Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The President has received a letter from Senator Bob Brown proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion, namely:

The recent oil and chemical spill from the Pacific Adventurer on the south-east Queensland coast.

I call upon those senators who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

The Acting Deputy President:

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today’s debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A major environmental catastrophe, on a global scale, is still unfolding on the ecologically significant coast of southern Queensland. It comes from the fact that the motor vessel Pacific Adventurer, of more than 100 metres with some 50 containers of ammonium nitrate stored on and above its decks, sailed north from Newcastle after there had been a great deal of publicity about category 5 Cyclone Hamish off the Queensland coast and continued to steam north into seas affected by that cyclone. Last Wednesday morning, at approximately 3.20, 31 of the 50 containers off the deck of the ship went into the ocean. I do not know whether that was by deliberate intent to save the ship or whether it was because the containers came loose and were effectively catapulted into the ocean. One of those containers then rammed into the ship, smashing part of its hull and releasing fuel oil into the ocean for some seven nautical miles, or 13 kilometres, off Cape Moreton. The details of what happened then are unclear, but we do know that what was then thought to be a 20-tonne spill of this toxic oil has become, according to the Deputy Premier of Queensland, a 250-tonne spill of oil. Most of that is on the pristine beaches of Moreton Island, Bribie Island and the Sunshine Coast to the north.

The question is: why on earth did this ship leave Newcastle and steam into what we now know to be conditions it could not handle as a result of the cyclone coming south? Its command and its company and the maritime authorities in Australia knew before the ship left Newcastle that there was a category 5 cyclone off the Queensland coast. I have not been able to ascertain whether the ship was due to call into Brisbane, but anyway it was en route to Indonesia with some 300 or 500 tonnes of ammonium nitrate to be used as part of an explosive facility for the Indonesian mining industry.

The first questions one might ask are: how much ammonium nitrate is being sold to Indonesia, under what circumstances and with what assurances of safety, given the history of the abuse of ammonium nitrate that there may have been in Indonesia? This is, of itself, a serious question that must go to the authorities. That said, how could a ship that was sailing to Indonesia sail directly into the path of a cyclone which is at the top category of seriousness? According to the Queensland government:

During cyclone activity, ships are ordered out to sea away from the port. Being out to sea is the safest place for a large ship to be during cyclone activity. The ship was travelling under normal coastal shipping protocols within ship navigation lanes. The conditions at sea were not considered to be significant enough to prevent commercial shipping movements.

I ask: ‘not considered’ by whom? There are two entities here: one is the national shipping authorities and the other is the shipping corporation itself, the owners of the ship.

On the second matter, if you look at the details about this ship, you will find that they are proud to announce that they have very sophisticated communications with head office around the clock. I presume that means in London, although it may mean in Hong Kong. Whatever the case, the shipping company itself was fully aware of this ship, its cargo, that cyclone and these circumstances presumably on a minute by minute basis, but it did not act to prevent this disaster from unfolding. The same may be said of the national authorities. Who was monitoring this ship? Who allowed it to leave Newcastle loaded with dangerous chemicals and a huge supply of oil and sail into those foul weather conditions? I suspect no-one. I suspect that national shipping surveillance is such that it is simply left to the commercial operators to make these decisions. That is unforgivable and unacceptable for this nation, with its 12,000 kilometres of fantastic coastlines, in an age where we have seen repeated oil and chemical spills from the oceans end up on the shores of this country. This is 20 years after Exxon Valdez, and it seems that the government—or at least the authorities over which it has command—were asleep when this ship left Newcastle and were asleep when it sailed into the cyclone affected waters.

I went to Moreton Island on Friday and saw there the massive oil spill washing up into the rocky canyons below Cape Moreton and then onto the adjacent beach. From the helicopter, I saw in the 20-kilometre spill spreading along the coastline perhaps a dozen or 20—maybe there were more than that, I do not know, but I doubt it—people with rakes and buckets. This was 2½ days after the spill occurred and at least two days after the oil spill had been noted in the ocean by a number of aircraft. We have to ask if that is okay. The answer is no. There has to be some form of culpability that there could have been so little activity in the wake of a known environmental disaster. The shipping company said 20 or 30 tonnes at the outset, and we now know from the Deputy Premier of Queensland that it was 10 times that amount. All of this will be subject to an inquiry.

This ship was heading up past the Great Barrier Reef. Where this oil spill has occurred is a total disaster. There are at least people there with buckets. These are terrific, good-hearted people. I spoke to them. The word that kept coming up was ‘despondent’, because they were dealing with something far bigger than their wherewithal, but they wanted to protect the ecosystem on Moreton Island. I have no doubt the same applied elsewhere. With this large amount of oil coming ashore, why was there not much faster action? I am told there are 300 people on the island today, but why was that not so on Friday?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Good question. Who should have been doing that?

