Source: Australia Government Statements 2
Federal Member for Leichhardt, Matt Smith: My name is Matt Smith. I’m the Federal Member for Leichhardt. I’m here with Assistant Minister and Senator for Queensland Nita Green, Stewart from Terrain and of course Professor Allan Dale. We’re here to announce that the Reefwise Water Project, which is $7.5 million, specifically for Leichhardt but $30 million right across the Great Barrier Reef catchment as part of a larger $1.2 billion investment into the health of the Great Barrier Reef. This investment will work with local cane growers to ensure that there’s less nutrients and sediment runoff into the Reef. This will also improve yield. For too long, farmers have been held responsible and been blamed for a lot of these runoffs and issues within the Reef, but the fact is nobody loves the land like a farmer and we have found a way to help improve their yield while protecting the Great Barrier Reef, which as we know contributes over 77,000 jobs to Queensland and is worth around $9 billion a year.
For us to be able to improve the lives and the livelihoods of farmers while protecting our greatest natural asset is a massive, massive win and I’m really excited to work with landowners to help them get the best out of the land that some of them have been growing on for generations. Sugar Cane in particular is a massive, massive part of the Far North Queensland identity and we have an obligation to help them to continue to thrive and provide the world with some of the finest sugar and as we can do that, as well as protecting our greatest natural asset and all those jobs and that is a win-win for everybody. And I’ll hand over now to Stewart from Terrain. He’ll go over some of the details of what we’re doing here.
Stewart Christie, CEO of Terrain NRM: Yeah, so Terrain works across the wet tropics dealing with the biggest environmental challenges facing our region and so this investment, which we welcome from the Albanese government, which is a seven and a half million dollar investment is helping us to work with farmers to accelerate practice change, which is about reducing the amount of fertiliser and pesticide that’s flowing through the Reef, which is equivalent to something like 15,000 football fields of area across the region. So it’s a significant investment and will have a significant impact in our region.
Journalist: How are you going to maximise their yield still? Because obviously that’s a concern for farmers.
Christie: Yeah, so maximising productivity and yield for farmers is absolutely critical. So we’ve got to get triple bottom line outcomes. We’ve got to get what’s good for productivity, what’s good for the environment, what’s good for the community. So what we’ll be doing is working with farmers to look at things that are, how do we actually increase the amount of fertiliser uptake into crops? We’ll be looking at how do we actually reduce the amount of fertiliser and nitrate that get taken off the paddock. So looking at drainage, we’re looking at things that improve the health and productivity of the plants and most importantly what we’ll be looking at is providing, we will be establishing a series of demonstrator sites so that those farmers which are not in the program can see the work that’s happening to then end up scaling up the change across the region.
Journalist: What are the kind of goals for this? Is there a certain amount, like a percentage of runoffs that you’re hoping to decrease in terms of the fertiliser runoff from farms or what are the goals and achievements you have?
Christie: So effectively the target is to achieve that practice change over the 10,000 hectares of land and it’s going to be different in each region, each paddock. So we’ve got different targets for different kind of regions and stuff, but what we’ll be looking to do is to end up reducing that kind of fertiliser and nitrate pesticide run off on the paddocks overall.
Journalist: Is there a certain amount that you’re hoping to reduce it by and over what period as well?
Christie: So the period is going to be over three years. So effectively the targets will be developed up with basically the farmers and what’s achievable because there’s been so much work that’s been done in the last 15 years with farmers. So it’s again about just maintaining what’s achievable while we maintain productivity and profitability and what’s going to be good for the environment.
Journalist: How big is this problem in terms of how much runoff without those kinds of interventions that you’re hoping to put in? How much runoff is going down towards the Reef?
Christie: Again, different amounts of runoff and different catchments. So we’ll be working in some of the high priority catchments, which are the Tully, the Johnstone, the Herbert, and the Barron. There’s different, as I say, there’s different issues in different catchments and we are working to then reduce effectively the overall flow to the Reef basically in those particular catchments.
Journalist: Can you give a practical example of maybe something that’s been done over the last decade and a half where runoff [inaudible] onto the Reef has been used as a result of something that’s now considered best practice for farmers in Far North Queensland?
Christie: So I think there’s a series of things that have been done over the last 15 years, so changes of machinery type which is much more efficient when they apply the fertiliser and the pesticides has been a big sort of thing which has been looking at weather forecast when there’s likely to be a big burst of rain and then looking at, and previously it’s been really looking at, it’s been rules of thumb that has been used in the past based on what my dad and my granddad did and now it’s actually using science based on the condition of soil. So basically people been looking at soil samples, how do we actually end up applying that fertiliser and the pesticides in the best possible targeted way? So those have been some of the things that have been done over the last 15 years which have generated big changes and now it’s about the next wave of change that we’re looking to end up taking through the Reef.
