Chapter 2

Background

2.1        This chapter provides some background to the bill and issues relating to port development in the Great Barrier Reef, including a summary of the regulatory system at the Commonwealth level, World Heritage Committee deliberations and an outline of relevant recent reports by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.

The Great Barrier Reef

2.2        The Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area stretches approximately 2300 kilometres along the coast of Queensland from the northern tip of Queensland in north-eastern Australia to just north of Bundaberg. The Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1981, and:

• covers 344,400 km² in area;
• includes the world's most extensive coral reef ecosystem; and
• includes some 3000 coral reefs, 600 continental islands, 300 coral cays and about 150 inshore mangrove islands.[1]

2.3        The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority notes that coral reefs 'only comprise about seven per cent of the Marine Park and the World Heritage Area' and the rest is:

...an extraordinary variety of marine habitats, ranging from shallow inshore areas – such as seagrass, mangroves, sand, algal and sponge gardens, and inter-reefal communities – to deep oceanic areas more than 250km offshore.[2]

Relevant legislation

2.4        There is a range of relevant legislation specific to the Great Barrier Reef. Key Commonwealth legislation relating to port development near the Great Barrier Reef region includes the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act); the  Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 and also the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981. These Acts are summarised below.

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

1.1        The EPBC Act is the primary piece of Commonwealth legislation regulating environmental matters,[3] and has among its objects:

• to provide for the protection of the environment, especially those aspects which are a matter of national environmental significance;
• to provide for the protection and conservation of heritage;
• to promote ecologically sustainable development through the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources; and
• to assist in the co-operative implementation of Australia's international environmental responsibilities.[4]

2.5        In general, the EPBC Act prohibits a person from taking an 'action' without approval from the environment minister if the action is likely to have a significant impact on a 'matter of national environmental significance'.[5]

2.6        Matters of national environmental significance currently covered by the EPBC Act are:

• world heritage properties;
• national heritage places;
• wetlands of international importance (listed under the Ramsar Convention);
• listed threatened species and ecological communities;
• migratory species protected under international agreements;
• Commonwealth marine areas;
• the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park; and
• nuclear actions (including uranium mines).[6]

2.7        The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park has been recognised as a matter of national environmental significance under the EPBC Act in its own right since 25 November 2009. It is prohibited to take any action in, as well as outside, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park that will have a significant impact on the environment within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, unless the action has previously been approved or the action is being undertaken by the Commonwealth.[7]

2.8        The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is also protected under the EPBC Act, for example, as a world heritage area,[8] a national heritage place;[9] and to the extent that it provides habitat for listed threatened species and listed migratory species. There are also two internationally-listed 'Ramsar' wetlands in the Great Barrier Reef region: Bowling Green Bay and Shoalwater and Corio Bays.[10]

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975

2.9        The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 established the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA). It also contains provisions for the protection of the Great Barrier Reef. For example, it sets out a duty to prevent or minimise harm to the environment in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park that could be caused by a person's entry.[11]  It is also an offence to discharge waste into the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park unless approved by the appropriate authority, or if waste is discharged for the purpose of preventing a specific incident of pollution and to minimise the damage from pollution.[12]

2.10      The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 also provides for the preparation of zoning plans in respect of areas in the Marine Park.[13] The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Zoning Plan 2003 is the primary planning instrument for the conservation and management of the Marine Park. It defines what activities can occur in which locations, both to protect the marine environment and to separate potentially conflicting activities.[14]

Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981

2.11      The Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 (Sea Dumping Act) regulates the loading and dumping of waste at sea in waters surrounding Australia's coastlines. Essentially, under the Sea Dumping Act, permits are required from the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities for all ocean disposal activities, including dredging operations. The Sea Dumping Act fulfils Australia's international obligations under the London Protocol[15] to prevent marine pollution by dumping of wastes and other matter.[16]

2.12      Some sea dumping projects may require approval under both the EPBC Act and the Sea Dumping Act. In these cases, applications can be assessed concurrently under both Acts.  If sea dumping activities are proposed in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, they will be assessed by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.[17]