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a serious matter, Senator.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is for the Queensland government, too.

Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brown should be heard without interjection or comment from the sideline.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The other thing that is extraordinarily obvious is that removing the oil from the sand is a delicate operation. I saw bulges under the oil—it is thicker than molasses—where crabs and other creatures were building up pressure to try to get out of the choking envelope. They burst out and then were faced with tens of metres of oil in all directions—no escape for them. The quicker the oil is removed from the beaches, the better for the surviving ecosystem, but it took too long to get the required number of people into place, and there were volunteers by the thousand who wanted to help.

The other question that comes is where the appropriate machinery for cleaning up Australia’s beaches is. One thing that needs to come out of this is a specialised piece of equipment which is able to take the oil off the top and remove it with minimal skimming of sand. You cannot put a grader in there. These are very pertinent questions for the Commonwealth to be responding to. I have seen no comprehensive response from either the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government or the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. I am out of time here, but what we do know is that the effect of this spill is going to go on for months, if not years. (Time expired)

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make my comment on this MPI today, but before I do I want to make it very clear that, from the government’s side of the benches here in this chamber, this really is a very important issue to the maritime security of Australia. The saddest part is that, unfortunately, it will be politicised today. There is no doubt about that. I am not belittling the comments of Senator Brown; it will be from those opposite.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don’t you think the behaviour of the Queensland government is a legitimate subject?

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They will not be able to help themselves, because there is an election going on in Queensland.

Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brandis, would you cease interjecting. If you wish to participate in the debate, you can put yourself on the list of speakers.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are aware—

The Acting Deputy President:

Excuse me. That is not an invitation for all senators to start talking across the chamber, and it is disorderly for you, Minister, to interject during my pauses.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was saying before I was rudely interrupted by someone who is not even on the speakers list from that side—a Queensland senator, I must add—it will be politicised. Unfortunately, that will be their nature because there is a state election going on in Queensland. They will not be able to help themselves. They will find an opportunity to attack not only the Queensland government but also the fine women and men who are helping in the clean-up situation they are facing there. I will let everyone else make that decision when they hear those on the opposition benches trying to politicise this very dire situation that we have in Queensland. I do want to clarify one thing for you, Senator Brown. You talked about buckets and shovels—I made some quick notes on a piece of paper. You also went on to talk about specialised machinery, which I am glad—

The Acting Deputy President:

Senator Sterle, you will respond to Senator Brown’s point through the chair.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I certainly will. I was reading an article in the Queensland local paper, the Courier-Mail, this morning. It actually quoted Maritime Safety Queensland’s General Manager Mr John Watkinson, who said yesterday that two filtering machines which were being supplied to help clean up the mess were on their way to the island. Further on, there was an interview in the same article, on page 5, by Mr Brian Williams with Moreton Bay Regional Council Mayor Allan Sutherland. He was talking about cleaning up, and he said: ‘We did not use heavy machinery as much as we thought. We found the oil was lightly dispersed and heavy machinery was just putting a lot of it back into the sand. It ended up that rakes and shovels were best.’ That is just to clarify that.

Some of Senator Brown’s other statements, I think, have to be challenged. I cannot reiterate enough that this is a very serious situation, and the Queensland government is onto it. If I remember reading rightly, it was reported at 3.15 am. The ship contacted AMSA and by eight o’clock the national plan was well underway. Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President: Senator Brown, I know that you spent most of your 10 minutes absolutely haranguing us about why that ship headed out to sea. It is a very good question. Why did that ship go out to sea? Before senators opposite interject, I think they should take note that there are laws of the sea that have been in place for the 12 years that their government was in power. I would hope they would not belittle the situation by trying to attack this government, which has only been in power for some 17 or 18 months. But, unfortunately, Australia’s powers to regulate foreign ships in Australian waters are subject to international conventions. Senator Brandis would be well aware of where I am coming from in this argument. Even though the ship was travelling from Newcastle to Brisbane, it was not carrying coastal cargo and had no permit to carry coastal cargo; it was going on to Indonesia from Brisbane.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It’s the old cabotage argument.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald will have his turn, and I welcome it. You were actually a minister too in that last government for 12 years. I did not see you standing up here banging on about this, but I am sure that you will belittle this argument, this very important situation that we have—

The Acting Deputy President:

Please ensure that you direct your remarks through the chair.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Williams interjecting—

The Acting Deputy President:

Senator Williams, I do not need any advice or assistance from you; just be quiet.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will say, through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, that it will be belittled and it will be politicised. They cannot help themselves on that side of the chamber. They see every opportunity to have a go, because there is a Queensland election on. As I was saying before that, through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, the effect of these conventions is that Australia cannot hamper or impair the right of passage of foreign vessels through its territorial waters. Just to clarify a few of those claims or questions from Senator Brown, under international maritime conventions, AMSA—the Australian Maritime Safety Authority—has the ability to inspect and detain foreign flagged ships visiting Australian ports if they are found to have major safety or environmental deficiencies and are therefore unseaworthy or substandard. AMSA undertakes risk based assessment of the 3,000-odd ships entering Australian ports annually. There are no powers in Commonwealth transport legislation that would allow AMSA to prevent a foreign vessel departing an Australian port in rough weather. Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, that is to clarify some of Senator Brown’s remarks.

