Senate debates

Tuesday, 7 February 2017

Answers to Questions on Notice

Question No. 196

3:04 pm

Photo of Scott LudlamScott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

Pursuant to standing order 74(5) I ask the minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Energy, Senator Birmingham, for an explanation as to why answers have not yet been provided to question on notice 196. These questions were asked more than 90 days ago, which makes them two months overdue. I understand Senator Birmingham's office has been contacted by mine, and we seek some understanding as to why they are so vastly overdue.

Photo of Simon BirminghamSimon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Education and Training) Share this | | Hansard source

I have received in the last few minutes notice of your question. This is a question that was directed in my representational capacity to the Minister for the Environment and Energy. I am afraid I will have to come back to the chamber with information in terms of reply to that question and the time line that the reply should have been provided within. My apologies to the senator that that has not been met in accordance with the usual customs.

3:05 pm

Photo of Scott LudlamScott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

I acknowledge Senator Birmingham's comments and particularly the fact that he is here in a representing capacity and so it is unlikely that he would have the brief on his desk. Nonetheless, the Minister for the Environment and Energy has had a brief on his desk for months, you assume. The questions that I put on 2 November relate to the disastrous Roe Highway. I was going to call it 'a proposal', but since we were here late last year the damage is now well under way. This project is being rammed through the Beeliar Wetlands. More than a hundred hectares of priceless and precious banksia woodland is being bowled over even as we speak.

The questions I put to the Minister for the Environment and Energy, Minister Frydenberg, relate to the approval of the Roe 8 and in particular how the environment minister decided upon the criminally abject offsets condition—I will talk a little bit more about offsets in a moment—and whether the core surveys of endangered Carnaby's Cockatoos were conducted or even completed. As I speak, 300-year-old tuart trees are being cleared, as are banksia trees and paper barks in an area of woodland incredibly precious and rare. While this disastrous project is still being assessed, it was declared to be a federally-listed threatened ecological community. So while we wait for the wheels of bureaucracy to slowly turn and while we wait for a flicker of interest from the Commonwealth government, irreplaceable urban bushland is being torn apart and pushed into piles.

I want to pay my respects to everyone who has shown up in defence of this incredibly precious place and conducted respectful and determined nonviolent direct action. When legal processes fail, when processes of governance fail, when processes of allocation of scarce taxpayers' resources fail, it is often the last resort of ordinary members of the community to step up in protection of their backyard. There have been many arrests on site. For the most part, relations between community members who have put themselves on the line and the police have been respectful. But, I should say, all of this could have been avoided.

This process has been a debacle from the start. Since construction began in December, with three court cases at a state and federal level still pending, the community has been bearing witness to clearing and construction practices that have been in breach of many of the ministerial conditions that these questions go to. These have been reported to the minister. The minister did me the courtesy of taking a phone call even though he was on leave earlier this year—I appreciated that—and made some of his advisers available. When it came to the conversation, we were paid the courtesy of the conversation. When it comes to action or anything at all actually being done to change the practices on the ground, nothing, zero impact. Asbestos has been uncovered. Dust suppression has been almost non-existent. Native fauna management borders on the criminally negligent, with the trapping and removal of endangered southern brown bandicoots occurring as little as 90 minutes before bulldozers move in to tear the place apart.

My question went directly to the issue of the status of the management plans. We will continue to raise these issues of noncompliance, but the government should be aware that these powerful community-led actions will continue until some sense is coming from this government, which is, after all, bankrolling it. We are here, thousands of kilometres from the impact area, but it is this Commonwealth government writing the cheques that makes this project even possible—and that is one of the ghost policies of Prime Minister Abbott that we are still dealing with today.

Even worse is the reliance on offsets to approve the project and the failure of the offset conditions to even comply with the government's own policy. I do not know whether senators would be aware of what an offset is when it is put into environmental conditions. It does not mean that the government has to go out and plant 100 hectares of banksia woodland and restore ecosystems to their former intact state, not at all; it is simply the drawing of a rectangle around an area of bushland that already exists and a commitment to not flatten it at some stage into the future.

The questions that we put to the minister included: is it the intention that the endangered cockatoos at these wetlands will find their way to the new offsets 100 kilometres from the Beeliar wetlands? How will the cockatoos be notified? Are you going to set up a website? How are you going to get them there? Are you going to set up a new bus route? Exactly how are these offsets meant to work? What it betrays, unfortunately, is an incredible illiteracy as to how ecosystems function. This is a tragic and avoidable destruction of a precious place.

