Rex Patrick (SA, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Hansard source

Commonwealth marine reserves play an integral role in protecting the diversity of our oceans and also in balancing the need to enjoy the benefits of them. Marine parks that are based on science will ensure that this balance is achieved. In November 2012 the new Commonwealth marine park reserve networks were first proclaimed under the EPBC Act for the north-west, the north-east and the south-west marine regions as well as the Coral Sea. A total of 44 new marine reserves were declared, covering a total of 2.34 million kilometres.

Following consultation, management plans for those reserves, including those in the south-east region, were tabled in parliament in March 2013. The management plan for the South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserves Network came into force on 1 July 2013, while the management plans for the other regions, plus the Coral Sea, were due to come into effect on 1 July 2014. However, a change of government took place in September 2013. Following this, in December 2013, the Governor-General revoked and reproclaimed the Commonwealth marine reserves in the south-west, north-west, north and temperate east networks and the Coral Sea, pending a marine reserves review.

The effect of this revocation and reproclamation is outlined in the Federal Register of Legislation. For example, in the detail section for the Coral Sea Commonwealth marine reserve management plan 2014-24 you can find the following statement: 'This management plan ceased to have any legal effect on 14 December 2013, when the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Commonwealth Marine Reserves) Proclamation 2013 took effect and revoked the reserves this plan related to and declared new reserves for these areas.' In other words, the ALP management plans are tied to a proclamation that has now been revoked. So, although the plans may be described on the Federal Register of Legislation as 'in force', they have no legal effect. I'll say it again: they have no legal effect. Labor have argued that their management plans were legislated and that the government's management plan reflects a cut of more than half of the protected marine areas in the Coral Sea. Yes, they may have legislated them, but they weren't due to come into effect until 1 July 2013. I will repeat what I said earlier: Labor's management plan ceased to have any legal effect on 14 December 2013.

In order to cut something, you need to have something in the first place. I know the Greens understand the dilemma we face. Based on comments from Senator Whish-Wilson that were published in The Guardian, they can see through the arguments being put forward by the Labor Party. I think Senator Whish-Wilson summed it up quite succinctly when he said that, if the government management plans were disallowed:

… then we move from some protections to no protections, and the protections of our oceans have to rely on Labor winning government and the conservative major and minor parties not having the numbers to disallow whatever plans Labor put in place.

I also note the comments that have been made by Senator Whish-Wilson tonight in the chamber. I understand Senator Whish-Wilson has announced that the Greens will be supporting the disallowance, and I respect that he had a tough decision to make about the balance between some of the competing interests in his constituency.

I'd like to put on the record that NXT wrote to the government stating that the preferred position of the Nick Xenophon Team was to support the management plans that were a result of the independent review colloquially known as the Buxton maps. Whilst the government's management plan does not represent the preferred option for NXT, we believe that disallowing the instrument will result in the least preferred option of no protection or certainty. Disallowing the instrument will continue this uncertainty for a number of months, possibly until the next election, as there is a minimum 120-day consultation process. This uncertainty and lack of protection has been in effect since December 2013, and it is the view of NXT that this cannot continue.

Before concluding my remarks, I will say that the coalition management plans do offer more protection for South Australia than the Buxton maps. I thank the minister for listening to Ms Sharkie, the member for Mayo, and NXT in our advocacy for this particular change. In summary, perfect is the enemy of the good. In this case, not supporting the good leaves our waters unprotected and also leaves uncertainty. As such, we will not be supporting the disallowance motion.