It is very important to Australia’s economy and to the reputation of its maritime industry that we rely heavily on the safe and secure passage of billions of dollars of imports and exports in and out of this country. As we know, and I will just reiterate a few points, on Wednesday, 11 March at approximately 3.15 am, AMSA received a report from the Brisbane harbour control that a ship reported it had lost 31 containers in rough seas eight nautical miles east of Moreton Island. It was a 185-metre container ship called the Pacific Adventurer. It suffered a rupture to its fuel tanks as a result of the containers falling overboard. As I said earlier, by 8.30 am, Maritime Safety Queensland had established an incident response centre and had assumed control of the response activity. The Australian Maritime Safety Authority issued a broadcast alert for shipping in the area. The national plan for combating oil pollution was put into effect, and the resources were made available to the Queensland government.

Just briefly, the national plan is an integrated, cooperative framework between the federal, state and territory governments and includes the oil, chemical, shipping and exploration industries. It has proven its effectiveness over the last 30 years, having been established in 1973. The national plan covers all aspects of marine pollution response, which includes response planning, stockpiling response equipment at strategic locations around Australia’s coast, training teams of response personnel, coordinating national training programs and conducting regular simulated pollution exercises involving all parties to the national plan. I would go back to Senator Brown’s comments. I think the wording was, and correct me if I am wrong, that there were ‘thousands of volunteers waiting’. There was also an article in today’s Courier-Mail which said that Queensland officials were not seeking thousands of volunteers. With the greatest of respect, they wanted to leave it up to the professionals. I just think that has to be made clear.

Australia’s response to marine pollution is characterised by a cooperative approach between federal agencies, state and territory agencies and industry, with well-developed consultative mechanisms on risk management and mitigation strategies in place. In the current situation, the ship’s crew first advised through AMSA that some 20 to 30 tonnes of heavy fuel was lost. For those who do not appreciate metric volumes and tonnes—though I certainly know what 20 to 30 tonnes means—to make it quite simple, it is just over a semitrailer load of fuel. It is even less than that which would be carted by a B-double.

It does not matter if it is only a cupful. That is probably a throwaway line, but no spill is any good at all—let us make that very clear. But 20 to 30 tonnes, if I can put that into context, is one tri-axle barrel going down the road behind a prime mover. It is significant, but you would not think it would cause a significant threat to the coastline. But what the Queensland officials found out a little bit later was that it was about 218 tonnes. Senator Brown said 250 tonnes, but whether it was 250 tonnes or 218 tonnes does not matter: that is a hell of a lot of tonnes of fuel to be lost—10 times more than what was reported. The Queensland government’s response to the serious oil spill affecting the eastern coastline of Moreton Island and ocean beaches to the north of Moreton Island has been carried out professionally and rapidly—forget the ranting that may follow. I hope it does not; I hope this is not politicised; I hope that this is not used by the opposition as an opportunity to rant, because there is an election coming up in Queensland on Saturday. But I will find out as I listen to the rest of the contributions from those opposite.

From the start, the Queensland government took the most responsible course of action in response to such an event and ensured that the clean-up was under the control and direction of those most skilled in dealing with such emergencies. That was the responsible course of action and that was what was done. As well, the Queensland government immediately deployed the resources of all its relevant agencies to deal with the oil spill as a whole-of-government effort. The work is proceeding rapidly under the direction of the relevant experts. Detailed work has already commenced on investigating the events leading up to and contributing to the cause of the spillage. Already, substantial areas of the affected coastline have been cleaned up—fortunately. The Queensland government and its agencies did not cause the spillage but they have responded magnificently with the necessary clean-up operation. They, the volunteers and the experts concerned, deserve our greatest congratulations for their efforts.

It is quite disgraceful for members of parliament to pull stunts like this to try and get the caption or the highlight of the day in the Senate. The Senate’s time could be spent investigating other issues. We know that there is certainly quite a bit of legislation that we have to work through.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a disgraceful contribution.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will take that interjection from Senator Boswell, from the Nationals. He said that it was disgraceful. You are right; that is what I said, Senator Boswell. It is disgraceful that the Senate’s time is being wasted to try and politicise an unfortunate event in Queensland. Senator Boswell, it is not too often that I agree with you, but I congratulate you. I agree with you this time that it is a disgrace.

