ABC RN Breakfast interview with Minister for the Environment and Water Tanya Plibersek

Subjects: Proposed decision to refuse development in Toondah Harbour; EPBC Act reform; protection of Great Barrier Reef.

SALLY SARA: A near decade-long battle between conservationists, government and developers over a controversial billion dollar development on internationally protected wetlands in southeast Queensland will soon come to an end. Conservation groups argued the 3,000-apartment development at Toondah Harbour in Moreton Bay would harm endangered animals. The then Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg pushed ahead with the approval process against the advice of his own department. The department labelled it clearly unacceptable. Now the current Environment Minister is proposing to finally reject the development, and the Minister Tanya Plibersek joins me now. Minister, welcome back to the program.

TANYA PLIBERSEK, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: Good morning, Sally.

SARA: Just so we understand where we’re at at the moment, this is your proposed decision. Why is this not the final decision at the moment?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: This is the way the environment law works. The Minister makes a proposed decision. You give the proponent the opportunity to respond under the procedural fairness provisions under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. It’s section 131AA of the EPBC Act. And that happens for every approval decision.

What normally happens is, that happens behind closed doors, but because 26,000 people commented last time this was in the public arena, I thought it was the right thing to do to give the public as well as the proponent the opportunity to comment this time.

SARA: Why has it taken so long to get here?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I think that’s a question for previous Ministers. As you mentioned, an earlier Minister was told that this was a clearly unacceptable development and overruled the advice from his department to keep going with the project. You know, I guess you’d have to ask them why they didn’t accept that information and that advice at the time.

I mean, I’ve made this proposed decision now because the project would see the destruction of almost 60 hectares of an internationally significant wetland. That’s about 24 times the size of the Gabba for your Queensland listeners. And it’s an area which is really important for a range of species, including loggerhead turtles and critically endangered birds like the eastern curlew, which migrates is it 12,000 kilometres from Russia to Australia and it relies on that area in Moreton Bay for feeding and roosting. And it builds up its body strength – I think it puts on about 70 per cent of its body weight there in Moreton Bay and then flies back to Russia for its breeding cycle. It would also have significant impacts on dugongs and dolphins and a range of other species.

SARA: Minister, what will the timeline be from here? You’ve put out this proposed decision. There can be a response from other parties. When do you think this decision could be finalised?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I’m giving anybody who’s interested 10 days to make a comment. That obviously includes the proponent, but others who also may have an interest. And then I’d have to take some time to consider that feedback. Obviously if we get another 26,000 comments it will take a little while to make sure that we have an accurate assessment of the support for the project or, you know, lack of support for the project. There are clearly people in the local community who are opposed to it, but I would also say that I’ve spoken to the local council up there and a range of other members of the community who support the project going ahead. So I have to do a proper assessment. And then I’ll make a final decision.

SARA: This brings us to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity and Conservation Act. You’re currently working on a new act. How long would this project – how long would this process have taken to be – this project to be rejected if your new EPBC Act was the place?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Look, the very reason that we’re doing the law reform to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity and Conservation Act is because we need stronger protections for nature. But we also need faster, clearer decisions for proponents of projects. I think if something is clearly unacceptable then that really ought to be the end of it. And, instead, this project has been around, as you say, for almost a decade. If there were a similar project at a different time that had a clearly unacceptable impact on critically endangered animals or an environment that is, you know, special and needs to be protected, I think it’s fair to give a proponent a really early signal that a development not going to go ahead.

I don’t think proponents should be spending years and millions of dollars developing projects that in the end get knocked off because the assessment is that they’re going to have too big an impact on nature. We want to send those signals upfront. We want to say to proponents, if you’re having this unacceptable impact on plants or animals or the natural environment, if it’s in a place that is too precious, is irreplaceable, you know, don’t even spend your money. But, if you’ve got this type of development in this type of area and you take this type of action to protect nature, you’re going to get a much faster yes. That’s what our objective is.

SARA: Minister, there have been concerns that you’re planning on splitting the EPBC reforms. Are you planning on doing that?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, we’ve already introduced and passed the first tranche of changes to the EPBC Act, and that was with the changes to the water trigger that we made at the end of last year. For people who aren’t following this closely, that means we changed the law to make sure we could better protect water resources from all types of gas extraction. There were some protections there for water if there was a coal mine or a coal seam gas, but other types of unconventional gas weren’t covered by these protections in the law. We expanded those protections at the end of last year and we’re working very hard to continue to consult with environment organisations, scientists, the business community on how we can get stronger laws that better protect the environment and giving faster, clearer decisions.

SARA: Let’s go to another key area in your portfolio – the Great Barrier Reef has experienced five bleaching events over the past five summers. How many more bleaching events can the reef survive in your view?

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, of course we’re very concerned about the bleaching that we see at the moment, sadly, not just on the Great Barrier Reef but right around the world. The northern hemisphere had some very severe bleaching in their summer as well. We need to protect the reef because it’s – I mean, it’s unique in the world and also 64,000 people rely on it for their work. And that’s why we’re doing whatever we can, first of all, to get Australia to net zero. We’ve got a 43 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030 and, you know, net zero by 2050. We’re working very hard to get to 82 per cent renewable energy. That’s why we’ve put $1.2 billion into protecting the reef, improving water quality, getting gill nets out of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. I rejected a coal mine that would have had impacts on the reef. We withdrew –

SARA: But you have approved several other coal mines during your term so far.

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: We have, because Australia has to get to net zero by 2050, and every new project that we approve is now part of the safeguard mechanism. And you know what would have made a real difference? If 10 years ago our carbon pollution reduction scheme hadn’t been blocked by the Greens and the Liberals, we would have seen 80 million fewer tonnes of carbon pollution in our atmosphere. We need to get on with the safeguard mechanism that has been approved by the parliament with the support of the Greens and the crossbench. We need to get on with implementing the safeguard mechanism, and all new projects are measured against that safeguard mechanism and our trajectory to net zero.

SARA: Minister, we’ll need to leave it there. Thank you.

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Thank you, Sally.