Trevor Evans (Brisbane, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

This motion really does contain some fine sentiments. I share some of the member for Griffith's concerns about recent bleaching events. Sentiments are fine and they do have their place, but sometimes actions and outcomes are what matter more. Anyone who genuinely cares about the Great Barrier Reef and has been following its health and its progress for many years will know that it seems to get put on the UN watch list when Labor is in government and taken off the UN watch list when the Liberals are in government. It happened recently. When the coalition government took office in 2013, the Great Barrier Reef was on the UN World Heritage Committee's watch list, basically because Labor was proposing four sites for the dumping of dredge spoils. When we took office we put a stop to the dredge sites and the Great Barrier Reef was taken off the UN's watch list.

I'm glad the member for Griffith referenced the World Heritage Committee's recent session because in that session they congratulated this government on its work to help protect the reef. Specifically, they mentioned their considerable appreciation of the efforts of this government in the creation and implementation of the Great Barrier Reef's long-term plans. That sort of track record extends back decades for Liberal governments. After all, it was a Liberal Prime Minister who set up the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority all those years ago. I'm very proud to say that more recently this government has directed record amounts of funding towards the Great Barrier Reef. The Reef Water Quality Protection Plan, the Great Barrier Reef Climate Change Action Plan, the Reef Guardian stewardship program have all been initiated and funded under this government. Let me put that another way. Rather than expressing mere sentiments, this government has done more—put more money on the table, made bigger commitments and put in place more programs—than any other government of any persuasion in Australia's history.

Some of the sentiment in this motion is about linking the health of the Great Barrier Reef to achieving our commitments under the Paris agreement. That's good and fine. Of course, the answer to that is that Australia will meet its commitments under the Paris agreement under this government, just like we met and exceeded our targets under Kyoto. Given Australia's size and place in the world, the bigger risk to the reef is other nations not meeting their commitments. That's where more of our sentiments and, indeed, more activist efforts should be directed.

One line in this motion really grabbed my attention. It's the one about the possibility of a loan to Adani for a railway line. This is where it ceases to be just a sentiment for Labor and moves into a place where Labor could do something, actually take action, if they meant it. The Adani Carmichael mine in Queensland is going ahead because the Labor state government approved it. Let's not get distracted by sentiments or words here. If you don't like the Adani mine, you should go straight to the government that approved it, that gave it its licence, that set the environmental conditions and that laid out its transport plans.

The mover of this motion, the member for Griffith, has an electorate that entirely overlaps with that of the Deputy Premier of Queensland, Jackie Trad. She is the deputy leader of the Labor government that approved the mine. Popular rumour has it that Jackie Trad calls the shots inside that government and tells the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines, Anthony Lynham, how high to jump. If the member for Griffith really wanted to take action to stop the Adani mine, she should start with them. She should talk to her Queensland Labor counterparts, including those in her own electorate, and she should be leveraging her influence with them on George Street, not grandstanding in Canberra.

The final reference to the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility is probably the most misleading and ill-advised sentiment of all. Let's be clear here: there's an application for a loan because the Queensland Labor government arranged for that application to be submitted. The Queensland Labor government's proposal is for an application for a NAIF loan. Their names are at the top of the paperwork. Their approvals will require Adani to build community rail not private infrastructure. They will require Adani, through their transport conditions, to build infrastructure to benefit the entire community through that area. In other words, because they've asked Adani to build infrastructure not for their own private purposes but for the benefit of the entire community, it is therefore a project that becomes eligible for a NAIF loan. Let's not forget that, if the loan goes ahead, the Queensland Labor government will get the money in their accounts before passing it on. The Labor Party is saying one thing to the people of inner Brisbane about Adani and is saying another thing to the people of regional Queensland. They need to be called out on it.

See this speech in context