobs in the coal industry in regional Queensland and in other parts of the country. Workers already employed in the coal industry are already suffering from exploitation by mining companies. Giant multinational corporations are using more and more exploitative employment techniques. They are forcing more and more people onto temporary jobs, using more and more contract labour and forcing down the conditions of workers in the coalmining industry in Queensland and elsewhere, and yet we have this continual push to open up more coal deposits. This is driven, of course, by the fact that the mining corporations are embedded deeply in our political establishment in this country.

So the last thing we should be doing is having a new exploration incentive scheme that provides subsidies for any form of thermal coal exploration. This is a simple amendment that I'll speak to in a bit more detail when we get to the committee stage of the debate, but it's a simple way of sending a clear signal that the time for subsidising coal exploration and coalmining is over. That is close to an economic reality already; the last thing we should be doing is sending any signals that our structures and our mining incentives are still going to be made available for the fossil fuel industry. The legislation already exempts petroleum; it should exempt thermal coal as well.

Can I emphasise again that there is a significant role for the mining and resources industry? I say that as the Greens spokesperson for mining and resources, as well as for the environment. There is a significant problem with the inability—or the unwillingness, as well as the inability—of many mining companies to properly rehabilitate their mines after they've either used up the resource or just gone bust and left it there to fall to bits and to continue, in some cases, to poison the local environment and the local water table. There's a Senate inquiry into that at the moment, which I'm looking forward to seeing the final report on soon. But, clearly, there is a significant problem in adequately rehabilitating existing mine projects and ensuring that there is proper protection when mining does occur, both to ensure that there isn't unnecessary or unanticipated environmental damage and to ensure that there is proper rehabilitation, as should be required at any time a mining project operates. That is beyond the scope of this legislation. I accept that, so I won't go further on that at the moment, but that is a continuing problem and we shouldn't simply be looking to further expand exploration and development of the mining sector without ensuring that the existing problems, which have been well identified for decades now, are properly addressed.

Let me say this again: job opportunities in regional areas are another area where there is significant opportunity in properly rehabilitating existing mines and abandoned mines. There are significant employment opportunities there if mining corporations simply did the thing they were supposed to do, and which they are often legally obligated to do but they nonetheless walk away from. Where they have simply disappeared into the dust, as some of them do, governments could pick up the slack, ensure that in the interests of those communities there is not ongoing poisoning of the local environment, and provide employment opportunities for people in those regional areas.

The Greens do recognise the importance of ensuring that there are viable community-building, sustainable employment opportunities in regional areas. That's why we reject the unviable boom-bust approach that's happened through the thermal coal industry in Queensland and elsewhere; that's why we reject further subsidising of that industry; and that's why, amongst other reasons, we don't support this legislation.