Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business (House)) Share this | Hansard source

Much as I would love to allow the minister to speak on my behalf, as he just attempted to do, I'll have a go at delivering this speech myself. The minister, as it happens, on this occasion—and I won't reflect on other occasions—is accurate: Labor will be supporting this particular piece of legislation. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Amendment (Authority Governance and Other Matters) Bill 2017 is the result of a review and consultation process that aimed to improve the management of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, ultimately to improve the protection of the Great Barrier Reef itself. Whatever differences we may have with the government on its actions in protecting the Great Barrier Reef, the governance changes that are here are common ground.

The government started the independent review of the marine park authority's governance in March last year. It evaluated whether the management of the authority under its current arrangements is adequate in delivering its statutory functions. The review process involved public submissions, a series of consultation meetings and engagement with a variety of stakeholders, including industry, community and conservation groups. The review found that, while the authority is widely supported, its current structure can be improved. This bill deals with those changes. I'd like to acknowledge the work of the head of the review, Dr Wendy Craik, who suggested that refreshed governance arrangements would enable the authority to better fulfil its role as the expert manager of the Great Barrier Reef in the future. The government has accepted all of the 24 recommendations for a new governance model for the authority, and Labor participated in the review process.

The bill aims to implement the recommendations of the review through a number of amendments to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act. These include separating the full-time chairperson position into two separate roles—a part-time chair and a full-time CEO. I must say that—without reflecting in any way on people who've held this position over the years—in terms of governance, you need a very good reason to combine the roles. As a general principle for good governance, I think it makes sense to separate these particular roles. Other amendments to the act include strengthening requirements for the appointment and termination of members of the board and a series of minor technical amendments to clarify the legislation that regulates the authority's functions. A modern marine park authority is important to Labor. It reflects our commitment to protecting the Great Barrier Reef. We want governance laws and policies that promote the reef's long-term health and climate resilience.

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority has been around for a long time. It was established through the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act in 1975, and it was set up because Australia recognised we needed to protect the iconic and precious Great Barrier Reef. Let's not forget that around that time it was being proposed that there be drilling directly on the Great Barrier Reef itself. Further protections have happened with respect to the Great Barrier Reef over the years, but today the reef is viewed differently to the way it was viewed in 1975. Today, if you talk to most scientists, the key additional measures that need to be taken to protect the Great Barrier Reef are not within the boundaries of the Great Barrier Reef but external to them. For a long time, when you had projects being proposed such as drilling on the reef itself, all the focus was within the boundary. Now we know the impact of climate change and the impact of the causes of climate change, in particular with respect to carbonic acid in the ocean and ocean acidification and what that does to growth rates, coupled with the impacts of run-off, and the need to have tough regulations on fishing, not only within the reef area itself. These are regulations that were largely put in place by the Howard government, I would note—although, when I started to put marine parks in different places, some of those opposite were less enthusiastic. But within the Great Barrier Reef it was done by the Howard government. It is critical to make sure that we have restrictions on a series of commercial fishing operations, in particular in the Coral Sea, as the cradle to the Great Barrier Reef.

My view has always been that when we deal with agricultural run-off and chemical run-off for protection of the reef we need to deal with the immediate palliative care that you end up having to put onto the reef itself, and the critical example of that is crown of thorns starfish. Some people have argued that we shouldn't deal with crown of thorns starfish, that we should deal only with agricultural run-off. And it is true that agricultural run-off is the cause of the problem. But I have been supportive over the years of measures to deal directly with crown of thorns starfish as well. When I previously held the portfolio on that side of the chamber, very good scientific work was done to reduce the number of injections required to kill the crown of thorns starfish.

It is important that we couple the works together—that the work on the reef itself in protecting the coral is being done but that we are, at the same time, taking a direct role in dealing with agricultural run-off. The agricultural run-off can go to issues of chemical run-off. It can also go to straight sediment issues, and I do believe we should not have a discussion about the Great Barrier Reef without being up-front about the challenge of the change to land clearing laws that was made under the Newman government. That has resulted in increased sediment load within the catchment area of the Great Barrier Reef through some of the deforestation that's taken place. Fortunately this time, with a majority in the Queensland parliament, the LNP won't be in a position to block the reversal of those Campbell Newman changes. The impact there was direct on the Great Barrier Reef itself.

We often talk about the impacts of climate change. I'll probably get to that in the second half, which will kick off after we go to 90-second statements, so I imagine we'll be back later today. But I do think it's important as well, within the climate change debate, to note that the impact of the causes of climate change is not only in temperature, not only in increased sea levels but also in what happens with respect to carbonic acid. You see, the increase in major weather events means that aspects of the reef get knocked around more often than they otherwise would. Carbonic acid, which is not caused by climate change but is caused by the causes of climate change, means that those corals grow back more slowly. This is where the reef is being attacked from every side. Think of those beautiful images in nature documentaries—and there's still some of it on the reef, and I'm not pretending that there's not, and there's still corals in the reef, and I'm not pretending that there's not; we still have a magnificent piece of World Heritage there. It is the case that some of those tree-like corals, the ones that are really slow growing, are the ones that are being knocked around at a rate that means that to simply say, 'Oh, but there's still coral there' doesn't answer the question, because we are seeing a change in the ecological character of the reef. Those delicate corals are the ones most likely to be knocked out during a major weather event, whether it's through a massive inundation or whether it's through increased intensity of cyclonic activity. When they get wiped out, the increased sediment load and the increased chemical load that's coming off agricultural land, combined with carbonic acid, means that it's growing back more slowly. It's being knocked down more regularly and is growing back more slowly.

It's very important in any debate about the Great Barrier Reef that we don't simply ask, 'But will a magnificent reef still be there?' We also have to ask, 'Will the extraordinary biodiversity of the Great Barrier Reef that was first being protected in 1975 still be there?' The answer to that will never be simple. Some people would like to pretend that the answer to that will be resolved by a single project—by either conducting a single project or by preventing a single project. Some people will talk about the need to act on climate change, and that is absolutely critical. But the truth is that the only way we're going to be able to protect the Great Barrier Reef is through action on every side. We need action from the left-hand side, when you're looking from the western side of the reef, with respect to agricultural run-off and deforestation, and from the east with respect to proper protections for the Coral Sea, and of course from above in making sure, both with respect to climate change and carbon levels—

See this speech in context