2.13      The SEWPAC website reports that 'port operators account for the majority of sea dumping permit applications.'[18]

2.14      In 2009, the National Guidelines for Dredging were published, which set out the framework for the environmental impact assessment and permitting of ocean disposal of dredged material. The guidelines set out a framework for:

• evaluating alternatives to ocean disposal;
• assessing loading and disposal sites;
• assessing potential impacts on the marine environment and other users; and
• determining management and monitoring requirements.[19]

Background to the bill

UNESCO Reactive Monitoring Mission to Great Barrier Reef Report

2.15      In June 2012, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) completed a Reactive Monitoring Mission Report into the Great Barrier Reef (UNESCO report). This report was requested by the World Heritage Committee to establish the state of conservation of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage property.[20] The report noted that there had been positive trends with regards to managing threats such as oil and gas development, and fishing and tourism in the Great Barrier Reef, however:

Considering the rapid increase of coastal developments, including ports infrastructure, and the fact that circa 35 new development proposals are awaiting determination by 2013, including in highly sensitive or already pressured areas, the mission concludes that this is of high concern to the conservation of the OUV [Outstanding Universal Values] for which the property is inscribed on the World Heritage List.[21]

2.16      Due to these concerns the UNESCO report made 14 recommendations designed to keep the Great Barrier Reef off the 'List of World Heritage in Danger' (listed at Appendix 3).[22]

Recommendations made by the World Heritage Committee

2.17      After considering the UNESCO report, the World Heritage Committee requested that Australia address a number of matters, as set out in Appendix 3. These included to:

• not permit any further port development or associated infrastructure outside existing major port areas within or adjoining the Great Barrier Reef property, and to ensure that development is not permitted if it would impact on the values of the property;
• complete the strategic assessment for the sustainable development of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area and to ensure that the assessment fully addresses impacts on the reef; and
• undertake an independent review of the management arrangements for Gladstone Harbour to ensure that port development is consistent with international best practice standards.[23]

2.18      The World Heritage Committee also requested that the Australian government respond to its recommendations by 1 February 2013, stating that a lack of substantial progress could place the Great Barrier Reef on the 'List of World Heritage in Danger'.[24]

Australian State Party Report

2.19      On 1 February 2013, Australia presented its State Party Report in response to the recommendations made by the World Heritage Committee. The State Party Report identified several key issues affecting the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, including climate change, extreme weather events, ocean acidification, chemicals, and land clearing leading to increased run-off.[25] The State Party Report also stated that 'nutrient-rich flood waters arising from the extreme weather events...have created conditions that result in increased numbers of the crown-of-thorns starfish, which preys on coral.'[26]

2.20      The Australian government outlined several initiatives in response to these challenges, including:

• the Great Barrier Reef Water Quality Protection Plan;
• research and management activities to combat crown-of-thorns starfish;
• a comprehensive zoning plan for the marine park;
• the establishment of the Coral Sea Commonwealth Marine Reserve; and
• the introduction of a carbon price.[27]

2.21      The State Party Report also indicated that the Australian government is undertaking a strategic assessment of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, with the aid of the Queensland government.[28]

Great Barrier Reef strategic assessment

2.22      The strategic assessment is being undertaken by the Commonwealth government and the Queensland government in accordance with section 146 of the EPBC Act. The Great Barrier Reef strategic assessment has two key components: a marine component and a coastal component. GBRMPA is leading the marine component which will look at the arrangements in place to manage and protect the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and World Heritage Area. The Queensland government is leading the coastal component which will look at coastal development such as planning for urban, industrial and port development.[29]

2.23      The assessment will examine whether the appropriate planning processes and management arrangements are in place to ensure development occurs sustainably and does not impact unacceptably on matters of national environmental significance.[30]

2.24      The terms of reference for the strategic assessment were approved on 30 August 2012 after a period of public consultation. The strategic assessment will reportedly take approximately 12 months to complete, and there will be further opportunities for public input, including on draft strategic assessment reports.[31] Outcomes of the strategic assessment will be presented to the Commonwealth Environment Minister.[32]

Independent Review of the Port of Gladstone

2.25      As part of the Australian government's response to the World Heritage Committee, the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities has commissioned an Independent Review of the Port of Gladstone.