We have evidence to believe that the surveys of the black cockatoos were never even conducted. The community groups who have been spearheading the campaign to protect this area and to create a much saner freight strategy for the Perth metropolitan area have had eyes on that site for months. It is our understanding that that work simply has not been done. We have been asking for copies of the surveys. We have been asking for responses not to just to my letters but to those representing the 40 or so citizen scientists who are working around the clock to report the breaches on site. We have been begging the minister to send compliance officers and shut down works until these things can be investigated but has come to nothing and that is why I am asking for an explanation as to why my questions still remain unanswered.

Before the minister provides an answer though, I would like the government senators and members to be absolutely crystal clear: this is that an election-defining issue back in Perth. This costly debacle is going to cost Premier Barnett government; that is the way the polls are running. There are a lot of people working across Western Australia and across political divides—the Greens, the Australian Labor Party—and this project is so reckless and pathetic that even One Nation have come out and said they oppose it. The project is a disaster but it is somehow fitting that the final legacy of eight empty and pointless years of the Barnett government will be a five-kilometre stretch of complete ruination that will take many years to repair.

3:11 pm

Photo of Christopher BackChristopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I was not going to rise to speak on this matter but those who might be listening need to have Senator Ludlam's comments put into perspective. If I can draw attention firstly to the legal challenges of those opposed to the Roe 8 project, the first was a challenge to the Supreme Court in Western Australia, not so much to the project but to the manner of environmental approval by the Environmental Protection Authority. Chief Justice Wayne Martin upheld the request of the applicants. On appeal, unanimously, Chief Justice Martin's colleagues in the Supreme Court of Western Australia overturned the decision and, in fact, the project was approved to proceed. Senator Ludlam did not make that point in his contribution.

I then turn to the matter of the Federal Court in which a challenge took place to the approval by the federal environment minister. In January this year that was also overturned, and the decision of the federal minister was upheld. But it is important that there be some historic perspective of this because Roe 8 was part of the Stephenson plan from the 1950s, a plan which had gone internationally to tender and Stephenson—a Scotsman—and his associates had won the tender to develop an overall transport plan for metropolitan Perth. So successful was it that Stephenson moved his family from Scotland to Perth to oversee that project. Much of what we see today in place—the freeway system, the highway networks et cetera—were all there as part of the Stephenson plan.

In her wisdom, the then state minister for transport, Alannah MacTiernan—having once been in the state parliament, briefly in this one and now back being recycled again in the state election for another crack at the state parliament—working in conjunction with the then member for Fremantle, Mr McGinty, decided that they would stop the conclusion of the Stephenson plan into Fremantle port. In so doing, they had the land rezoned and they had that component of it zoned residential. The then secretary, I think, of the Transport Workers Union in WA at that time resoundingly criticised Ms MacTiernan and Mr McGinty for the foolhardiness and stupidity of the decision they took. That secretary was a person for whom I have enormous regard. He is now in the Senate. It is Senator Glenn Sterle, and he was quite right when he criticised Ms MacTiernan and Mr McGinty for their failure to give effect to the conclusion of a program that was some 40 years in the making.

The reason the progress is now occurring with Roe 8 and Roe 9 is so there can be reasonable movement of heavy transport to and from the Port of Fremantle. Into the future, if and when—as you know, Deputy President Lines, because you are Western Australian—there may well be an outer harbour constructed down in the Kwinana area to assist in future freight demands, Roe 8 will always be needed to be built. The actions of then transport minister MacTiernan are even worse, because those of us familiar with the Roe Highway know that as we come to the Kwinana Freeway, very close to my parliamentary office, there is a project which was referred to as Roe 7. It was always intended that roadworks should be put into place so that Roe 8 would continue in an east-west direction across the north-south Kwinana Freeway. Minister MacTiernan, in her actions, ensured that there would be no future provision made for a Roe 8, and today several tens of millions of dollars have been added to the taxpayer burden as a result of the refusal of minister MacTiernan at that time to allow for the future provision of Roe 8.

Senator Ludlam is correct in the sense that there is a small area of Roe 8—I have walked it—

Photo of Scott LudlamScott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

The whole thing?

Photo of Christopher BackChristopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I have walked all of Roe 8. It adjoins a road which already exists. It goes over a limited area of wetland, it is true, but what has not been said here this afternoon is that several million dollars are being expended to ensure that the nature of the building of bridges over that area is such that they will have the least adverse environmental impact. There will be movement capacity for people who use the area. I want to remind those who might be interested that I had the opportunity on several occasions to journey over a similar wetland in Louisiana, America, between the cities of Lafayette and Baton Rouge. That particular road is two bridges—one in each direction; each dual carriageway—and they are 40 kilometres long, or 23 miles. I have made it my business, in investigating Roe 8 and 9, to receive information from the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality as to the apparent adverse impact of that 40-kilometre-by-two highway over the affected wetland area. The advice to me has been that it has actually improved the aquatic environment of that space during that time.

