Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Again, we bring this matter, which, quite frankly, as Senator Cadell has said, should not be controversial. This should not be a controversial issue. I said that in the debate on this matter last time. We're looking to understand the power imbalance between farmers, fishers, governments and energy companies seeking to compulsorily acquire land. We know that that's happening across the country. We had 60-odd farmers here in the gallery the last time we talked about this. They don't come to Canberra for nothing. Farmers don't shut up shop and come to Canberra for no reason at all. They're coming here because they're concerned about their rights. All this seeks to do is to give them some voice. There's a lot of discussion about voice in the broader debate at the moment, but these farmers aren't being allowed to be heard. We're asking for a Senate inquiry, for heaven's sake. That's all we're asking for.

It shows how two-faced the government, the Greens and some on the crossbench are on this issue—how fundamentally two-faced they are. I was reading an article a couple of weeks ago from Far North Queensland: 1,000 hectares of native vegetation to be cleared for a wind farm. There is no mention of a koala or a greater glider from the Greens in this debate. If you want to build a wind farm, go for your life. If you wanted to harvest and regenerate a thousand hectares of forest in Queensland, Tasmania or Victoria, there's no way known that you would be allowed to do it. In Victoria, you can't. It's been banned. In Western Australia, it's been banned. You can't do it. Build a wind farm? Go for your life. What hypocrites. What complete and utter hypocrites.

What we're asking for, through this motion, is to conduct a Senate inquiry so that we can suggest sensible terms and conditions for compulsory acquisition of land, access for farmers and Indigenous owners and fairness of compensation.

Why is this controversial? Why have Labor, the Greens and Senator Pocock now voted against this four times? Why have they done that four times? Why is it controversial to have options to maintain and ensure the rights of farmers, fishers, Indigenous Australians to maintain and ensure productivity of agriculture and fisheries? It is because the minister, Mr Bowen, doesn't want to have the conversation. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Senator Watt—a doormat—hasn't got what it takes to stand up to him. As I said, if you want to harvest and regenerate a thousand hectares of forest under our world-renowned forestry standards, you can't do it. If you want to knock over a thousand hectares of forest for a wind farm next to a World Heritage area, go for your life! What complete and utter hypocrisy. And this place, this chamber, can't give a voice to the farmers, to the fishers and to the Indigenous Australians.

In another inquiry that I'm participating in through the Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth, the Greens asked some Indigenous Australians to come in to talk to us, concerned that they were getting paid less for access to their land for these sorts of projects, so that this information could be put on the public record. So it's not as if they're not really interested. And the evidence from this group was from a Doctor O'Neill.

As I said in my answer to a previous question, there are several broader trends, and certainly what the lawyers are telling me at the moment is that people in Western Australia are getting paid a lot more than people in New South Wales and Queensland. I've also heard that in Queensland, pastoralists are getting paid more per installed capacity rate than traditional owners are. So there are different rates. But the Greens, having asked someone to come to put this evidence on the public record, as they've done, won't vote for this inquiry that will give us—this chamber, the Senate—the opportunity to investigate that and suggest a fair system for compensation. They're voting against this. Again, the hypocrisy is breathtaking.

Another farmer in New South Wales—we're told about climate change, we're told about the risk of fires—has a 3,700-acre property at Mulla Creek in north-east New South Wales. They've worked it and it's going to be cut in half by powerlines. The airstrip on their land that is used to fight fires will be made inoperable by the lines running through the farm. Lecture us about climate change, bushfires and the impact of climate change. Farmers are trodden all over. The hypocrisy is breathtaking. It's two-faced. It's a disgrace. In other parts, the compulsory acquisition letters are being left in black bags pinned to the fence. Farmers turn up and there's a document sitting on the gate.