Journalist: So just for our viewers, are you hoping to implement those practices like better machinery and better fertiliser times now? Is that where the money’s going or where is the money going and how are we going to ensure that these farmers do actually implement it?
Christie: What will be implemented in this wave will be looking at things like drainage, about how do we actually apply the fertiliser, where do we apply it. Looking at things like the productivity on the health of those crops, so looking at new types of crops in different areas. So because we’re looking at areas from Ingham right up to Cairns, it’s a big kind of area and different kind of things will work in different areas. How do you going to know that this is going to work? So what we do is we put in a very kind thorough monitoring and evaluation program. So we set where we are now, we basically set the benchmarks and then we will regularly monitor and evaluate over the three year program. At the end of the three years we will report back to the government on the progress that’s been made.
Journalist: Is it possible to reach a point where pesticides and harmful chemicals that are currently being used on farms are phased out? [inaudible].
Christie: So I think there’s always innovation happening in the ag sector and that’s why it’s an amazing sector because it does embrace technology and innovation. There’s always that kind of price point of when things actually become feasible and viable to then end up implementing. And so that’s some of the things that we’ll be looking at in this project is how do we actually then de-risk some of those things that can actually be used to reduce the amount of fertiliser and pesticide that’s going into Reef over time.
Journalist: You said you want 10,000 hectares of lands to achieve these practices in the scale of things, what is that percentage of this land that runs off into Great Barrier Reef?
Christie: Yeah, so that’s equivalent to 15,000 football fields worth of area across the wet tropics. I don’t have the figures off the top of my head of a percentage of the overall region, but effectively it’s a significant amount of area that’s under farmland across the wet tropics and as I said before, what we’re looking to do is to end up having a series of demonstrator projects. So there’ll be a series of farmers that get involved which are farming that 10,000 hectares and then it’s about how do we actually then end up getting others in to showcase what those changes are, what’s feasible, and then what we’ll hope is that over the next three years, past those three years that there’ll be other farmers that then take up those opportunities because they see that they’re just practical, no-brainer opportunities that they must take up.
Journalist: Are they getting money to take up these new practices? Are they getting paid?
Christie: They’re not necessarily getting paid to do the work, but effectively those practice changes that cost money. So if there’s additional machinery, if there’s work that’s to do with resculpting and redraining things and if there’s practice change that’s involved that has a cost, then those things are involved in the program.
Journalist: So they can get a new machine?
Christie: At this point the machinery isn’t part of the program, but effectively if that machinery has got to be brought in as part of a contractor’s work to do that particular piece of work, then that would be part of the program.
Assistant Minister for Northern Australia, Senator Nita Green: Well, can I say first of all, thanks to Stewart and the team at NRM. They do an amazing job and it’s really nice to be here talking about the Reef Wise program, a program that works in partnership with farmers, but will deliver real outcomes for the Great Barrier Reef. We know that water quality is incredibly important and improving the water quality that runs into the Reef has been a priority of our government and that’s why I’m really proud of the changes that we’ve made through the EPBC reforms. It’s been a week since the government passed environmental protection laws through the Senate. We said that we wanted to pass these laws this year. It has been five years since Graham Samuel delivered his review and said that we needed better environment laws, not just for the environment but for businesses as well, and the laws that we’ve delivered will deliver better environmental protection and faster approvals for businesses and will make sure that we are doing everything we can to protect the Great Barrier Reef.
Now of course, as I said, water quality is an incredibly important part of protecting the Great Barrier Reef. Climate change continues to be the biggest threat to the Reef. Improving water quality is just one of the ways that we can improve the resilience of the Reef and how it manages through the next decade. That’s why we’ve delivered an enormous amount of funding through the catchments of the Reefs we’ve delivered on the Reefwise funding today. But we also, when the opportunity became apparent through the negotiations with the Greens, we agreed to changes in the EPBC reforms. That means that the same approval process will apply to land clearing on the Great Barrier Reef catchment areas. For a really long time, these types of activities were actually exempt from EPBC approval. The changes that we’ve made means that landholders who want to clear land within 50 meters of water drainage or a waterway in the Great Barrier Reef catchment, will need to get approvals for that activity.