While I am on that, it was reported that Senator Brown flew over the affected area. I might be wrong, but I think that you were accompanying a Greens candidate at the time.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A Labor rat.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Acting Deputy President Forshaw, I rise on a point of order. I ask that that senator be asked to withdraw that comment. It was an identifiable member of parliament in Queensland who was accompanying me, and it is unparliamentary for the senator on my right to use that language.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If calling Ronan Lee a Labor rat is offensive to Senator Brown, I withdraw. I just thought that that is what the Labor Party called him.

The Acting Deputy President:

You are withdrawing the reference?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy President, I rise on another point of order. That was an objectionable and nasty procedure by this particular coalition senator. It was a disgrace to the Senate and he should be ashamed of himself.

The Acting Deputy President:

That is not a point of order, Senator Brown.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I must say that I am thoroughly enjoying this MPI today because not only have I agreed with Senator Boswell, from the Nationals in Queensland, but I have to agree with some of Senator Macdonald’s interjections from that side of the bench, too. It was not me who called him that. Obviously, you have touched a nerve. You have had similar problems in your party. The problem, unfortunately, is that if the Greens were interested in finding the real cause of the spillage they would have put the spotlight on what Howard government policies did to Australia’s maritime and shipping security and safety when it was in power. I would like to add that in the 12 years of the previous government’s reign, there were more things to worry about than a unionised workforce on the waterfront—that is very clear.

This event reinforces what many Australians with vast experience in working in the maritime industry have been saying for years: that the level of competence of foreign crews employed by many international shipping companies is of a standard which would not be accepted in Australia and should not be accepted in Australia. You can have low-skilled, low-wage foreign crews, but this can come at huge potential risk to the environment and to national security. This ship, the Pacific Adventurer, was carrying a large deck cargo of ammonium nitrate, as Senator Brown mentioned. I believe that it was heading off to Indonesia. But to say that we should cease all export of ammonium nitrate or that we should ban the shipping of ammonium nitrate to Indonesia is, Senator Brown, a little bit far out for my liking.

This ship left Brisbane while a cyclone was active off the coast of Brisbane. We said that. I hope I stated the reasons very clearly in my opening remarks. To state the bleeding obvious, I suppose, losing some 218 or 250 tonnes of crude oil and 30-odd containers overboard in one morning is quite a concern. It is quite disgraceful that it happened. Fortunately, it is on the way to being cleared up. I seriously hope that the rest of the beaches in Queensland are cleared up sooner rather than later. I read an article that named all the beaches that had been opened, but I will leave that to my Queensland counterparts. I am sure that Senator Moore will help us out. I must admit that it is alarming to see how many of those pristine beaches were covered with the oil, but it is very comforting to know that the national plan has swung into operation. It is very comforting to know that there are literally thousands of people wanting to help clean up.

Unfortunately, situations like this do occur; it does not make us feel any better. But I really do take offence that all of a sudden it is the fault of a government—regardless of their political persuasion. How could it be the fault of the government that containers have fallen off a ship and that the ship was damaged leaving a massive oil slick on the Queensland coast? They are doing a great job and I urge senators opposite and Senator Brown of the Greens to at least focus on the effort by the volunteers and the fine job they are doing. (Time expired)

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the present time, Queensland is confronted with what could be one of the greatest environmental disasters—for wildlife, for sea life and for the tourism and fishing industries—that our state has ever seen. It is a very serious matter and I am very pleased that Senator Brown has raised this. I agree with most of what Senator Brown said in his speech.

I cannot agree with the previous speaker, who gave a very eloquent political speech that was devoid of any fact. It is typical of the Labor Party these days to be all spin and no substance, and the speech from the Western Australian senator on this very important issue should just be disregarded in this debate. I would have thought that this issue was of such significance to Queensland that the Labor Party would have included all Queensland speakers on their list. A senator from Western Australia has, I am sure, a great interest in union matters and all the other things that are really quite irrelevant to this issue.

I am not blaming government. What I am absolutely concerned and angry about is how long it took to recognise the significance of this disaster and for something positive to be done. As soon as those containers went overboard we should have had a minesweeper up there looking for them—at the very moment that it happened. Yet I understand that the Attorney-General has announced, only in the last 10 minutes, that he is going to send a boat up there to look for those containers full of ammonium nitrate. This exemplifies my concern: it is too little and far too late.

Let us have a look at some of the facts. As previous speakers have said, this incident occurred at 3.12 am on Wednesday, 11 March. That was five days ago. At 5.15 on that day there was a report of the ship losing oil. The ABC reported it at 8.00 am. At 9.41 an officer of the Brisbane City Council—not the state government or the federal government—spoke to the state authorities about a ship that was leaking and losing containers. No request was made to the Brisbane City Council for any help. At 10 o’clock that day Maritime Safety Queensland, when meeting with the Brisbane City Council, advised that Queensland’s marine services were looking after the oil. At five o’clock that afternoon, Queensland’s emergency management advised the Brisbane City Council that the ship had struck a sandbar and that there was an oil slick from the ship to Caloundra. It took until four o’clock that afternoon for the Queensland government to even recognise that something had happened.

