Senate debates

Thursday, 20 March 2014

Bills

Defence Legislation Amendment (Woomera Prohibited Area) Bill 2013; Second Reading

11:36 am

Photo of Helen KrogerHelen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is with great interest that I rise to make a small contribution to this debate on the Defence Legislation Amendment (Woomera Prohibited Area) Bill 2013 and, in doing so, I firstly want to commend my colleagues on this side of the chamber for their contributions this morning and on previous days in relation to this bill. I recognise and acknowledge the persuasive comments made by my colleague Senator Ruston—a person who, at her very heart, centre and core, is a passionate advocate for the rural and regional sector of South Australia. This bill directly affects that sector. If anyone has any doubt about that, they should listen to the comments that have just been given in this chamber by Senator Ruston, because they demonstrate how those of us on this side of the chamber are at our very core absolutely, wholeheartedly committed to the interests of that sector. It is also worth noting that it is not just Senator Ruston and Senator Farrell but also Senator Birmingham, Senator Bernardi, Senator Edwards and Senator Fawcett who have risen to make contributions on this bill and who have very real concerns and interests in relation to it.

This bill, which has been introduced by Senator Farrell, attempts to amend the Defence Act 1903 in order to establish a framework for administering access to the Woomera Prohibited Area in South Australia. I acknowledge and commend him on his continued interest in this area and in the Defence Act 1903, because I know that he does have real concerns about this issue. These concerns are shared by the minister and, as I have said, by senators who have been very engaged in the issue, who include not only senators from South Australia but also senators from the coalition who have been on the foreign affairs, defence and trade legislation and reference committees for some time now. As one of those senators, I know that this issue has been of particular interest to us for some years.

The bill enables the minister to make rules prescribing certain matters, including defining the WPA, the Woomera Prohibited Area, and the zones to be demarcated within that area. It also creates a permit system for access and use by non-defence users. The bill introduces offences and penalties for entering the WPA without permission and for failing to comply with the condition of the permit. It provides for compensation for any acquisition of property from a person otherwise than on just terms, and it also provides for a cap on compensation payable to a person for any loss or damage incurred in the WPA.

May I again commend Senator Farrell. He has admirably persisted in furthering the interests of the state of South Australia on this important matter, just as the coalition senators whom I have referred to earlier when I rose to speak on this matter have. The government has long shared those concerns—concerns that we have not adopted since the September election. As I said, they are concerns that we have canvassed, discussed and travailed on behalf of the interests of many through various avenues, including an inquiry by a committee.

We are here today debating this private senator's bill for one reason, and I have to say that that reason is the former Rudd-Gillard government's delay in considering this matter as a priority. It is why this matter has now been submitted by Senator Farrell as a bill to be considered during private senator's time. As Senator Farrell is well aware, the previous defence minister was only too happy to allow the outcome of Dr Allan Hawke's review, which was completed in 2011, to—and I hate to say it—sit in a corner and gather dust, because that is exactly what happened. This was so symptomatic of so many bills and issues of particular concern. It was their approach to what they considered a priority for the country and for South Australia. Notwithstanding the questions on this matter that were directed by the coalition time and time again, the review was stuck in a corner and gathered dust. It failed to take any take shape, as nothing further was undertaken in the minister's office to advance the matter for another two years. So if there is any question as to why this issue has not been considered a priority and a matter of some urgency then that question has to be directed at those who sit on the other side of the chamber, because they determined that they would sit on this matter and not advance it.

This reflects somewhat on the now opposition's approach to all matters of defence, because when you look at their approach to the defence budget it was essentially to trash it and to take billions of dollars out of the defence budget to prop up their failing policies in so many other areas. This, in effect, undermined any proper strategic approach that could have been taken with the investment of money in defence. In essence, I think they used the defence budget as their slush fund—and that should be condemned, and I condemn it here today. However, they have been quite open clear on the intended direction in this area.

My colleague Senator Fifield has indicated that this legislation is in the process of being prepared in an amended version, with a planned introduction in this autumn sitting—and there is a reason for that. As I said, this is no flight of fancy; we have been making serious, considered deliberations on this matter. This has been undertaken in a proper, comprehensive, thorough way, and the minister, I understand, has his own version of this that is to be introduced, as I said, in the autumn sitting. But an important part of that was a thorough and more consultative approach than the previous government sought to undertake, so that all stakeholders had an opportunity to make their submissions and give us their considered views on how they would be affected by any bill. I am informed by Senator Johnston himself that this amended and more thorough legislation is nearing completion and that the concerns of those stakeholders in South Australia and in the Northern Territory have been more adequately addressed and will be more adequately addressed.

I am not sure whether Senator Farrell is frustrated by the way in which this has been undertaken. I can only presume he is, seeing as he has submitted his own bill. I can appreciate that frustration, but I think it is frustration and vexation that he should direct towards his own colleagues, those on the other side of the chamber. This coalition government wants to introduce the right bill. We want to do it right first up. We want to do it right so that it fixes a number of failings in the bill that we are now debating.

Having been on either the Senate or joint foreign affairs, defence and trade committees for close to six years now, I have had the opportunity to visit a number of very important defence facilities, and that has really informed my appreciation of what we are debating today. I understand and recognise the importance of the defence industry to South Australia and I view that as one of a number of reasons why we must ensure that legislation encompassing one of the world's premier weapons-testing ranges is absolutely first rate. We must recognise the importance of the Woomera Prohibited Area not just to Australia but to broader international interests. We are talking here about a national asset of significant importance, so it is fundamental that this be addressed in a proper way and that we get it right first up. The consultation process that has taken place over a significant amount of time has been very comprehensive and incorporates the views of a lot of people—as I said earlier, taking into account all stakeholders.

On 5 September 2013, Defence met with representatives of the South Australian Department for Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy, and Defence SA to discuss matters, including the pastoral leases that are captured in this area, and have gone through a consultative process with them. In December 2013, a WPA Advisory Board meeting was held in Woomera itself. I note that the WPA Advisory Board comprises the chair, Mr Stephen Loosley, who has presided over it in the most competent way, and I cannot underscore how fortunate we are to have someone of his expertise as chair; the deputy chair, Mr Paul Holloway; and senior ex-officio representatives of the Australian government departments of Defence, Industry and Finance, and the South Australian Department for Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy, and Defence SA. The board met with a number of stakeholders, including pastoralists, resources companies, and rail owners and operators. The pastoralists and resources companies advised that coexistence with Defence in the WPA is working well. The rail companies still have some concerns about potential future disruption but have a better understanding of how they can work with Defence, and Defence is continuing to work with them to develop communications protocols. A further WPA Advisory Board meeting, I understand, was held on 18 February 2014 in Adelaide. I am not aware if they have already met, but I know that it was certainly in the pipeline to meet with Indigenous groups, conservation groups and the South Australian Chamber of Mines and Energy.

In closing, I stress to Senator Farrell that the minister is bringing something to this chamber which we hope will actually factor in the concerns of the broader stakeholders, and I ask him to wait.

Comments

No comments