Now we know most farmers want to do the right thing and actually are some of the best protectors of the Reef, but we know that we need to step up our game when it comes to water quality and land management. I know that UNESCO is particularly concerned about water quality and the steps that our government is taking and they asked us at the last World Heritage Committee to really consider how we could improve the laws around land management and improve the water quality going into the Reef. That’s exactly what we’ve done. This is about protecting Queensland jobs. 77,000 jobs rely on the Great Barrier Reef, but in a town like Cairns and Far North Queensland, this is a huge part of our economy. That’s why we’re taking these steps, delivering $1.2 billion of investment in the Reef, but also making sure that we protect our environment at the same time.
It has been very disappointing to see comments from Queensland Government ministers about what these changes will do and the impact that they will have. I’ve seen comments from Agriculture Minister from the Mining Minister, but I will say it’s been very strange that we’ve seen no comments from Andrew Powell, the Minister for the Environment and Tourism. He’s the Minister that should be standing up and supporting these changes. He should be saying that this will protect the Reef but also the jobs that rely on it. We know how important it is to protect the Reef in real terms, but also reputationally and it is Andrew Powell’s job to protect the Great Barrier Reef and the jobs, the tourism jobs that he so proudly supports every other day. It’s very strange that he has been silent on this. He’s been in hiding on this issue and we would like to ensure that we get more support from the Queensland government on these reforms. They are important. They are once in a generation, they will make a huge difference to the Reef and we want to know why the Queensland Environment Minister has had nothing to say in support of these laws when his number one job is to protect the environment and protect the jobs that rely on the Great Barrier Reef. I’m happy to take questions.
Journalist: Does this act leave farmers more susceptible to the [inaudible].
Green: No. What this does is it means that any activity is now subject to the same approval processes that a renewable energy project, or a mining energy project would have been susceptible to. We know that farmers take action to manage their own land, but we are asking them to get approval for actions that happen close to waterways and that’s because we know that it does have a huge impact on what runs off into the Reef and we know that this is something that we need to take action on. We talked about targets or measurable outcomes. We are not meeting our water quality targets and we need to do that if we want to protect the Reef, build its resilience and if we want to protect the reputation of the Reef as well.
Journalist: So isn’t that creating more red tape for a farmer though, who’s trying to protect their livestock or homestead or assets if there’s another layer of regulation being in place?
Green: This is an important step that we are taking to protect the environment and to protect jobs and it applies the same laws to these types of actions, the clearing of land in Queensland, that would apply to any other type of clearing of land. Whether it was for a project for renewable energy, whether it’s for a project to build a mine, we are saying that the same laws should apply and that means that they will seek an approval process and that action may be able to be taken, but they will need to seek approval for it and that means that we can manage when there are big, big land clearing that happens in a way that is not sustainable and could make a huge difference on the water quality running into the Great Barrier Reef.
Journalist: The Opposition Leader called the act a dirty deal. Did Labor leverage the Greens and the coalition against each other to push both sides?
Green: We were very willing to do a deal with Sussan Ley and the Coalition. Unfortunately, they are such a mess at the moment. They are hopelessly divided. They are unable to negotiate. They had multiple negotiators from different sides of the party with different amendments being put forward. It was an absolute mess and an indication of how bad Sussan’s leadership really is. What we said is that we were going to pass these laws by the end of the year. We wanted to give businesses certainty, we wanted to give farmers certainty. We wanted to give the environment the protection it deserves. Graham Samuel delivered this review five years ago. It was time to get this done and we were willing to do a deal with the Greens or the Coalition, but the Coalition were unable to do a deal with themselves. That’s why we’ve passed these laws with support of the Greens and the Senate and what that means is that we have agreed to a change that I think will make a real difference to the Great Barrier Reef. Sussan Ley should know how important the Great Barrier Reef is. She was the former Environment Minister. She came here a few days ago and claimed that she knows the Reef better than anyone else. Well, if she does, she should be supporting these laws because this means that we will have once in a generation protection for one of our most important environmental assets, but one of our most important economic assets as well.
Journalist: Did the Far North miss an opportunity by Australia failing to secure COP 31?
