House debates

Tuesday, 28 February 2012

Bills

Antarctic Treaty (Environment Protection) Amendment Bill 2011; Second Reading

8:42 pm

Photo of Jane PrenticeJane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I should point out that the previous speaker spoke at length about krill, which is not mentioned anywhere in this bill at all.

I will repeat: it will not surprise you or the rest of Australia to hear that when November 2010 came around, Japanese research vessels were continuing their operations in Australian waters and no real action was taken and no real action has been taken since. Although Japan does not recognise Australia's claim to approximately 42 per cent of Antarctica, this government must get serious about protecting the sovereignty of our nation's borders and enforce our law via the Australian Antarctic Territory Acceptance Act 1933. The coalition warned the Gillard Labor government on three occasions that they should have sent an Australian Customs vessel to our waters in the Antarctic to monitor the situation between Japanese whalers and protesters on the Sea Shepherd. Once again, the government failed to listen to good advice. Then, after three anti-whaling protesters illegally boarded a Japanese ship, the government—or, should I say, the Australian taxpayer—was forced to pay the hefty bill to have them returned.

Australia needs to have a presence in these waters to ensure that the Japanese whaling fleet is reminded that we as a country do not approve of whaling in the Antarctic region and in order to monitor protesters who are putting lives at risk and potentially endangering the environment. Without this presence, the government is allowing the risk of further confrontations and the possibility of a serious collision between protestor and whaling boats which will risk lives and, should one of these vessels sink, endanger the environment.

This is the lesson that applies to the measures in today's bill. There is no point in signing treaties that implement changes of this kind if we do not have a practical way of enforcing them. For example, we have no real binding agreement regarding the question of possible mineral, oil and gas exploration and mining in the region. In the late 1980s, there was an attempt to come to such agreement, however the Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities never came into force. In the original Madrid protocol, which Australia signed and ratified, consultative parties are completely prohibited from undertaking mining exploration. Australia itself has agreed to a 50-year moratorium.

We are facing similar concerns about Australia's ongoing challenge to manage whaling fleets in the region. We will in the future have to deal with some very serious issues about Antarctica, including the question of mining and mineral exploration in addition to questions about sovereignty. It is very important that all other stakeholder countries, including Russia, Argentina, Chile and the United States, understand that Australia is serious in its commitment to this region. This legislation provides that extra guarantee and signals to the rest of the world that Australia is committed to its obligations to care for this environment with which we have been so closely linked so long.

With this bill we fulfil our international obligations and ensure that the minister has the power not only to grant safety approvals and environmental protection approvals but also to impose conditions on those approvals. This will lay a proper foundation for the protection of humans and vessels travelling to this region and thereby facilitate the protection of the Antarctic environment itself. As such, I support this amendment bill in this the year we celebrate the 100th anniversary of the first Australasian Antarctic expedition, led by Sir Douglas Mawson, and commend it to the House.

Comments

No comments