Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water, Minister Wong. Last night, UNESCO's report on the Great Barrier Reef made it clear that climate change is the greatest threat to the Great Barrier Reef and that the Australian government is still on probation over the Great Barrier Reef's World Heritage in-danger status. In particular, UNESCO urges the Australian government to act on climate and increase our emissions-reduction targets. Will your government now legislate a more ambitious emission reduction target in order to help secure the future of the Great Barrier Reef? Will you take this commitment to the next election?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Whish-Wilson for the question. He is right to raise again the issue of the Great Barrier Reef. We know that the biggest threat to reefs worldwide is climate change, and, obviously, the Great Barrier Reef is one. It's an extraordinary reef, but there are many coral reefs around the world which are feeling the effects of climate change and are at risk of further damage as a consequence.

The Australian government and the Queensland government have welcomed UNESCO's latest draft decision on the Great Barrier Reef. It's a huge win for Queensland, a huge win for the thousands of people who rely on the reef for work, and a huge win for all the plants and animals that call it home. I acknowledge the work of Senator Green as our envoy for the reef and for the work that she has done with communities and more broadly.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order on relevance: I asked specifically whether you would now legislate a more ambitious emissions-reduction target as requested by UNESCO.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You did, and there was a preamble around UNESCO and what UNESCO recorded. The minister is being relevant.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We understand, unlike those opposite, that climate change is a risk for this country, which is why we have legislated both to reach net zero and a 43 per cent emissions-reduction target for 2030. I know that the senator and his party say that's not enough. I trust that they also tell their voters that those opposite don't support the action to reduce emissions and, as I can see from Senator Canavan's recent statements, still don't support net zero by 2050. Things just keep going back to where they were—it's like Groundhog Day again. What I would also say to you, senator, is those targets have to be delivered, and that requires us to transform this economy from a high-emissions economy to one— (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, a first supplementary question?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority said today only the strongest and swiftest actions to decrease global greenhouse gas emissions will reduce the risks and limit the impacts of climate change on the reef and coral reefs around the world. How is opening new coalmines, and a future gas strategy that, for example, facilitates the Barossa gas project, one of the dirtiest projects in Australia's history, compatible with the strongest and swiftest actions on climate change?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would make a few points about our action on the reef. Apart from the net zero target and the commitment to reach 82 per cent renewable energy supply by 2030: we've invested more than $1 billion in the reef; we've accelerated water-quality improvements, including $200 million for projects such as revegetation, grazing management and engineering work; we've introduced legislation to establish an independent EPA; we've withdrawn federal funding for dams that would have had a detrimental impact on reef quality; the minister has rejected a coalmine that could have had direct impacts on the reef; we've engaged more Indigenous Rangers to manage sea country, including the crown-of-thorns outbreaks; and we've commenced a phase-out of gillnets in the marine park with a $185 million package. We are doing a great deal because we understand the importance of the reef not only to jobs and to the economy but also for future generations. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, a second supplementary question?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, you just said that the report by UNESCO last night was a huge win for Queensland, a huge win for thousands of people who rely on the reef for work, and a huge win for all the plants and animals that call it home. Minister, the reef is fighting for its life after the seventh mass coral bleaching event this summer—the worst on record—and the science tells us that as the planet warms this will get worse. How exactly is this a huge win for the Great Barrier Reef?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The senator might not think that it's important for Queenslanders that this listing be maintained. He might want to speak against that. We understand the importance to Queenslanders, and to Australia, of the reef both economically and as part of our natural heritage. It's part of our natural heritage.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You need to take more action.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll take the interjection about more action. As I have repeatedly said in this place, I know that some in the Greens political party think that yelling loudly about an issue actually is policy. It is not. Yelling loudly about an issue does not transform an economy. Yelling loudly about an issue does not deliver an 82 per cent renewable energy component of our national electricity system.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Wong, please resume your seat. Senator Whish-Wilson?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Two points of order. Firstly, Senator Wong is misleading the chamber. There was no yelling loudly. Secondly, can she actually explain how the death of the Great Barrier Reef—one of the great tragedies of our lifetime—is somehow a huge win for people who live on the reef?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, both of those are debating points. Minister Wong, please continue.

An honourable senator: That was yelling, if you want a good yell!

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's true. You weren't yelling before, just then, so that's okay. My point is that, as a government that is committed to acting on climate change, we actually are taking on the hard task of changing our economy. That's what's required. (Time expired)