Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Senator Wong. Now that the Coorong has reached crisis point and is critically threatened, as evidenced in the report on the health of the Coorong leaked last week, can the minister advise if, and if so when, the government plans to nominate the Coorong and the lower lakes Ramsar site under the convention’s Montreux Record of sites as undergoing change in ecological character prior to the Ramsar conference of the parties in October this year? Also, will the government list the area under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 as a critically endangered ecological community, and if not, why not?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Siewert, for the question. Can I say on the Coorong and the lower lakes that I have previously answered questions on that issue in this place, and it is a very serious situation we confront in that region. I have previously visited the lower lakes and, of course, to all South Australians the Coorong is an area that we absolutely understand the value of.

What the Australia government is dealing with there is, to be honest, a situation which results from a number of factors. The first of those is climate change and the reduction in water availability through the Murray-Darling Basin in southern Australia more generally, consistent with what the IPCC said and the CSIRO predictions. The second is a persistent drought. The third, of course, is a history of overallocation under successive governments, including by those who were in government prior to the Rudd Labor government. We are dealing with a very difficult situation in the lower lakes and the Coorong, and I have been quite clear about that. Obviously, we are confronting a situation where there were very low inflows for the last two years. We were hopeful, because of some of the weather predictions, that we might have seen a slightly less dry autumn than over the last two years. Unfortunately, to date in the relevant regions of Australia, that has not come to pass and we are still confronting very low inflows. Obviously, we are all hopeful of a better result in terms of rainfall over the winter. This is an issue that, as I said on previous occasions, I have asked for some urgent advice on given what has been put before the ministerial council.

I do make the point that the situation of the lower lakes has been something that certainly this government has been apprised of, as has the ministerial council, on previous occasions. You might recall, Senator Siewert, through you, Mr President, that we previously allocated $6 million to pump water into Lake Albert in order to manage the impact of low water levels and in order to stabilise its acid sulphate soil problem—and pumping is well underway on that issue.

In terms of the Montreux Record listing, which was mentioned I think in the second part of Senator Siewert’s question, the Montreux Record is a voluntary tool under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands which is used to highlight sites that have been subject to actual or likely adverse changes in ecological character. In December 2006, following discussions with South Australia, the Australian government did notify the Ramsar secretariat of a change in the ecological character of this Ramsar site in accordance with its obligations under article 3.2 of the convention. In making these notifications—which occurred, as I said, in December 2006—contracting parties are encouraged to consider whether the site would benefit from listing on the Montreux Record. The Australian government’s position is that Montreux listing is considered on a case-by-case basis under the guiding principle that Australia only lists sites on the record when all locally generated remedial actions have been exhausted and where there is a high probability that such a listing would assist in achieving improvements in the on-ground condition of the Ramsar site.

Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. The minister did not answer my question of whether the government were planning to list it under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Can I ask again: will they list under the Montreux listing? I know it has already been notified. I want to know whether it will be listed under the Montreux Record.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Through you, Mr President, I thought I addressed the Montreux listing issue; in fact I gave an answer on that issue as to what the Australian government’s position is. Let me put it this way: I will ascertain if there is further information in relation to the EPBC Act and come back to the senator. I have outlined the Australian government’s position in relation to the Montreux listing.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.