Senate debates

Tuesday, 16 August 2011

Bills

Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Bill 2011, Carbon Credits (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011, Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Bill 2011; In Committee

1:02 pm

Photo of Nick XenophonNick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

It's all good, despite the disapproving look of Senator Bernardi. But he's smiling now!

These amendments relate to the negative list. Amendment (4) states that projects which, based on advice by the Domestic Offsets Integrity Committee, have an adverse impact on the availability of water or on agricultural production should be on the excluded offsets project list. As I said in my second reading contribution, ensuring Australia's water availability is vital and I do not believe that it should be left up to regulations.

This amendment also states that, where a forest was established as a managed invest­ment scheme, it too should be on the excluded offsets list. I note that, since we last debated this matter, the government has tabled the draft Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Regulations. In terms of types of excluded offsets projects, I note that, in division 12, clause 61, reference is made to forestry managed investment schemes, so they are covered. That of course is welcome, and I congratulate the government for going down that path. Obviously it was something that was within consideration. But this amend­ment goes further. It states that, if it is determined by the minister, on the advice of the Domestic Offsets Integrity Committee, to have an adverse impact on the availability of water or on land and resource access for agricultural production, the project is deemed to be an excluded offsets project.

What is at stake here is simply this—that a Carbon Farming Initiative project should be an excluded offsets project if it is going to damage the availability of water or if it is going to damage land and resource access for agricultural production. It is that straight­forward. It does not go against the integrity of what the government is trying to achieve, but it does give a safeguard in terms of food production and water availability. We know from the very contentious debate about coal seam gas on prime farming land—a different issue altogether—the importance of preserving the integrity of our water supply in this country. That is why it is important that this amendment strengthens those safeguards for both water and prime agricultural production.

Comments

No comments