At six o’clock that night the Brisbane Lord Mayor, thankfully, contacted the Deputy Premier and the Premier to ask if he could do anything to help. He offered 300 Brisbane City Council workers who could get going immediately. He was told that they were not needed and that the Queensland government had everything under control—this was late on Wednesday afternoon. There is no evidence that the state government had at that time considered bringing in the specialist planes that are available on four hours notice under the relevant plan, which I will refer to later, to do something about the oil before it hit the beaches.

During the day we all thought that a recovery operation was underway, but it was not until five o’clock that night that the Queensland government released a statement saying that the oil had reached Moreton Island and had covered about 10 kilometres of coastline. An inquiry was made about how the clean-up operation was going and there was no indication that anything was happening—this was a day and a half later. In the evening, telephone calls were made to Maritime Safety Queensland confirming the extent of the spill, and then late on Thursday afternoon—a full one and a half days after the incident—the Queensland Premier eventually got around to making a disaster declaration. Did the state government then contact the Army to have them help? No, they did not. But, fortuitously, Brisbane City Council Mayor, Campbell Newman, did do that.

But it gets worse. A whole series of incidents happened throughout the next two days. The Brisbane City Council was there—and this is all on public record—with trained workers ready to move machinery. They kept offering help to the state government but were told: ‘Oh, it’s okay. Don’t bother about it; we’ve got it under control.’ Bob Abbot, Mayor of Maroochy council, having seen that there was a serious disaster in the making, put his big machinery onto the beach but was told by the state government to get it off because they would clean it up with buckets and spades! Do you believe it! Fortunately, Mayor Abbot, who is not known for taking a step back when it comes to any state government, put his machinery through and did something that may have helped. And so it goes on. Naturally, when I asked the government about this at question time I got no response from them because they are hiding something. It has been a stuff-up so far by the Queensland government and now it is a cover-up in which both the Queensland and Commonwealth governments are complicit.

The National Marine Oil Spill Contingency Plan, which I have here, is available on the internet. It sets out in detail what should be done and what the responsibilities are, and it was clearly a responsibility of the Queensland government to do something before this many days had elapsed. Senator Sterle tried to make a political case over this. I do not want to talk politics. I am just angry as a Queenslander that my state government took a day and a half to even get going and since then has fumbled away. Senator Brown in his contribution in this debate highlighted some of the deficiencies. He was careful not to criticise the Queensland government too much—and I can understand why, because it is a bit like the situation with the Traveston Crossing Dam. Senator Brown’s party is giving the Labor Party in Queensland—the current Queensland government—preferences in 12 crucial marginal state electorates which will mean that the Labor Party will be returned to government in Queensland and that the sort of environmental vandalism that the state government has been part of in this particular incident will continue into the future. And while Senator Brown has been canoeing down the Mary River telling all the people in that area that he is against the dam, giving preferences to the Labor Party in Queensland to assure their re-election next Saturday will mean the Traveston Crossing Dam will be built.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a hypocrite!

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The party is hypocritical, Senator Brandis. If you were serious about the Traveston Crossing Dam and about what is happening to Queensland beaches at this time, you would not as a party be preferencing the current Labor government—the people who want to build the Traveston Crossing Dam; the people who have failed to address the problem that Senator Brown so rightly brought to the notice of this chamber by raising this matter of public importance. He was quite right to do that, but then he turns around and gives preferences to a party which has facilitated this environmental disaster and which will build the Traveston Crossing Dam. I hope Senator Brown is going to get up later and tell me I am wrong, that they are not going to preference the Labor Party in those 12 crucial marginal seats. I hope he will say that they will be preferencing the party that has guaranteed to stop the Traveston Crossing Dam and that has done something about getting this disastrous mess on the Queensland beaches addressed. I hope Senator Brown will tell me that they have had a change of mind and will not worry about getting Labor Party preferences to support a defector in the electorate of Indooroopilly. I hope they will tell me I am wrong and that they are now not giving preferences to the Labor Party, the party that wants to build the Traveston Crossing Dam and that has not done enough on this disastrous environmental nightmare. I hope he will tell me that the Queensland Greens will now be preferencing a party that will not build the Traveston Crossing Dam and that will actually do something at the right time when environmental disasters come onto our shores.