I have an enormous amount of respect for Senator Ludlam, but I do have to take issue with him here. People have every right to protest in a democracy. We all have the right to protest, but there is a rule of law, and the rule of law says you take your case to the courts and you must respect the decision of the courts. We have seen interruptions from people who have flatly refused to accept the democratic process in the state of Western Australia. They have chained themselves to machinery, abused those responsible for commencing the project, and climbed into trees—naked, for whatever reason—with every hope and intent of stopping that work. The cost in salary and overtime to the Western Australian Police Service, when they should have been out attending to other work, has been monstrous.

I will conclude with this comment. It was put me to me recently that this is some recent initiative of the Western Australian government. I have in my possession—not in front of me—a newspaper from September 2008, when I was standing in the state election in Western Australia for the seat of Alfred Cove, evidenced by the fact that my advertisement and face appear on that front page. The headline in that local newspaper in 2008 was 'Libs to proceed with Roe project.' So let there be no doubt in the minds of those who are questioning the democratic opportunity here that back in 2008—not the last state election; the state election before that—our party had said we were going to proceed with Roe 8. That is the democratic process. People elected the Barnett government in 2008 in the full knowledge that that project would go ahead. They re-elected the Barnett government in 2013 knowing the project would go ahead. It is interesting that we find ourselves here today in the circumstances that this disputation is now claimed to somehow or other have recently arisen. The funding is in place. It is the continuation of a 40-year project. I will be the first to say that I think the government in Western Australia and its department could well have sold the issue better.

But let me say this as I wind up my contribution: the city of Cockburn, with whom I have a tremendous relationship, commissioned a study of inquiry into what would happen if Roe 8 was not built. Well, of course it is dominated by people who are opposed to the project, and they attempted to bury it, to explain what the enormity of the traffic congestion will be and the risks if Roe 8 is not built. Fortunately one councillor—and I do not need to go into the politics of the council of Cockburn—ensured that that report was made public. Indeed, what did it reveal? It revealed the importance of proceeding with what Stephenson came up with in the fifties: there is a group of councils called the South West Group; it is Fremantle, East Fremantle, Melville, Cockburn, Kwinana and Rockingham. And that South West Group independently had assessed the impact on road safety, on rail safety and indeed on transport activities. Once again, the members of that group of councils who did not want the results made public did their best to make sure that report was buried. And that report has surfaced, and it emphasises the enormous risk that will happen to that area of the southern suburbs of Perth if Roe 8 is not built.

It was not my intention to speak today on this matter, but I do want to correct the record. I want people to know that this is and has been a democratic process. The courts at state and federal level have been involved. The people have known for years what is going to happen. And I simply say that it does not do any good at all for small amounts of information to be presented in this place that give the suggestion that it will not be challenged.

3:24 pm

Photo of Rachel SiewertRachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

I would like to make a contribution to this debate as well, provoked by Senator Back. It is all very well for Senator Back to selectively quote facts, as he was accusing Senator Ludlam of doing. If you are talking about the Stephenson plan, the government has gone way off the Stephenson plan; it went away from that plan years ago. If we were going to stick to that, it would have meant a freeway going up Stock Road, across Stock Road and into Alfred Cove at Point Walter, across the river and into Dalkeith. For those of you who do not know Perth, Dalkeith and around Point Walter and Alfred Cove are two of the wealthiest suburbs in Perth, so of course they did not want that to happen. Did we stick to that plan in WA? No, we did not, but that was part of the Stephenson plan. There was a whole lot of other really urban design involved in that plan, and really good rail. Has that rail been put in place? No. So, stop quoting the Stephenson plan to us. Governments over the years have thrown that out. There was some really good stuff there that was never done. So, do not say, 'Oh, now we should stick to the Stephenson plan.' I bet your wealthy mates did not want that road going through Dalkeith or going through Alfred Cove. When are you going to start lobbying for that road to go in?

When we talk about 'just a little bit of wetlands', you have to remember that the context in Western Australia is that we have lost on the Swan Coastal Plain 85 per cent of our wetlands. So, 'just another wetland' does not wash with those people who are trying to conserve the last little bit of wetlands that we have on the Swan Coastal Plain and who have fought for years and years to protect the Beeliar Regional Park and in fact to get the Beeliar Regional Park in place. I was there. I was campaigning from the word go on those regional parks, in particular the Beeliar Regional Park. It is of extremely important ecological value. It is a tragedy, watching those banksia woodlands being destroyed, which is what is happening. They are home to Carnaby's black cockatoos, which are threatened. These are very important banksia woodlands.