2.26      The review is focussed on the port of Gladstone but may result in findings that are relevant to other ports adjoining the Great Barrier Reef. The review will be used to inform the strategic assessment outlined above. The review panel will report back to the Commonwealth government by 30 June 2013.[33]

UNESCO response to State Party report

2.27      The UNESCO World Heritage Committee will consider the State Party Report on the Great Barrier Reef in June 2013. The provisional agenda for that meeting recommends that the Committee welcome progress made with the strategic assessment, and the establishment of an independent review of the management of Gladstone Harbour. However, it notes with concern the limited progress made by Australia in implementing key requests and recommendations made by the Committee. The agenda also proposes that the Committee request that, among other matters, Australia commit to:

Ensure that no port developments or associated port infrastructure are permitted outside the existing and long-established major port areas within or adjoining the property.[34]

2.28      Finally the agenda proposes that the World Heritage Committee request Australia submit an updated report to the World Heritage Centre on the state of conservation of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area by 1 February 2014. The World Heritage Committee would examine that report at its 38th session in 2014, with a view to considering, in the absence of substantial progress, the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger at its 38th session in 2014.[35]

Queensland Ports Strategy

2.29      On 31 October 2012, the Queensland government released a draft Great Barrier Reef Ports Strategy 2012-2022 for public consultation. The Queensland government's stated aim is to ensure that port development in the Great Barrier Reef region occurs in a 'balanced and incremental way to support economic development while maintaining the outstanding environmental value of the Great Barrier Reef'. The strategy includes a commitment to restrict any significant port development, within and adjoining the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, to within 'existing port limits' until 2022.[36]

2.30      The Committee notes, however, that on releasing this draft strategy the Queensland government stated that it considered Balaclava Island and Port Alma to be within 'existing major ports'.[37] This was despite UNESCO's reactive monitoring mission finding that these areas were in pristine or near pristine areas of importance to the outstanding universal values of the Great Barrier Reef,[38] and the World Heritage Committee's 2012 recommendation that Australia should not permit any new port development or associated infrastructure outside of the existing and long-established major port areas within and adjoining the property.[39] The draft report being considered by World Heritage Committee at its meeting next week in Cambodia notes that the Queensland government's Great Barrier Reef Port Strategy presents the continued possibility for development outside existing major port areas (for example, Balaclava Island and Port Alma), which would be inconsistent with the World Heritage Committee' s previous recommendations.[40]

Ports and shipping issues in the Great Barrier Reef region

2.31      GBRMPA is currently in the process of developing a statement outlining its view on the environmental aspects of the development, operation and management of ports in and next to the Great Barrier Reef. Presently, there are 12 ports in the World Heritage Area, including two that are situated within the Marine Park (see figure 1 over).[41]

2.32      GBRMPA notes that mining and gas industry growth has led to an increase in port developments in the region. This has included proposed expansions in at least four ports along the coastline of the Great Barrier Reef, as well as three proposals for the development of new ports on previously undeveloped sites at Wongai (Bathurst Bay, Cape York), Fitzroy Terminal (in the vicinity of Port Alma) and Balaclava Island (near Curtis island, Gladstone).[42] The company involved in the proposed development at Balaclava Island announced its withdrawal of the project on 13 May 2013, citing among other reasons, 'poor current market conditions', 'excess port capacity in Queensland' and 'specific shipping limitations'.[43]

2.33      GBRMPA reports that these developments and the activities associated with them, such as dredging and sea dumping, could have negative outcomes for the environment. GBRMPA lists a range of potential environmental impacts such as seabed disturbance, the removal of existing habitats, the degradation of water quality and pollution from port waste.[44]