Green: I am really proud of what we’ve managed to negotiate throughout the COP negotiations. I know that there is a lot of interest here in Far North Queensland and of course in the Torres Strait, which Matt can talk to. About our climate change targets, the action we’re taking on climate change, but also what everyone is doing internationally. We also wanted to walk into that negotiation getting a good outcome for the Pacific because you understand, and many people in Cairns do, this is the number one issue for people in the Pacific. What we’ve been able to negotiate in a really difficult bargain is that we will have a pre-COP meeting focused on the Pacific and making sure that leaders from around the world get a chance to be involved in that meeting. We’ve also managed to ensure that our Minister will be the chief negotiator and the President of negotiations throughout that meeting, and what that means is we will have a say on the parameters of the conversations, the things that are outlined and the targets that people are setting.
I think that’s a good opportunity for us in Australia. We know that there is a real need to focus on these issues. That’s why our government is delivering action on climate change, which is opposed of course to Sussan Ley and her non-government backbench who are so divided on net zero that they’ve scrapped it, they’ve walked away from the Paris agreement, they’ve walked away from emissions reductions and there is no possible way that they will ever deliver the climate change action that Far North Queensland needs and the Torres Strait needs or that our entire region needs. And we’re talking about the Pacific, it’s the number one issue for them, and the Liberals have completely walked away from any credibility on this issue.
Journalist: Were you concerned about the pressure an Australian hosted COP 31 might put on the government’s environmental record, particularly in relation to the Great Barrier Reef?
Green: Well, first of all, I’m very proud of the government’s environmental record when it comes to the Great Barrier Reef and I’m very proud that only a week ago we passed laws that mean that the Reef will be protected in another way, making sure that this important environmental and economic asset is protected for generations to come. That being said, we know that people are passionate about this issue. We know particularly people in Cairns and Far North Queensland are really passionate about climate change and protecting the Reef. We are under pressure all the time from our communities whether we held the COP or not, and I welcome that pressure. We know that it’s important and I think every single MP in Far North Queensland should be put under pressure and asked questions about what they are doing to protect the Reef, to protect jobs and to protect the environment and take action on climate change. We’ve got an Assistant Minister for Tourism here in Far North Queensland who has said nothing about the changes to the energy roadmap, who has said nothing about the changes to support the changes to the EPBC reform and we welcome that pressure. We just want it to be applied across the board.
Journalist: Will you support a pre-COP meeting in the Torres Strait?
Green: We will certainly be in conversations with Minister Bowen about what we can do to highlight the pressures on the Torres Strait throughout that process. I know we’ve made a commitment to deliver a Pacific meeting and I think that is very important because without Australia, those Pacific countries do not have the means to highlight those issues. I’m happy to hand over to Matt because I know he’s been speaking to Torres Strait leaders directly and we will be speaking to Minister Bowen about how we can use this opportunity to really highlight not just the impacts on the Pacific, but how we are seeing the impacts right now in the Torres Strait.
Journalist: Do you support the idea of having a pre-COP 31 meeting in the Torres Strait highlighting climate change?
Green: The meeting which was not being held in Australia, it’s being held in Türkiye and it’s going to be in August next year. If there’s a meeting anytime between now or then, I’m very happy to attend. I think it’s really important that we speak to the Minister who will be the Chief Negotiator about what the outcomes should be in the COP, and I think what we also want to see is that Torres Strait voices are elevated through the process and that is something that we will talk to them about. I’m looking forward to visiting the Torres Strait next year. I know Matt has been there many times and it’s our job to elevate those discussions, not just through COP, but through every single government decision that affects this policy area.
Journalist: So this is something that Torres Strait Islanders experience and said that they want and they want government support. So will you support it?
Green: We can talk to them about that and what that might look like. We’ve committed to a meeting in the Pacific and you can understand why that’s incredibly important and what I think is we need to find out exactly what the leaders in the Torres Strait would like. Whether they would like to be involved in that particular meeting or want their own standalone meeting. At the end of the day, we need to be focused on outcomes. That’s why we went into the negotiations of the COP itself. We wanted to get the best outcomes for the Pacific because that’s what we committed to do, and I think that we will get outcomes from this process. Our Government is delivering climate change action and we are delivering on targets that are meaningful. We’ve got an opposition who have completely walked away from any action on climate change or targets. So there’s a very stark position when it comes to what our Government is delivering and what the Opposition is pretending to deliver.
Journalist: I’ve just got a quick question on PALM workers. So there’s a recent report that indicated that quite a lot of PALM workers are experiencing conditions that are described as slavery and that there’s a lot of insecurity and in terms of wages and job conditions and that the only recourse that many have is to leave which brings their visa into question. Does something need to change in this space to provide a safer, more equitable way for PALM workers to safely work and to change employers if they need to?