This is an enormously serious problem: the ramifications of the ammonium nitrate in the ocean and the oil spill could have an impact on Queensland’s ecology, its environment, its water quality, its tourism industry and its fishing industry for many years to come. What has the state government done? A day and a half after the disaster occurred it was still fiddling around the edges. Thank heavens for Campbell Newman. Thank heavens for the volunteers who got out there to try to do something. But all brickbats to a state government that sat on its hands and did nothing—and I might include the federal government in this. Here we have a media release, issued a couple of minutes ago, saying they are going to send a minesweeper up there to find these containers. It was five days ago that they fell off. When you see me getting angry, Madam Acting Deputy President, I am angry at the delay. It took five days to send the minesweeper to look for those containers. It took two days for the Queensland government to do anything about this monumental environmental disaster heading our way—and Senator Brown and his party will preference them next Saturday and make sure they are returned so we can have a repeat of this in the future.

I want to thank Campbell Newman. I want to thank all those Brisbane City Council professional workers who are out there helping and have been available to help for five days. I want to thank those in the state EPA who, now that the Premier has woken up, are out there doing something. I also want to thank particularly all those hundreds of volunteers who have offered their assistance to address this problem. I just wish their enthusiasm and their commitment had been shared by their state government, because if it had been, at the right time, we might not be facing quite the same environmental problem we are facing now. (Time expired)

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is such a relief that this is not a political discussion and I do thank Senator Macdonald for that entirely apolitical contribution he just made to the debate! This is an intensely serious issue for all Queenslanders, but not just for Queenslanders. I think it is a privilege that the concern about this issue is shared across the country. I know this area very well. It is a very beautiful, pristine piece of Queensland. The threat we are facing is serious and significant. But any attempt to pretend that there is not concern and not an appropriate response can only be coming from someone who is fighting over jurisdictional responsibilities. Consistently in the previous contribution to this debate we heard about ‘who told whom when’. The major issue is that after 3 am, on the morning when the Brisbane harbour authority advised that there was an issue in the area, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority received that information and, from that point on, the well-established cooperative national plan for handling these disasters was put into action.

This national plan, Australia’s National Plan to Combat Pollution of the Sea by Oil and Other Noxious and Hazardous Substances—a quite direct title—reflects what should happen in such circumstances. From the moment that there was a complaint made, this plan came into effect. The plan states that the owning agency is the national agency—Mr Albanese’s agency; it comes under the transport portfolio—which works cooperatively with the relevant state, in this case Queensland. This plan has been around since about 1973 and is an acknowledgement, because of the deep concern that our country has for our environment, that should an incident occur—and unfortunately it did occur—there should be a national response which clearly delineates the responsibilities. In this case the national organisation had the overall authority, but the ownership for operations was with the Queensland state government. There had to be a communications strategy developed between those levels of government and then involvement by the relevant local government.

There seems to be a bit of an issue in Queensland and in Brisbane. The state government has been working with the Moreton Shire, under Mayor Sutherland, and not, I believe from what I have heard in the media and from Senator Macdonald, involving the Brisbane City Council in the way that they had hoped. That is really unfortunate and, in terms of how we can best cooperate, we need to involve all people. But making this into a barney over which organisation should own what defeats the purpose of having a national coordinated strategy which looks at the issues involved and the expertise which is available. One of the core aspects of the national plan is to see whether national expertise is available and develop the best response to the particular issues.

We should remember that on the Wednesday evening and the Thursday we were suffering gale force conditions off the Queensland coast. This area is now subject to a legal consideration and there will be reviews of what occurred, so I do not want to go into that area. But, as to the legal responsibilities, it seems to me that an accident occurred because of the conditions. We need to find out how we can clean up the area which has been affected. I share the concerns that have been raised by all speakers about what this could do to our environment, to the animals and to the whole future of this very beautiful piece of Queensland. There have been legitimate concerns raised about what is going to happen to the businesses that rely on tourism in that area to survive, along with concerns about fishing and the general enjoyment of that particular part of the world.

As a result of discussions with the Queensland state government, I can say that a lot of good work has been done and a number of areas are to an extent working through a quite successful clean-up process. Bribie Island, which many people know, has wonderful beaches and a large population. Currently, 95 per cent of that area has been declared clean. Certainly, they continue to watch the area because the oil is on the tide and so they have to watch that very closely. Under the national plan, experts are visiting the area and keeping an eye on what is going on. This is what we would expect and this is in direct cooperation with the Moreton Bay Regional Council and the people who are working on the job.

The Sunshine Coast, slightly further north, is also affected, particularly around the Currimundi and Port Cartwright areas, where there are local clean-up processes underway. One kilometre of that area is defined as ‘heavily oiled’. They had to have special removal processes put in place because of the amount of oil there. Most beaches have now been opened. We have 16 now open on Bribie Island and on the coast and eight remain closed. Hopefully, during today—maybe during this debate—we will get information about further openings and people who are watching what is happening to their own area will be able to get advice about what is going on and what future action will take place.

