Since
its election in September last year the Abbott Coalition Government has
implemented a series of changes which have far-reaching ramifications for the
natural environment and ultimately for the human community which relies on the
important services provided by a healthy natural environment.
Some
aspects of the Coalition's actions in relation to the major environmental issue
of climate change policy were discussed in an earlier post on this blog. (http://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/the-abbott-government-and-environment.html)
This
post outlines four of the Government's other decisions which relate to the
natural environment.
NO FEDERAL SCIENCE PORTFOLIO
A background matter which
has significance for the natural environment and its conservation was the
surprising decision by the new Government not to appoint a Minister for
Science. This is the first time since 1931 (except for a brief period during
World War 2) that there has been no Minister for Science. Science in Abbott's Government is largely the
responsibility for the Minister for Industry, Ian Macfarlane, with some aspects
being part of the portfolio of the Minister for Education. So, as has been noted with disbelief by some
commentators, Australia has a Minister for Sport but no Minister for
Science. Whatever the Prime Minister
says to explain the lack of a science portfolio in a period when science is an
ever-increasing contributor to our lives, it is inevitable that this strange
decision has been seen as an indication that science is not considered a
priority by the government.
"ONE STOP SHOP" FOR
ASSESSING ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS
The
Minister for the Environment, Greg Hunt, has commenced work on creating a
"one stop shop" for assessing the ecological impacts of major
projects. Under the current system major
projects have to be approved by the federal government under the Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act (introduced by the Howard Government
in 1999) as well as by the states under their legislation.
The
Abbot Government intends to devolve all environmental assessment on such
projects to the states. It claims that
such a system would "slash red tape and increase jobs and
investment". When this rationale is
used it is quite obvious that the priority is development at the expense of the
natural environment - despite claims to the contrary.
Naturally,
this move has been welcomed by business because it considers the change will
save time and expense. And, according
to Maria Tarrant, deputy chief executive of the Business Council of Australia,
it will provide "certainty" for projects.
Those
concerned with conservation have good reason to be worried about Hunt's new
system because it is unlikely to provide even the equivalent protection
available under the present far-from-perfect system. Furthermore, the recent record of at least
some states on environmental protection indicates they are ill-qualified to
take over sole responsibility for environmental protection.
For
example, some of the NSW Government's decisions have shown a cavalier disregard
for the environment. These include the
decision to allow recreational hunting in some national parks, the three year
trial of grazing in 60 national parks, changes to native vegetation regulations
easing restrictions on land-clearing, cutting back on protected areas for the
critically endangered Grey Nurse Sharks in Marine Parks and changes to the
State Environment Planning Policy (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive
Industry) to make the "significance" of the resource to the economy
the central consideration in the approvals
process.
Hunt is hoping that
agreements with all states will be finalised by September this year.
PORT
DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE GREAT BARRIER REEF COAST
On December 10 Environment
Minister Hunt formally approved the Abbot Point (north of Bowen) and Curtis
Island (near Gladstone) projects under the EPBC Act. Abbot Point is set to become one of the
largest coal ports in the world while an LNG (liquefied natural gas) plant and
port is being developed on Curtis Island.
Mr Hunt said that he had
imposed "some of the strictest conditions in Australian history to ensure
impacts are avoided, mitigated or offset".
Despite Hunt's claim, there has been considerable concern about the
impact of these developments on the Great Barrier Reef. A major concern has been the effect that the
dumping of 3 million cubic metres of dredged material from the Abbot Point
development will have on the marine park. Opponents of the dumping of this
dredged material had hoped that the Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority would
ban any dumping in the Marine Park. However, on January 31 the Authority
announced it had approved the dumping.
The Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park is a World Heritage Area. UNESCO's World Heritage Committee has
been concerned for some time about port development in the vicinity of the
Great Barrier Reef World Heritage area. It has told the Australian
Government that it is considering putting the Great Barrier Reef on the
"in danger" list unless Australia addresses key threats to the Reef
from industrialisation - primarily from coal and gas port projects along the
Great Barrier Reef coast. The Committee will consider whether any progress has
been made in addressing its concerns when it meets in June this year.
Given the decisions made by
Hunt and the Marine Park Authority, it is highly likely that the Heritage
Committee will put the Great Barrier Reef on the "in danger"
list. If this happens the negative
publicity for Australia is likely to be significant.
ATTACK
ON THE TASMANIAN FOREST AGREEMENT
Another World Heritage Area
is receiving attention from the Abbott Government. In 2013 the World Heritage Committee approved
a 170,000 hectare extension to the Tasmanian World Heritage Area (WHA). This extension followed an agreement made
between all sides involved in decades of disputation over Tasmanian forests. Lengthy consultation between business, union
and green groups led to a deal which secured government payments of $363
million to the timber industry and included a sign-off by all parties to the
World Heritage Area extension. The deal
was also endorsed by the Tasmanian Parliament.
During the 2013 election
campaign Tony Abbott indicated that the Coalition did not support the WHA
extension. Environment Minister Hunt is applying to the World Heritage
Committee for the removal of 74,000 hectares from the extension when the
Committee meets in June. The Coalition appears completely unconcerned about the
consensus reached between the industry and green groups and the fact that the
settlement is in the interests of a prosperous timber industry which will be
able to export its products – something it was having difficulty doing before
the agreement because of sustainability issues.
If the Government gets its way the forest wars will erupt again.
Given what has happened
with the Reef and what Hunt and the Tasmanian Liberals are trying to do,
UNESCO's World Heritage Committee will be wondering about the Australian
Government's environmental credentials and its indifference to world opinion.
Conclusion
Before September's federal
election it was obvious that the environment would suffer if the Coalition won
office. That is not to say that the
Labor government it succeeded always acted in the best long-term interests of
the natural environment. It didn't. Politicians in general appear to have
difficulty in grasping that we as humans rely on the services of the natural
environment for our own well-being. This
lack of understanding is epitomised by politicians' obsession with the economy
at the expense of the environment - an obsession which completely ignores the
fact that the economy and human society are both subsets of the natural
environment. The economy – and human
society - will suffer in the medium to long term if the natural environment is
degraded. There are of course other factors
which make it easy for politicians to ignore environmental degradation, one of
the most significant being the shortness of the electoral cycle. It is very difficult to see how this problem
of political ignorance/indifference can be overcome.
Hildegard
Northern Rivers
Guest Speak is
a North Coast Voices segment allowing serious or satirical
comment from NSW Northern Rivers residents. Email ncvguestpeak at gmail dot com
to submit comment for consideration.
No comments:
Post a Comment