Figure 1: Map of Queensland ports in the Great Barrier Reef Region.[45]

2.34      Due to the increase in port developments, GBRMPA has observed an increase in commercial shipping:

There will be a significant increase in shipping in Reef waters over the next 10 to 15 years as a result of mining and LNG industry growth, port expansions and increases in trade.[46]

2.35      Ships carrying mining by-products usually contain substances such as sulphuric acid, ammonia, sodium cyanide and caustic soda.[47] This can be an issue in the case of an emergency, such as a collision or grounding, in which a chemical spill can have a devastating impact on the reef. Other negative impacts on the Great Barrier Reef include waste disposal and anchor damage.[48]

Other recent reports and strategies

2.36      In 2009, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority published the Great Barrier Reef Outlook Report 2009 (Outlook report), which assesses what is known about the reef ecosystem, its use, management, and the pressures it is facing, and its future. The report identifies climate change, continued declining water quality from catchment runoff, loss of coastal habitats from coastal development and remaining impacts from fishing as the priority issues reducing the resilience of the Great Barrier Reef.[49] The report concluded that the 'overall outlook for the Great Barrier Reef is poor' and that:

Further building the resilience of the Great Barrier Reef by improving water quality, reducing the loss of coastal habitats and increasing knowledge about fishing and its effects, will give it the best change of adapting to and recovering from the serious threats ahead, especially from climate change.[50]

2.37      In relation to ports and shipping in the Great Barrier Reef area, the Outlook report stated that:

Most routine shipping activities have negligible consequences. Dredging and construction of port facilities can have significant but localised impacts.[51]

2.38      However, more recent information released by GBRMPA notes that :

Since the release of the Outlook Report in 2009 and as a result of mining and coal seam gas industry growth, there has been a significant increase in development proposals to expand all of Queensland's major trading ports, including several new port development proposals.

These inshore areas of the Great Barrier Reef are where species and habitats critical to the healthy functioning of the Reef's ecosystems are under the greatest pressure from a range of threats, including coastal development.[52]

2.39      Most recently, GBRMPA published the Great Barrier Reef Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 2013. This strategy identifies that:

....inshore habitat and species continue to be impacted by a range of pressures including: declining water quality due to catchment run-off; loss of habitat because of coastal and port development; some remaining impacts of fishing; and climate change. [53]

2.40      The strategy further states that 'there is an urgent need for a systematic approach to addressing the cumulative impacts on inshore biodiversity'. [54] The strategy also warns that:

The scale and scope of the expansion of existing ports, along with proposals for new ports to meet export demands, requires careful consideration of the development of large-scale coastal infrastructure and subsequent increases in dredging activities, shipping movements and the number of ships moored in the Marine Park awaiting loading and offloading...The rapid urban expansion, mining and development or expansion of ports and related infrastructure occurring along the Great Barrier Reef is adding further pressure to inshore biodiversity...[55]

Overview of the provisions of the bill

2.41      The purpose of the bill is to amend the EPBC Act to implement recommendations made by the World Heritage Committee to ensure the Great Barrier Reef is not included in the 'world heritage in danger' list.[56]

2.42      Proposed section 24D of the bill seeks to prohibit the construction or development of new ports outside existing port areas. It also prohibits the development or expansion of existing ports in designated areas such as the Fitzroy Delta, Balaclava Island, Port Alma, northern Curtis Island, northern Great Barrier Reef, or any other area that could have a significant impact on the environment in the areas already designated.

2.43      Proposed section 24E would prevent the minister from approving any development after 20 March 2013 within existing port areas located in, or next to, the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, if these developments would impact the world heritage values of the Great Barrier Reef.

2.44      Proposed section 24F aims to put in place a moratorium on all developments impacting on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area until the strategic assessment has been completed and deemed adequate by the World Heritage Committee.

2.45      Finally, proposed section 24G would restrain the minister from approving any developments that do not deliver a net benefit for the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area.[57]

Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page