Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish to speak about matters related to the Great Barrier Reef, which is a beautiful part of my town in Queensland. I would urge everyone to go and visit, because it is lovely, but unfortunately it is under threat from a number of things, some which I want to talk at length about this evening.

I am sure senators would be aware that about two months ago UNESCO, the body responsible for looking after our World Heritage areas and making sure that state signatories to that convention are abiding by their obligations, gave the Australian government a pretty big rap over the wrist in how the government has dealt with the Gladstone Harbour LNG export facilities. This is yet another example of why the coal seam gas industry is steaming far too fast ahead without proper consideration of not only farmers' rights but also the environmental damage that it promises to do.

The specific point about this is the 55 million tonnes of dredging of the Gladstone Harbour seabed to facilitate the deepening of that harbour and hence the export of LNG. Unfortunately, the Australian government neglected to inform, as it is obliged to, the World Heritage Committee about its intention to authorise any new development that may affect the outstanding universal value of the property. This is a major issue of concern because this is the world body saying that the Australian government is potentially presiding over and approving activities that could threaten the World Heritage status of the Great Barrier Reef—surely the most iconic and wondrous place that we as Australians and, I would argue, people globally, think is so significant.

The matter that I want to speak about this evening is in that context. It is the combination of both coal export facility expansions and a whole lot of toxic industries that are planned for Bowen, which is further up the Queensland coast in a beautiful part of Queensland and the world. At the moment there is a 16½ thousand hectare state development area that the Queensland government proposes to approve to house some of the world's most polluting industries—namely aluminium and nickel refineries with smelters, chloralkali plants, ammonium nitrate plants, coke and gas fired power plants—and, of course, to expand the port facility to turn it into a multicargo facility that will allow export not just of the 25 megatonnes per annum of coal per year but of 230 megatonnes per annum if the Palmer and Hancock coalmines are approved in the Galilee Basin, which certainly from all records of both state and federal governments they look to be.

This is a huge concern because this export facility is situated right next to an absolutely beautiful wetland area which meets Ramsar criteria—it is not yet listed, although it certainly deserves to be—and houses over 20,000 migratory birds. Clearly this is a really important area that sits adjacent to another really important area, the Great Barrier Reef. So we have got two huge repositories of biodiversity that deserve protection and, unfortunately, our state government for one is proposing to trash it. This brings me to the role of the federal government, which has received quite a number of referrals under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, the EPBC Act, which deals with this area. So not only is there the multicargo facility expansion, which would entail 580 hectares of dredging and reclamation in the World Heritage area—it beggars belief, but there are the facts—including 22 square kilometres of the World Heritage area actually being lost, but there is a litany of other projects. There is further dredging associated with the expansion and there are various infrastructure components and investigations related to that expansion. There is the proposed Chalco alumina refinery, which is currently on hold but still on the federal government's assessment books. There is the proposed Waratah coal terminal and the proposed Hancock coal terminal. Another south Galilee coal project is proposed. Also proposed are the massive Adani Mining coalmine and rail project, and the 'Water for Bowen' project. This region is being slammed and the federal government is still failing to look at these projects cumulatively. It is assessing each and every one of these referrals individually.

That makes absolutely no sense at all. There is no scientific justification for that. It is really incumbent upon the federal government to now say, 'We need to take a strategic assessment approach to this and start looking at things in context and consider whether or not the reclamation and loss of 22 square kilometres of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage area is really the sort of legacy that we want to leave for our kids.' I would hope not.

Another thing I am particularly interested in, as we saw the failure of the Australian government to let UNESCO know about this massive Gladstone port expansion, is whether they have told UNESCO about the proposed Bowen expansions. Are they keeping the world bodies informed, as they are required to under the operational guidelines that I referred to earlier? I wonder, because I suspect UNESCO would not be terribly happy with Australia in that respect. So, when UNESCO visits Australia on their monitoring mission early next year, I will certainly be raising with them the need to expand their terms of reference to include looking not just at Gladstone but at the Bowen part of the Queensland coast. No doubt they could look at a whole lot of other things while they are also here, but that is another story.

I want to put on record the amazing work that the local community groups have been doing around the proliferation of development proposals. There is so much to keep up with and these folk are all volunteers. I want to single out for mention Ian Lee, who is a particularly committed activist in Bowen; Maria MacDonald, also from Bowen; and Patricia Julien, from the Mackay Conservation Group. They are really the last bastions of the defenders of this wilderness. They are up against it, when it comes to the proliferation of stupid and damaging proposals.

I will be pursuing with the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities whether or not he has made those referrals to UNESCO, as he is obliged to do. I will be seeking from him a commitment to assess this litany of proposals through a strategic assessment process rather than on a one-on-one basis, which will see death by a thousand cuts. I will be raising with him the need to protect the Caley Valley wetland, given that it is such a beautiful haven for migratory birds and does meet the Ramsar criteria. In time we would hope to see that, in this age of climate change, rather than expanding our coal export facilities by a magnitude which is endangering the Great Barrier Reef not only directly through shipping but naturally through climate change and ocean acidification that we might actually see a reduction in coal exports. Why are we planning to double coal exports in my home state of Queensland, when the science is telling us that if we are serious about inhabiting this planet and passing it on to future generations then we need to turn around our emissions profile in the next five years?

It is with great shame that we are placing the Great Barrier Reef under such threat from these specific proposals and from the mentality of 'Let's just keep pushing it to its limits and it'll bounce back.' Unfortunately, it will not bounce back and that is why UNESCO is coming here: to look at whether in fact the government is approving projects that threaten the Great Barrier Reef's outstanding universal value. It would be an incredible embarrassment if this generation, this parliament, presided over any endangerment of the listing of the Great Barrier Reef as one of our most beautiful and precious World Heritage icons.

I look forward to being able to advocate for the Great Barrier Reef in this place in the years to come and I look forward to a more sustainable approach from both sides of the chamber when it comes to looking after our precious few World Heritage areas. They are great tourism icons. If nothing else, if you cannot accept the inherent value of these places, then look at the economics of it: 67,000 people are employed on the reef, providing a $6 billion annual income to this nation's books. These are important areas and we must do our utmost to protect them. I will be pursuing these matters with the minister. I would ask both sides of the chamber to really think about whether this is an appropriate sort of future for our beautiful Great Barrier Reef and to visit it while it is still there.