Fortunately, the Maroochy and Mooloolah rivers are currently clear and they have booms on stand-by if they are required. It is a case, once again, of working effectively with the local regions—in fact with Mayor Abbot, whom Senator Macdonald referred to earlier. They are working with the local council there to see what is going on.

Moreton Island has been the focus of much of the media coverage in Queensland, most particularly because a lot of the oil was moving in there and the coastal area was deeply affected. It is also an important tourist area and there is great concern about the long-term effects of this natural disaster. As of today, 25 per cent of the Moreton Island area has been declared clear. Clean-up crews are focusing on Middle Creek in Cape Moreton, with Honeymoon Bay—an extraordinarily beautiful place—having been largely cleaned. There are still 25 kilometres of oiled beach on the eastern side to be cleared. Approximately 300 staff arrived this morning and are on the beach. That was this morning at about 10 am; I expect they are still there, because the work continues.

One of the core issues is making sure that the appropriate work is done and the appropriate process is followed. Senator Macdonald talked earlier about the issue of heavy machinery and scathingly referred to the national plan having a preference for using individuals with buckets and spades under certain circumstances. That was not a throwaway joke; it was a clear decision based on the level of the oil and the condition of the sand in those areas. You do not have heavy machinery going onto beaches without having the appropriate scientific approval that that is appropriate. The decision was made, particularly around some areas of sand and around some rocky areas, that it was much more effective, though focused intensely on individual personnel, to use individuals so that people would be able to work safely, there would be fewer accidents and that people would be able to see exactly what was going on. You do not rush in on these occasions, even with the best will in the world, without being part of a coordinated plan. That is why they are there.

We need to work cooperatively on this issue. It is a serious issue. It is unfortunate that it has occurred in any case but that is a part of working and living in an area which does have transport working through it. However, it seems to me particularly unfortunate that, because of the timing of this issue just leading up to the state election, people have jumped in most quickly to make short-term political points rather than looking at what we should be doing, which is identifying the danger to this wonderful part of the world and then seeing how we can activate the formally agreed national plan which has been in our government for many years. It is not new; it involves a cooperative arrangement between levels of government, with the clear outcome to ensure that we can clear our beaches and our oceans as quickly as possible and then look at the legal implications of the people who are caught up in this process. The people, as we have heard through the media, who are working in tourism and fishing in the area are deeply concerned about their economic futures and livelihoods. That will need to have a response when we work through the immediate legal aspects of who is responsible and what will occur. All of that is part of the planning process. It would be better if we could concentrate on that and on clear outcomes rather than having a barney around whose jurisdiction it is and who should be doing what, with one intent: to see which political side people belong to.

I do not think that people who are actually working on the beaches care which political side they belong to. What they want to do is a clean-up. In terms of process, it would be something that all Queenslanders could respond to if they could hear clearly and openly what is going on, and what we are going to do in the future to save this area.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Moreton Island is a place that I know well. In fact, my house was one of the closest houses to Moreton Island. If I stood on my front veranda, there was no other house between me and Moreton Island, so I know it well. I have been over there many times and sailed around Moreton Bay. What has happened should never have happened. I do not know why anyone would try and take a ship into a category 5 cyclone. It has always been my impression that when there is a cyclone coming you go the other way and you get right out of it. No doubt, why a ship went into a cyclone with a 200-odd kilometre an hour wind will be revealed in the inquiry.

When this did happen, the ship was carrying 50 containers of ammonium nitrate, 31 broke loose and went over the side and no-one can discover them; they do not know where they are. The boat was then ordered into Moreton Bay. The Environmental Protection Agency ordered two tonnes of fertiliser to be hosed off the boat into the waters inside Moreton Bay. That needs to be queried as well. There has been an environmental disaster. The beach worms have gone, and whether they will come back again no-one knows. The pippis have gone. The culture in the mangroves has disappeared. Whether these will come back naturally or whether they will have to be induced to come back some other way is to be determined.

There is no question that this is politics. Under the Westminster system, when a disaster occurs the minister takes responsibility. That has never happened in Queensland. We have had disaster after disaster and we have never seen a minister say, ‘Well, it is my fault; I am responsible under the Westminster system. I will leave and I will resign.’ Where was Mr McNamara? He was in his electorate. He was the Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation and he did not seem particularly concerned. He did not worry particularly about it. He said, ‘Oh well, someone else is in charge, and I’m only going to get in the way if I go down there, so I won’t worry about it.’ The Premier took about a day and three quarters before she did anything. Paul Lucas, the member for Lytton, took the rap, as he always does. He takes the fall for Mrs Bligh. So he went over there and made some comments. But the point is that it took a day and a half before anyone did anything. No wonder Anna Bligh had said that only three ministries are safe, and I do not blame her. Her job, Paul Lucas’s job and the Treasurer’s job are the only ones that are safe if she is re-elected. I hope that she will not be re-elected because this is typical of what happens. Whether it is health, roads or traffic, it has been three years of disaster. Someone has gone in with a huge surplus and turned it into a $1.6 billion deficit, lost the AAA rating and now cannot put in a program that will be able to alleviate these oil spills.