Green: PALM workers are an important part of our economy and I know that the PALM scheme is incredibly welcomed and valued in the Pacific, and so we need to make sure that we get the balance right, that we’ve got a program that delivers for the employers that want workers and need workers for their businesses. But we also want to make sure that when workers come here from another country, they are safe and they’re taken care of. What our government has done in regards to PALM is work more closely with employers and work more closely with workers before they leave their country. We are putting more resources into educating workers about their rights so that when they are here, they know when something goes wrong, where they should go and what assistance they should get. I will say there is a huge demand for PALM workers and so we are very confident that if workers are not happy and there is something that really does need rectification, that we will support them to find another employer.
That is something that we are doing right now. It’s something that’s managed by the Department of Employment and they’ve got people on the ground who work with PALM workers closely. We also fund cultural liaison officers because we know that there can be some cultural barriers to reaching out and getting help and those people are on the ground, particularly in Mareeba, working closely with workers. It’s never going to be a perfect program, but what we’ve done as a government is tried to increase the safety for workers, make sure that when people are here, they are getting to send money back home, but also feel that they have the right to raise issues if they find that they are in any danger, have any safety issues or are not being housed properly, we want them to come forward with those concerns.
Journalist: It sounds like these sort of issues are still occurring [inaudible]. Does there need to be more oversight of the places where these are happening and more punishment to employers that are exploiting workers?
Green: There is a process of excluding employers who do the wrong thing, and that’s a process that the department undertakes when they find that there are issues. We will not deal with any bad employers or employers that exploit workers. And we’ve introduced an anti-slavery commissioner to look into the broader issues around worker exploitation, but particularly migrant exploitation
SMITH: Can I just speak on EPBC from a Leichhardt perspective. So the EPBC, particularly from a Leichhardt perspective, is really, really important. Our region up here is very unique. We are obviously the home of the Great Barrier Reef, the mighty Daintree, Cape York Peninsula. We have these really pristine and fantastic natural environments that do deserve protection. But we’re also heavily reliant on the mining industry and the agriculture industry. And the big thing about this particular bill was getting that balance right. For years, it was very, very difficult for mining companies, for agricultural companies, for any kind of heavy investment to happen without knowing what the outcome is likely to be. They estimate up to $7 billion a year was wasted on projects that could go nowhere. These laws give surety to investment and to companies so that they know when they start where it’s likely to finish.
Once you’ve got the rules, you know how to play the game and this is actually delivering hard and fast rules that benefit industry, create more jobs in the region and protects the Reef, which is our largest employer in the area of 77,000 jobs annually. So in passing this, it really is about striking that balance and we’re very, very proud of what this means for Australia and what this means, particularly for the region up here. It also obviously feeds into the net zero transition because we’re allowing that surety of mining. We are going to be able to take advantage of the critical minerals that we have in abundance up on the Cape, particularly silica, tungsten, and [inaudible] which are going to be very, very much key in the renewable energy transition. So this is a win right across the board and we’re very proud to have delivered it.
Allan Dale, Professor of Tropical Regional Development JCU: Allan Dale, Professor of Tropical Regional Development, James Cook University. For Northern Australia and for the Great Barrier Reef more broadly, there’s been a lot of uncertainty around those foundations that are required to actually make our economy and our society and environment work. The foundations of certainty of investment for economic development, the certainty of protection of the environment where we rehabilitate, how Traditional Owners may take their agendas forward. And that uncertainty was reflected in the Samuels Review in 2020. It is very important that we now have a pathway forward to actually resolve some of that tension right across the Northern Australian landscape and in the context of the Great Barrier Reef in particular. That is a big job ahead now in terms of implementation of those reforms, making sure that the EPA is set up well, making sure that the bilateral negotiations with the State and Territory and Western Australia, in the Northern Australia context, progress well.
But particularly there’s opportunities to look at bio-regional planning and strategic assessment so that we can get certainty within the landscape and make sure our economy’s thriving and our environment’s protected and that we’re able to really support and enhance the aspirations of Traditional Owners. The job ahead is a big one. It will mean getting the standards right, setting the EPA up well, getting those bio-regional and strategic assessment processes in place, making sure that the offset system works to deliver great outcomes for the environment and the economy, but particularly water quality outcomes in the Great Barrier Reef. So I put on the table how important the challenge ahead is in implementing these reforms, but how important it is as well that the reforms are now in place five years after the Samuels review and how important it’ll be for everyone to work together to make sure we get effective implementation for economic, social, and environmental outcomes right across Northern Australia and particularly in the Great Barrier Reef. Great, thank you.