Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Nature Repair Market Bill 2023. Around 180 million years ago, the supercontinent of Gondwana split. One of the breakaway landmasses from that separation contained what would become known as Australia and Antarctica. Within 30 million years, Australia had fully separated and journeyed north on its own. Since then, changes in land formation and climate, and physical separation from the rest of the world, have led to the evolution of the unique flora and fauna we know in Australia today. Indeed, as a nation we're home to between 600,000 to 700,000 species, many of which are found nowhere else in the world. And, while the word 'biodiversity' is a scientific word, its meaning is simple: it describes the incredible array of different types of life we find around us and the delicate balance that exists between them all. It's a balance which enables them not just to survive but to thrive. It is this balance which is under threat globally.

My electorate of North Sydney is home to open scrub, dominated by black she-oaks, gully forests, estuarine mangrove forests on intertidal mudflats and estuarine saltmarshes, as well as sandstone rainforests, forest red gum and foreshore forests. And yet in this area, often referred to as the 'leafy Lower North Shore', we have 60 threatened species. Those are creatures like the powerful owl, the Regent honeyeater, the grey-headed flying fox and the giant burrowing frog, all of which called the geography now covered by my electorate home long before European settlement, but all of which are now facing the existential threat of annihilation.

Ultimately, biodiversity creates balance, and every life form plays a part in maintaining that balance. If we lose the bacteria that purify the water then the trees will not be able to get the water they need. As a result, many animals will lose their food source. As humans, we rely on this rich variety of nature for things like clean drinking water, food, medicine and shelter, and yet right across the country our unique nature is under threat. Prior to European settlement, diverse bushland habitats covered the gullies and ridge tops of the North Sydney Council area within my electorate. Today, less than five per cent of these unique vegetation communities remain and, due to our human-modified landscape, all are vulnerable to ongoing urban pressures. In the minister's own words, we're now 'the mammal extinction capital of the world', having lost more species than any other continent.

The fact that Australia has lost more mammal species than any other continent and has one of the highest rates of species decline in the developed world should be a source of national shame, yet for the preceding two decades the findings and reviews completed since the introduction of the EPBC Act in 1999 have quite literally been ignored. As a consequence, more than a hundred Australian species have been listed as either extinct or extinct in the wild, with the major causes of extinction being introduced species and habitat destruction and clearing. Meanwhile, the recent state of the environment report made it clear. In the past five years the number of threatened ecological communities has grown by another 20 per cent, and for the first time we have more foreign plant species than native ones in this country.

Looking to my own community, its level of awareness, key concerns and expectations were all clearly delivered to me, not only through direct conversations but via the results of a recent survey, which showed the vast majority of my community is very concerned about the dire state of Australia's natural environment. I'm worried we're not acting fast enough. My community is clear: success in this area must be measured in biodiversity repair and conservation, not just by a reduction in degradation. We must make every effort to rejuvenate nature. In the words of one resident, 'This is not a time for business as usual.'

In the face of a challenge of this scale, then, this government and this parliament have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to conceive and introduce truly transformational legislation to bring our nation together, uniting all levels of government: local, state and national. Private individuals, landholders, farmers, natural resource management groups, investors and banks, and businesses—large and small—must be a priority for us. Last night, I hosted an online community forum for my electorate, during which those in attendance heard from both the environment sector and the business sector. Both said that now is the time for action.

Everyone recognises the size of this challenge and is ready to work with the government to deliver a bold solution, and herein lies the rub with what we have before us. While the size of the challenge is well known, the government has chosen to start the process of looking at how we approach transformation by focusing on a small piece of the solution—the establishment of a nature repair market. It's a decision that confuses many and leaves them concerned that the government will be looking to personal and business investment to fix the problem, rather than ensuring it stays front and centre in driving action by prioritising the agreement of national environment standards and establishing the equivalent of a national environment protection agency, which the government has now given the working title Environment Information Australia.

In this context, my community fundamentally believes we should be debating a full suite of legislation that would deliver on the government's election commitment to bolster national environmental laws and introduce new national standards for development assessments in this place, in this moment. Improving the state of the environment requires national leadership; integrated management across federal, state and territory systems; new forms of funding; and improved monitoring and reporting. The sequencing should be that we have those reforms laid out before us before we debate this market mechanism.

We know from the Samuel review that the current EPBC Act is unfit for purpose and is failing to meet its objectives. As Professor Samuel himself concluded:

To shy away from the fundamental reforms recommended by this Review is to accept the continued decline of our iconic places and the extinction of our most threatened plants, animals and ecosystems.

The government have indicated they will deliver stronger laws designed to repair nature, to protect precious plants, animals and places, alongside national environmental standards to describe the environment outcomes we want to achieve and a new environment protection agency to make development decisions and properly enforce them, yet that's not what this legislation does.

The truth is many in my community are confused as to why the government is introducing a market based solution as its first priority, given the size and scope of the new environmental reforms required. North Sydney residents have told me that this bill should not replace proper reform and environmental protection laws; it should play a small part in a much bigger change to protect our natural environment. What we have before us not only puts the cart before the horse but drives it all the way to the market. We do not have stronger laws in place. We do not have national environmental standards. We do not have an agency to enforce the laws and the standards. My community fears that, without these as a strong foundation for reform, the market based scheme that this bill establishes may well fail, and failure in biodiversity protection could lead to perverse outcomes and set all efforts back significantly.

