Mal Washer (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I rise to speak on the advisory report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Climate Change, Environment and the Arts on bills referred on 24 March 2011. As the committee chair has noted, this report considers three bills relating to the proposed establishment of a carbon farming initiative, namely: the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Bill 2011, the Carbon Credits (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011 and the Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Bill 2011.

This legislation has multiple objectives. Firstly, it seeks to help Australia to meet its objectives under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Secondly, it intends to create incentives for people to undertake land sector abatement projects. Thirdly, it seeks to achieve carbon abatement in a manner that is consistent with protection of the natural environment. The committee heard about the opportunities that the proposed scheme will create for engagement in land sector-based greenhouse gas abatement projects. That said, as the chair has outlined, there were a number of issues raised with the committee and I will specifically focus on some of them.

In the report the committee has recognised the need for ongoing consultation with a number of stakeholders. The committee heard evidence about the bill's treatment of native title, for example, and the issues that this has raised for non-exclusive native title holders. The committee is also aware of the concerns of the WA government about the relationship between native title holders and other stakeholders under the bill. In this regard, I note that the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency has stated at paragraph 4.51 of the explanatory memorandum of the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Bill:

Given the practical and legal complexity of the interaction of the scheme with native title, the Government intends to undertake further consultation with a broad range of stakeholders and complete detailed legal analysis before reflecting a considered approach in amendments to the bill.

The committee has supported ongoing consultation on this issue. Generally comments about consultation have been positive so the committee is optimistic that a satisfactory solution can be achieved. The committee also emphasised that consultation should be ongoing with key stakeholders who have identified disincentives to participation in the scheme. The committee also recognises the need for improved carbon literacy among landholders and potential participants in the scheme.

The committee found that the uncertainty surrounding matters that are to be addressed in regulations, such as the positive and negative lists, was a significant issue. The committee concluded that the government should make the proposed regulations for the scheme publicly available as soon as possible. For many people it will be this detail that will determine the level of support and participation.

The committee received a range of evidence about possible perverse outcomes. Environmental groups emphasised that carbon credits issued under the scheme must represent verifiable, genuine additional abatement. Others commented upon the potential impacts on water availability and biodiversity. Several participants also told us that the scheme could lead to competition for agricultural land and land use change, leading to community, economic and social impacts. The need for adequate funding to support research and development, especially in the development of methodologies, was raised by many. The committee considers that support for the research and development that is essential to methodology development must be forthcoming.

In conclusion, while recognising that the government is continuing to undertake consultation and refine operation of the scheme, the committee took the view that the principle of the bills should be supported. On behalf of the opposition members of the committee, we believe that key issues need to be resolved through the Senate process with appropriate amendments including but not limited to: permanence, additionality, protection of Western Australian sovereignty of land use, transparency of the regulations and protection of prime agricultural land. I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context