Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Ian Campbell, the Minister for the Environment and Heritage. Can the minister confirm that his department told him that to rely on the Biosis report to block the Bald Hills development would have ramifications for all coastal development—not just wind farms—from south-east South Australia through southern New South Wales and western Tasmania? Is it also true that the minister was told that a decision to veto Bald Hills on the basis of the Biosis report would be totally inconsistent with approvals—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Chris Evans interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Evans, talking across the chamber when a senator is asking a question is disorderly.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

already granted for hundreds of wind turbines on the Victorian coast? Didn’t the minister’s department warn him of this before he alone decided that he would knock off the Bald Hills wind farm? By ignoring this advice, hasn’t the minister now drawn a question mark over all coastal development along thousands of kilometres of coastline, overturned precedent in environmental law and exposed taxpayers to costly legal action?

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the case was actually made very well by Senator Brandis in a most articulate intervention in a debate yesterday.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Certainly much better than mine! The point that Senator Brandis made, and I repeat it, is this: departments do give ministers advice on a daily basis, I think it is fair to say. Ministers read the advice. They often seek third-party advice and take other soundings. A diligent minister will do that.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy.

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Perhaps—and God help Australia if this ever happens—if Senator O’Brien does become a minister one day, he will simply receive departmental advice and then, without thought, discussion or even reading it, tick the ‘yes, I agree’ box. He would be sitting in his desk being lazy.

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sherry interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Sherry.

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will not do that. I will ensure that the Australian people know that they have a minister who can make up his own mind, based on the facts and without fear or favour. If Mark Latham had won the last election, Senator O’Brien might have indeed been the minister. The question that Senator O’Brien needs to address when he rises to his feet to, no doubt, ask a supplementary question is this: would he have agreed with Prime Minister Latham, who said of Christian Zahra’s bill that it was to ensure that only wind farms that have local—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I have continually asked people on my left to come to order today, and obviously you are not listening. I would ask you again to come to order and allow the minister to try and answer the question.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order: Senator Campbell is intent on introducing matters in relation to another matter of another former member of parliament. The question that I asked was about the way that this minister responded to his department’s advice. He draws a very long bow in trying to take this back to the Christian Zahra matter. I ask you to remind him of the question and to draw him back to it.

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order: the senator asked a question about the departmental advice and the impact of my decision on other coastal developments. It is a very important question, and I am addressing it.

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sherry interjecting—

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He just accused me of—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You have over two minutes to answer the question. I would remind you of the question and I would also remind senators—

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sterle interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

including you, Senator Sterle—that other presidents and I on more than one occasion have said, ‘I can’t direct the minister how to answer the question; I can just remind him of relevance and of the question.’ You have two minutes and 17 seconds to complete your answer.

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is, of course: if Labor stopped a wind farm proposal at Port Fairy, as Minister Hulls did recently, or at Ballan, which he did six months ago, where does Labor get off in relation to its hypocrisy in saying that those refusals would have no impact? I happen to believe my department is not right about that. I do not think there is a risk to other coastal developments, and one of the reasons I can actually demonstrate that they are wrong in relation to that is: since I made the Bald Hills decision, in fact, one wind farm proposal every fortnight has passed through the same process, so it can hardly be seen as a threat to wind power development. So both Senator O’Brien and my own department are wrong. But what Senator O’Brien should answer—and if he wants to address the—

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sherry interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Sherry, you are warned.

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator O’Brien needs to answer: does he or does he not agree with Labor leader Mark Latham, who said on the front of Christian Zahra’s private member’s bill brochure, ‘Local people deserve a say about developments that affect them. That is why I support Christian Zahra’s private member’s bill on wind farms—the Local Community Input into Renewable Energy Developments Bill.’ That was Labor Party policy at the last election. If you did not have community support, you stopped the development. A Labor government who put through Christian Zahra’s bill would have stopped the Bald Hills development, and Senator O’Brien would have actually voted for it. That I have got to say is rank hypocrisy. If you want to address the issue of the impact on coastal developments, I have got to tell you that the Labor Party policy—which has not been repealed; tell us if you have repealed this policy—that stands at the moment would have a massive impact on coastal development if you still stand by Christian Zahra’s bill; or you can get up and say that you no longer have this as your policy. It is your choice.

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question: didn’t the minister’s predecessor, David Kemp, approve four wind farms in the safe seat of Wannon in October 2002? Is it true that as a condition of approving these wind farms, which were a proven threat to the orange-bellied parrots, the developer had to implement a management plan for the parrot? Isn’t this what the minister’s department advised this minister he should do in respect of Bald Hills, advice which this minister totally ignored? Hasn’t the minister ignored his department, broken legal precedent and threatened millions of dollars of coastal development all for the sake of propping up a Liberal Party mate in a marginal seat?

Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator O’Brien and the Labor Party think it is all right for Minister Hulls and the Labor Party to close down a wind farm at Port Fairy or Ballan, in Labor electorates, but they seem to have trouble with me stopping one in Bald Hills. They seem to think it is all right to go around the same electorate and say, ‘We’ll stop this wind farm,’ and say to all the people of McMillan that Christian Zahra, Mark Latham and Senator O’Brien will stop the wind farm. But, when I did stop it because of scientific evidence and strong advice, that was no good. There are only two words for that sort of approach, and they are ‘rank hypocrisy’.