Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment, Senator Birmingham. Yesterday the Prime Minister announced plans to cut environmental laws to fast-track assessments of developments and mining projects. This plan cuts corners and removes vital checks on the impact projects will have on our environment. Why is your government weakening protection for the environment, which will put Australia's forests, our beaches, our native animals and our ancient historical sites at further risk?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Hanson-Young for her question, although I do reject many of the claims she has made in that question. What our government takes pride in doing is upholding environmental laws but making sure that we don't strangle economic activity in a morass of green tape and indecision and lack of progress in terms of analysing and assessing the applications that come before us. So, our government—the Minister for the Environment—has worked hard to make sure that decision-making is more efficient and effective. That's something that should be applauded around this place. Rather than having projects sitting there waiting, not knowing whether they're approved or not approved, we are actually backing them to get through the pipeline. Where conditions need to be applied, they're applied. Where they need to be rejected, they're rejected.

What the Prime Minister announced yesterday was a $25 million investment in specialist project teams, new approaches to information sharing between the Commonwealth and the states to reduce backlogs, to reduce the time taken for assessments, to make sure that there is less duplication of assessments between the Commonwealth and the states. This is simply about making our environmental regulation more efficient and more effective so that it can serve its purpose of protecting our environment and our biodiversity and our conservation needs but it doesn't strangle economic development, particularly at a point of time in our nation when we want to make sure that those investments that can go ahead do go ahead. We want to make sure that, when those who are willing to put money on the table and to make projects happen that will generate jobs for Australians, that goes ahead wherever possible, wherever it is not in breach of our environmental laws—not that it sits somewhere in the backdrop for years just waiting for somebody to make a decision. We're not afraid to make decisions, but we will make sure we make the right decisions for our environment and for the jobs of Australians.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, a supplementary question?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australia has already lost one million hectares of koala habitat because of the weak environmental laws in place. Koalas in some areas are now endangered. Minister, you pledged to uphold environmental laws. Will you guarantee that not one more hectare of koala habitat will be destroyed under your plans?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sure Senator Hanson-Young does actually know that, across different parts of Australia, there are, indeed, different areas of habitat for koala species, and quite different population trends in those different parts of Australia as well. Senator Hanson-Young invites me to come in here and give some blanket guarantee about koalas overall and 'not one more hectare' without acknowledging the fact that, in different parts of the country, there are absolutely strong, vibrant populations of koalas that we want to see continue to be strong and vibrant populations. But that's not to say that there can't be complementary developments, particularly of a tourism nature or the like, that can ensure sustainable activity in those communities and continue to preserve koala populations and habitat as is necessary. That's the careful balancing act that we commit to undertaking to make sure that we preserve those most important species for Australians but also to ensure that Australians have jobs as well.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, a final supplementary question?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the minister guarantee that fast-tracking approvals for mines and projects will not result in any more blasting of ancient historical sites, such as the destruction of a 46,000-year-old sacred site in WA last month by Rio Tinto? Will you fix the laws to guarantee that this type of environmental vandalism will never, ever occur again?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know it suits the agenda of the Australian Greens to come in and to, of course, make everything the fault of the government standing here, to ignore completely the reality of decision-making that might be the responsibility of state or territory governments, to figure that the EPBC Act is somehow a one-stop shop for every form of protection to occur. But the truth lies elsewhere. It certainly doesn't lie in the picture painted by the Australian Greens. I in no way condone unnecessary destruction of heritage, particularly of Indigenous heritage, which has a crucial role to play in sectors such as our tourism industry and, of course, is so important in terms of preserving the culture of our First Australians. But I won't take lectures from the Australian Greens or suggestions that somehow the policies of this government are at fault or are to blame for actions or decisions of state or territory governments and their regulatory authorities.