Brisbane has two oil refineries. There are millions of tonnes of oil that go in and out of Brisbane every year that is refined into petrol and fuel that go out in tankers. There has to be a contingency plan. Where was that contingency plan? Why was it not activated? Why didn’t the Environmental Protection Agency enact that plan? It was there but no-one seemed to take any responsibility. Under the Westminster system, a minister takes responsibility. If he will not, then the Premier or the Prime Minister sacks them on the spot. That is what should have happened, and it should have happened many times in Queensland.

Ironically, this Environmental Protection Agency that allowed two tonnes of ammonium nitrate to be hosed off the boat into Moreton Bay, that did not activate a plan and that allowed oil spills to run for 20 miles up and down the Queensland beaches, was the same agency that closed the fishing industry—50 per cent of the fishing area in Moreton Bay for professional fishermen and 16 per cent of the area for recreational fishermen. These are the people saying, ‘We are going to protect the bay for future generations.’ Well, they did not do it too well! This Environmental Protection Agency should be investigated as the ones that dropped the ball. They are the ones that allowed two tonnes of ammonium nitrate to be hosed off a boat just off the green zones. Then they allowed the boat to come into Moreton Bay. And then they allowed the oil spills to kill the pipis, beach worms and cultures up and down the beaches. These are the people who should be taken to task. They have destroyed the fishing grounds for the prawn industry—31 containers have gone overboard. No-one knows where they are. When these containers leach out there will be blue-green algae blooms on the seabed. This is a disaster that we are only learning about now. As Senator Brown said, it is going to take maybe seven, eight, nine or 10 weeks to understand what damage has been done. No-one will be able to establish the extent of that damage for maybe another eight weeks.

I would like to take up Senator Macdonald’s point. I do not know how the Greens can preference a party that allows these disasters to happen. The National Party and the Liberal Party are in a formal coalition—we work together and develop policy together. There is no question in my mind or anyone else’s mind who observes politics that the Labor Party and the Greens are in coalition as true as the National Party and the Liberal Party are in coalition. The Greens lead the Labor Party around by the nose and you people genuflect when they suggest anything. You need their preferences; you have let them get stronger and stronger. You have been weaker and weaker in letting them take the attack.

How can you, Senator Brown, endorse a party that has let the environment down so badly? If it had been the Liberal Party or the National Party you would be screaming and naming everyone as being environmental vandals with no care. But you let the Labor Party off. You hit them over the wrist with a feather duster. You will not stand up against the Labor Party. How can you can go up to Traveston Crossing and Gympie and float down the Mary River in a canoe and then say to Labor, ‘I’m with you’? I can tell you: if the Labor Party win because of your preferences you will be tarred and feathered if you ever go into Gympie again—and I will make sure that it happens. I will make sure that you will be made most unwelcome if you ever—

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Acting Deputy President Troeth, I raise a point of order. I think the honourable senator is getting a bit carried away; and you might advise him to be more careful with some of his statements.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Acting Deputy President, on that point of order: it is clearly not a point of order. That is my submission to you. It is part of the debate. What Senator Boswell says is entirely true, of course. I urge you to reject the point of order as being another way that the Greens are trying to help their mates in the Labor Party.

Judith Troeth (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order, but I am sure that Senator Boswell will take due care with his statements.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How can Senator Brown go up and say he is a friend of the Mary River when he is going to put in place next Saturday a set of preference deals that could make a huge difference? I really cannot understand how people can fall for this. I do not think the people of Queensland will fall for it.

Getting back to the debate: it has been a failure of the state Labor government. They did not do anything at 3.12 in the morning when they were advised that the ship was in trouble. They did not do anything until Thursday, 12 March, late in the afternoon. They let it happen. If any responsible minister in any responsible government got a message that there was a ship in trouble in 200-kilometre-an-hour cyclonic winds, was leaking oil and had dropped 32 containers of ammonium nitrate over the side, they would have alarm bells ringing in their ears in one second. The first thing they would do is ring the Environmental Protection Agency and all the other agencies and say: ‘We have a problem; stand by because you will be needed.’ But no, McNamara was swanning around his electorate, not particularly worried about anything. Anna Bligh said that it was under control when the Lord Mayor asked her whether she needed any help. Paul Lucas was not particularly worried. What sort of government is this? What sort of a government has a minister that cannot recognise a ship in 200-kilometre-an-hour winds in trouble— (Time expired)

The Acting Deputy President:

Order! The time for this debate on the matter of public importance has concluded.