It's for these reasons that I not only support the second reading amendments moved by the members for Wentworth and Goldstein but also will be moving a number of proposed amendments during the consideration in detail debate to encourage the government to expedite broader reforms onto the same trajectory. The market should not be operational until (1) the new offsets national environmental standard is legally enforceable; and (2) the new Environment Protection Agency is legally established. The minister has indicated that these reforms are on their way, with an exposure due in the second half of 2023, so my amendment allows for a 12-month period for the broader reforms, within which this repair market would sit, to be developed, debated and passed. It is clear the government must take the lead in addressing the biodiversity and extinction crisis we face.

With this broader context in mind and essential root-and-branch reforms on the horizon, I consider the Nature Repair Market Bill a small step in the right direction. As I have outlined, the size of the challenge to enhance, protect and maintain our biodiversity requires all comers. This bill will make it easier for businesses, philanthropists and others to invest in repairing nature across Australia, allowing landowners to be paid by a third party for protecting and restoring nature on their property. Some of the programs the scheme might support include farmers removing invasive weeds and animals to give space for native animals and plants, or Indigenous rangers controlling feral animals. Groups like Landcare Australia have said it will encourage good landholder management of ecosystem services, such as restoration and protection of native habitat, with benefits for biodiversity, soil stabilisation, water quality and carbon sequestration.

I support the intent of the bill, but, in order to ensure optimal outcomes for people and nature, the bill must be strengthened. I was sent to Canberra by my community of North Sydney on a platform of more ambitious, more rapid action to address climate change. The impacts of climate change, including drought, bushfires, storms, ocean acidification, sea level rise and global warming, on our ecosystems is clear. We know many plants and animals cannot adapt to the effects of climate change, with 1,000 plant and animal species and ecological communities already at risk of extinction in New South Wales alone. In addition, we must recognise that action on nature repair cannot happen in isolation to action on climate change.

Overwhelmingly my community of North Sydney has told me the No. 1 priority for the environment portfolio is to address the underlying causes of poor biodiversity, which are human impacts, invasive species and climate related impacts. For this reason, I'm also proposing to amend the objects of this act to ensure that climate change drivers and impacts are incorporated and integrated into every step of environmental and biodiversity protection. The amendment adds to the objects of the act the objective:

… to promote the enhancement or protection of biodiversity against the urgent threat of climate change, drawing on the best available scientific knowledge.

This wording mirrors that which was recently passed through the Climate Change Act.

While there are many concerning findings and recommendations from Professor Samuel, perhaps the most worrying is that the community and industry do not trust the EPBC Act and the regulatory system that underpins its implementation. In this context, strong new institutions are essential to ensure the EPBC Act can be trusted to deliver the environmental outcomes required. A dominant theme in the 30,000 or more contributions received by the Samuel review was that many in the community do not trust the EPBC Act to deliver for the environment, and that institutional reform should promote transparency, accountability and integrity in the administration of the act, and monitoring, evaluation and improvement in the delivery of environmental outcomes.

In this context again I will be moving amendments to ensure the Clean Energy Regulator's activities reports and the Secretary's report on biodiversity certificates must not only be published on relevant websites but also tabled in parliament within 15 sitting days after the end of the financial year—again, mirroring similar amendments that I moved and that were successfully made to the climate bills. Tabling reports to the operation of regulatory schemes like the nature repair market promotes transparency and accountability. As the Scrutiny of Bills Committee outlines, there should be appropriate justification for not requiring the documents to be tabled.

As I've said previously in this place, Australian voters voted to have politics done differently. To do so, we must ensure information is shared beyond the minister and the two parties to the whole of parliament and, ultimately, our constituencies. Only through the consistent, accessible and timely provision of information are we able to do our jobs thoroughly as parliamentarians and can our communities hold us to account. As a North Sydney community member urged me: 'Let's not distract or shift accountability from the core challenge, Kylea.'

The minister, the government, all of us in this place and all of our communities must work together to stop the extinction crisis before it is too late. The State of the environment report written in 2021 told us:

… the state and trend of the environment of Australia are poor and deteriorating as a result of increasing pressures from climate change, habitat loss, invasive species, pollution and resource extraction. Changing environmental conditions mean that many species and ecosystems are increasingly threatened.

With the next report due in 2026, all of us in this place and across our communities should be prepared to hold ourselves to account for ensuring we pursue more than an expedient headline. Learning from the mistakes of the past, adopting the very clear and sensible recommendations of those who have looked at this challenge long and hard and ensuring any legislation we prioritise or pursue ultimately not just protects but restores and repairs our precious native flora, fauna and ecosystems. To do anything less is to fail to meet both the obligations and the opportunities presented to us as parliamentarians in this 47th parliament. Let's lead boldly and show that politics can be done differently to generate positive, sustainable change. I can guarantee that our great-great-grandchildren will thank us for it.

See this speech in context