Senate debates
Wednesday, 9 August 2006
Questions without Notice
Wind Farms
2:11 pm
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is to Senator Ian Campbell, Minister for the Environment and Heritage. Isn’t the sole basis of the minister’s defence of his Bald Hills decision a single sentence from the Biosis report, that ‘almost any negative impact on the species could be sufficient to tip the balance’ against the orange-bellied parrot? Did the minister even bother to read the next sentence in the report, which says, in relation to blocking wind farms:
... such actions will have extremely limited beneficial value to conservation of the parrot without addressing very much greater adverse effects ... currently operating against it.
Doesn’t that sentence completely destroy the minister’s defence of this blatantly political decision? Can the minister tell the chamber why he has failed to tell the whole truth and, instead, has selectively quoted words to justify his political decision to veto Bald Hills?
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I am happy to respond to, I think, a very sensible question from Senator Wong. It goes to two issues. Firstly: did I read the report? In fact, I read the whole report. I read all of the advice and thoroughly understood it. Having listened to what Senator Wong read into the record, it reinforces the case that a whole range of actions need to take place if Australia as a country is going to save this endangered species. In fact, if you go to the Victorian government’s website, there is one thing that you will find and one thing that you will not find. Firstly, you will not find a copy of the report that they had before Minister Hulls—
Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Urban Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
What about your report?
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
saying that the impact on this bird was potentially catastrophic. It was exactly the same advice, but Mr Hulls has refused to make that available to the Australian people. He continues to hide that from the Australian people because he does not want the people to see the scientific advice that was before him. What the Labor Party is saying is that, when a Labor Party minister makes a decision to stop a wind farm in a Labor electorate, it is based on science, but if I make a decision it is political. I refer the senator to someone who did in fact play politics with the Bald Hills wind farm, and that is a now retired, or defeated, member of parliament: Christian Zahra. I will table this document. Christian Zahra sent out a wind power station survey before the last election.
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Is that why you used taxpayers’ money?
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
He promoted the fact that he had brought into the parliament a thing called the Local Community Input into Renewable Energy Developments Bill 2003. This was Christian Zahra’s private member’s bill, which I presume, if it had got to the Senate, Senator Evans and Senator Wong would have voted for. This bill would have ensured the very big subsidies that the federal government provides to wind power. I remind the Senate that this is a government that has supplied $3 billion worth of subsidies to produce 600 wind turbines. This government is, in fact, the best friend the wind energy industry has ever had. But Christian Zahra, a member of the Labor Party, made it very clear to his constituents—
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, I rise on a point of order going to relevance. It is very interesting hearing about the minister’s interest in someone who was once in the parliament, but the question was a very specific one, about one sentence in the Biosis report that the minister has conveniently edited from all of his answers in defence. It was a very specific question. The minister has made very little, if any, attempt to address the issue in the question. I ask you to remind him of relevance.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
On the point of order, Mr President.
Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Yes, on the point of order, Senator.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The senator’s question related to whether this was a political decision and I am addressing the issue of the politics. Furthermore, she says that I deleted one aspect from my defence. In fact, unlike Minister Hulls, I published the whole of the Biosis report on the internet and I call on Mr Hulls to publish his advice.
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, I rise on a point of order going to relevance. It goes to the minister answering questions that are directed to him about his responsibilities. While he may be interested in Victoria—he may want to move to Victoria; he may want to have a personal relationship with Mr Hulls—the point is he is here as the responsible minister to answer for his decisions. He is making no attempt to answer and defend those decisions.
Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I hear your points of order. We have had three points of order, which will mean that the opposition gets fewer questions today. Senator Campbell, I would remind you of the question and remind you also that you have a minute and a half to complete your answer.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I was talking about the fact that Christian Zahra had reminded his constituents that there were very big subsidies paid by the federal government—and I am quoting from his brochure—to wind power generators and his bill would ensure that those subsidies would only go to those wind developments built in areas where the local community supports them. Without the federal government subsidies, these developments would not be economically viable. Christian Zahra was quite right on that.
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
That’s what you said in Denmark when you were playing politics.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Yes.
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Chris Evans interjecting—
Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Evans, I will not call you again. If you keep interrupting, I will warn you.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I certainly hope that Senator Wong will ask a supplementary question because I still have a lot of material here to address. Mr Zahra asked all of his constituents in the Bald Hills area, ‘Do you think that the growing number of wind power station developments will damage the beauty of the South Gippsland coastal area, yes or no?’ Then he said, ‘Do you support Christian Zahra’s private member’s bill, which will give local communities a bigger say as to where the wind turbines are built?’ When Senator Wong asks her supplementary, which I hope she does, I hope she will also say whether she would have voted for Christian Zahra’s bill if it had come before the Senate. Would Senator Faulkner have supported Christian Zahra’s bill? Would Senator Evans?
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I ask a supplementary question, Mr President. I, again, remind the minister of the sentence in the Biosis report in relation to blocking wind farms. It says that such actions would have an ‘extremely limited beneficial value to conservation of the parrot’. Given that, Minister, how can you possibly use the Biosis report to justify the decision in relation to Bald Hills? Have you done anything to take any action, in relation to that second sentence, to address the very much greater adverse effects operating against the orange-bellied parrot which pose the real threat to its survival?
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The answer is yes. The Commonwealth government has spent in excess of $1 million on orange-bellied parrot recovery programs. The Victorian government, working in cooperation with the orange-bellied parrot recovery team, has in fact either stopped or moved 12 other developments in the potential habitat area. So there is substantial work going on to address all of those. I think that Senator Wong should refer to Christian Zahra’s pamphlet, which says, ‘There are many important industries in our area which can be badly affected by wind power station developments, like tourism, and appropriate—
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, I rise on a point of order going to relevance. The minister was asked a question about the Biosis report and he is answering in relation to something completely different—a petition. How on earth can that possibly be relevant? I understand the minister does not want to answer the question because he has no answer.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
On the point of order, Mr President.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
You cannot ask a question that accuses me of making a political decision and ignoring science and then not address both issues in the answer. If the senator wants to ask me a question, she cannot then dictate how I answer it. I will answer it and address the accusations she has made and address the question she has asked.
Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
On the point of order, I think everybody would have heard, if they could hear over the noise in the chamber, that the minister did answer the second part of the question. He has 24 seconds left to complete his answer to that supplementary question. I remind all senators that interjections across the chamber are disorderly. Today has been rather noisy and I hope that you will cease making these interjections across the chamber.
Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I want to conclude by making the case that the Labor Party’s hypocrisy on this knows no bounds. The former Labor member for McMillan was going around telling constituents that many business groups and businesspeople are concerned about the effect of wind power stations and that the Foster chamber of commerce recently passed a motion objecting to the establishment of further wind power stations. The reality is that, if Christian Zahra had been re-elected, this mob would have voted to stop the Bald Hills proposal. (Time expired)