Coalition Additional Comments

Background

1.1        The Coalition recognises that the Great Barrier Reef is Australia’s greatest natural asset and is a biological ark.

1.2        The Coalition also has a proud track record on environmental stewardship, the former Howard Government having legislated the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 which this bill seeks to amend and having also created the multi-billion dollar Natural Heritage Trust that delivered on-the-ground results, helping to restore and conserve our environment and natural resources including through Landcare.

1.3        The Coalition is committed to protecting the Great Barrier Reef through measures that deliver real outcomes through a Reef 2050 plan, the details of which will be announced prior to the next election.

1.4        Given, as the majority report notes, the bill’s purpose to implement recommendations made by the World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Coalition Senators note with some concern recent developments regarding communications with this Committee.

1.5        Specifically, the Queensland Government has expressed a lack of confidence in being able to rely on the current Commonwealth Government ‘to provide unbiased, accurate assessments of the many actions the Queensland government is taking to protect the reef’ and decided instead to engage directly with UNESCO on matters relating to the Great Barrier Reef to protect the international reputation of Queensland and protect the international reputation of the reef.

1.6        Queensland’s Deputy Premier further outlined:

Our record in relation to protecting the Great Barrier Reef will stand up to any reasonable scrutiny. For example, shortly after we were elected we halted progress on the huge development being progressed by the former Labor government that was proposing five new coal terminals and a multicargo facility at Abbot Point. We halted it. In complete contrast, we are progressing a much smaller, balanced, incremental development.[1]

1.7        Regarding the bill inquiry, whilst having reservations about some of the committee comments in the majority report, Coalition Senators are not opposed to the principles behind its recommendations but make the following additional comments on each of them.

Majority recommendation 1

The committee recommends that port development in the Great Barrier Reef region should be confined to existing (already developed) major port areas, pending the outcomes of the strategic assessments currently being conducted by the Commonwealth and Queensland governments.

1.8        Coalition Senators believe this recommendation is at least very similar to the Queensland Government’s current approach and highlights that further consideration should be informed by the outcomes of strategic assessments already underway.

1.9        The Queensland Ports Strategy under development by the Queensland Government is being informed by the results of public consultation on the Great Barrier Reef Ports Strategy. The Great Barrier Reef Ports Strategy complements the strategic assessment of the Great Barrier Reef Coastal Zone being undertaken by the Queensland Government under the terms of strategic assessment agreement between the Queensland and Commonwealth Governments, one of two strategic assessments underway.[2]

1.10      The Great Barrier Reef Ports Strategy, described as presenting the vision and principles guiding future port development and planning in the Great Barrier Reef coastal region to 2022, already includes the commitment to restrict any significant port development, within and adjoining the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, to within existing port limits to 2022.[3]

Majority recommendation 2

The committee recommends that, if the minister decides to approve any port developments or port-related activities in existing (already developed) major port areas in the Great Barrier Reef region, these developments and activities should be subject to stringent conditions under the EPBC Act, including robust monitoring and reporting requirements.

1.11      As the majority report notes, the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC) advised that the Great Barrier Reef and world heritage areas are already matters of environmental significance under the Act, and that one port has been approved since the World Heritage Committee decision of 2012 and ‘that port was in an existing port area’.[4]

1.12      Coalition Senators expect that any Minister would already impose appropriately stringent conditions as part of any approval of such controlled actions referred under the EPBC Act as it exists and are therefore of the view that this recommendation is effectively not necessary.

Majority recommendation 3

The committee recommends that the Commonwealth government review the regulatory regime surrounding sea dumping in the Great Barrier Reef region, with a view to ensuring that dumping of any dredge spoil in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area is subject to the highest scientific and environmental analysis and taken only as an option of last resort.

1.13      Coalition Senators are of the view that, while such a review might have merit, these matters should already be being considered as part of the strategic assessments underway. Coalition Senators accordingly believe any such review or associated reform should be informed by the full strategic assessment and related processes already underway, as referred to above in Coalition Senators’ comments regarding majority committee recommendation 1, or if a separate review is needed it should be undertaken after the completion of these processes.

Majority recommendation 4

The committee recommends that the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities publish the report of the Independent Review of the Port of Gladstone as soon as it is made available to him.

1.14      Coalition Senators support this recommendation.

1.15      Regarding evidence and debate about the health of the Gladstone Harbour aquatic environment, Coalition Senators note that those engaged in debate place blame entirely, or virtually entirely, either with port development or with flood events.  Given this apparent polarity of opinion, Coalition Senators opt to rely, at least until the conclusion of the independent review underway, on the conclusions of the independent Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. Coalition Senators note, in this regard, the evidence given by the Authority that problems overwhelmingly appear to be the result of extreme flooding events.[5]

Majority recommendation 5

The committee recommends the bill not be passed in its current form and calls on the government to closely examine any additional safeguards arising from the strategic assessments and independent review with a view to developing robust regulatory and legislative safeguards to protect the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area.

1.16      Coalition Senators support this recommendation, which effectively acknowledges that there are existing processes underway – most significantly the strategic assessments and the independent review of the Port of Gladstone – addressing identified and potential issues and that these processes should inform the need or otherwise for any subsequent legislative reform.

1.17      Coalition Senators note the independent review is due to report to the Government by 30 June 2013[6] and that the strategic assessments are also anticipated to be completed this year.[7]

 

Senator Simon Birmingham Deputy Chair

Senator Bridget McKenzie Senator for Victoria

Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page