What was also selectively left out of the discussion was the fact that Perth has also lost most of our banksia woodlands. These are important areas in a city that has lost its wetlands, that has lost a lot of its urban vegetation. These are the last remaining areas. And to say that it was in a plan a long time ago, when there have been deviations from that plan over many years, is completely out of context in the discussion. The community does not want this to go ahead. And the Liberal government knows damn well they do not want it to go ahead, and they are going to see some of those seats fall because they are ramming this out-of-date Roe 8 through. To say that there is a plan there and that it is going to go right through to the port is nonsense. They do not have the next part of that in place to get it through to the port of Fremantle.

When I was asking questions in estimates, the department confirmed that unless the business case is presented they will not be getting the funding for the completed freeway. As yet, that business case certainly has not been made public. So to say that it is funded is a misnomer, because it is not. They do not have those plans in place yet. They are not taking Roe 8 through to the port. So, to say that it is through to the port is absolute nonsense. There are perfectly valid alternatives that would deal with the issues Senator Back was talking about—some of the local councils down there being concerned about the cost to them. The Perth Regional Development Authority has some very encouraging plans about how you could take alternative transport down to a future outer harbour further south of the existing port of Fremantle.

That is not to say that everyone has endorsed it yet, but they are very encouraging plans. So, when we are having the debate, let's actually get all those facts on the table. People in Perth do not want Roe 8. They do not want to see Beeliar Regional Park and the Beeliar wetlands affected. It is tragic to see that vegetation that is being lost. We do not need to lose any more of our banksia woodland, all for a road that people do not want, that is going to be out of date—it is out of date; it is out-of-date planning. Move to the future. Support an alternative approach and let's stop Roe 8 right now.

3:29 pm

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Just briefly, I do not know this particular area terribly well—I am a Queensland senator from the north—but whenever the Greens run a campaign you always have to be suspicious. I want to thank Senator Back very much for telling those of us in the Senate who are interested in this what the real facts are. With the Greens political party, you have to always distinguish their political campaigns from their so-called environmental credentials. Senator Ludlam let the cat out of the bag when he told us all—as if we did not know—that there was an election coming up in Western Australia in the not too distant future. Of course, the Greens and the Labor Party, as a combined group as always, are fighting to defeat the Liberal government that has done so much for Western Australia over the past nine years.

But I rise in this debate simply to thank Senator Back. It is good that we have people like Senator Back, who know the facts, who can go through the history and who can tell it as it is, rather than listening to the mistruths and misconceptions of the Greens political party. I live in Queensland, and this is what we hear all the time from the Greens and their mates in the radical conservation groups. They will tell any lie at all to try and achieve their aims. I was interested in Senator Back's account of the court actions that have been taken. As I understand it, the courts have ruled against the line of the Greens political party and their radical green allies and ruled in favour of the law. The same happens in my state of Queensland. In Queensland, we desperately need the Adani rail and coal project. But the Greens political party representatives—the few of them that there are—and their radical green organisation counterparts keep taking court case after court case to try and stop this project, which means so much for jobs and wealth for all Queenslanders. It would be a fantastic project. It has unilateral support, except for the Greens political party. Even—I have to say to my colleagues over the aisle here—the Queensland Labor government has at last recognised the importance of this project and supports it. All the facts, all the evidence and all the scientific reports are there.

Photo of Gavin MarshallGavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Ludlam, a point of order?

Photo of Scott LudlamScott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

Deputy President, I ask you to call the senator's attention to the question that is before the chair. We were not talking about Queensland.

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

On the point of order, Deputy President, as you know—

Photo of Gavin MarshallGavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Macdonald, take your seat. This is a very wide ranging debate, Senator Ludlam, and Senator Macdonald has referred to the Western Australian issue. Please continue, Senator Macdonald.

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Ludlam moved the motion that the Senate take note of the lack of an answer, and that is what I am speaking to. If anything Senator Ludlam said was about the lack of an answer, I am still struggling to find it. Senator Ludlam used the opportunity, as people in this chamber do, to disrupt the agenda for the day and to have a diversion of about an hour into someone's pet project.

Photo of Alex GallacherAlex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

What's your agenda?

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

For as long as you want to do it, I am going to play the game too, Senator Gallacher. I can do that as well as you. It does not make a great deal of difference to me or the government. To continue, even the Queensland Labor government, dragged kicking and screaming, now support the Adani project. But the Greens political party and their radical allies, representing a very, very minor percentage of the people of Queensland, will continue to do everything in their power to disrupt this project, which is so valuable for Australia and so valuable for Queensland and which will mean real jobs. You do not care about the unemployed. We do on this side, and we understand the employment that that project will bring.

I cannot comment on the same aspects of the Western Australian issue; I do not know the details. But again, and I conclude here, thank you to Senator Back for rising to bring the Senate and those who might be interested in the debate the real facts about the issue so that we are not continually misinformed by the Greens political party and their allies with these strawmen they continue to raise to try and stop the development of Australia.

Question agreed to.