Interview with Patricia Karvelas, ABC Afternoon Briefing
PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: Environment Minister Murray Watt has granted approval to a large wind farm project on Robbins Island in North West Tasmania. Now the Federal Government says the project will generate power to 422,000 homes and has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 3.4 million tonnes a year. The approval follows several delays due to court appeals to stop the project. Minister Watt joined me earlier. Minister, welcome to the program.
MURRY WATT, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: Hi, Patricia, good to be with you.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Now, you've approved the Robbins Island wind farm with strict conditions, but how can you be certain that they will protect native wildlife even if you call them strict? Including, of course, the orange-bellied parrot, the Tasmanian devil and the Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle.
MURRAY WATT: The reason I can be confident about this, Patricia, is that we've considered the scientific evidence in arriving at this decision, and we have taken the time to get this right. I know that people are concerned that this project has taken quite a long time to assess before an approval, and part of the reason for that is that we have taken these issues seriously and come up with conditions that we believe mean that there won't be unacceptable impacts on those critically endangered species. The 88 conditions that we've attached to this approval include several conditions that go well beyond the conditions that the Tasmanian Government attached to their approval. And that indicates that we are taking these issues seriously and applying the strongest possible standards to this approval.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: But this has been strongly opposed by many environmental groups, but a particular one led by former Greens leader Bob Brown. He's predicted that this approval would bring on the biggest public confrontation with environmental defenders since the Franklin Dam. Now, you know, for young viewers, the Franklin Dam was really an iconic moment in Australian history where these conflicts between environmentalists and the government came to a head. Do you accept that that's the battle that you now face?
MURRAY WATT: No, look, let's wait and see how that plays out, Patricia. We do often see predictions from the Greens and their supporters, like Bob Brown, that don't turn out to be true. Before the last federal election, they were going to win all these seats across the country, and they went backwards. And you know, Bob Brown has got a history of opposing major economic development across the country, so I'm not too surprised that that's been his reaction. What Bob Brown needs to do is explain why the conditions that we've attached to this approval won't work. We have taken the time to consider the science. We've imposed conditions like buffer zones separating the wind turbines from the habitat of these species. There's management plans required of the proponent, which have the option of a temporary pause to some of the turbines for a period of time when species are migrating through the route. There's requirements on the proponent to fund conservation efforts that will continue rebuilding the population of some of these species. So, really strict conditions that apply that Bob Brown and others won’t have taken into account. I mean, the broader issue, though, as well, we've got to consider, Patricia, is that if we are to tackle the climate change challenge that our country faces and if we are to deliver the cheaper, cleaner power that we need, we need more renewables in the system. But we need to approve those projects in a way that is sensitive to the environment and minimises the environmental impacts. You know, the surest way to ensure that we end up with more critically endangered species in this country is if we fail to deliver the renewable energy and the emissions reductions that are needed. So, we need those projects, but we need to consider them sensitively and we need to attach strong conditions like what we have with this one.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: I don't think anyone would, especially in the environmental space, contest the premise that we need more renewable energy. But where you develop the renewable energy is up for debate, of course, and conservationists have been arguing pretty strongly, as you know, that there are some places that development should just not be allowed. And this is Robbins Island. This is at the heart of this. Sean Dooley, who's a senior adviser at Birdlife Australia, a lover of birds, says that this is a no-go site. That's how important it is to migrationary patterns, as you know, that it is actually a really fundamental place of incredible importance. So, you are taking a risky move, aren't you, Minister? Even with all of the conditions that you can possibly put in, given how crucial this is as an area, as a wetland, in terms of being able to help birds migrate, it's a key place.
MURRAY WATT: Well, I respect the fact that there are some views along those lines, but there is also other scientific evidence that expresses the contrary view, which is that a project like this can occur in a place like Robbins Island, provided there are strong conditions attached to the approval. And that's what we've done. So, it's not as if this is only a one-way debate. Of course, there are views that are against a project like this, but there are also views support of it, not just from a jobs perspective, but from an environmental perspective. You know, if we take a really hardline view about this, we won't have renewable projects anywhere in the country. But what we've got to do is pick the right places and attach the right conditions, which we've done. More broadly the point I'd make about this is that we are obviously undertaking the consultations around the reform of our national environmental laws and this point around no-go zones is an issue that we are considering in these reforms. And I think there is a case for the rules about where is acceptable and where is not acceptable for developments to be made more clear in the reforms, and I'd like to see that happen.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, ok, but you've now approved this particular project, which there's no doubt about it has been held up for a long time. But this particular project at a time where that act, which we'll get to in a second, has not been reformed. So, when you say you're considering no-go zones, would this be a no-go zone or you don't consider this an area that should be a no-go zone?
MURRAY WATT: I wouldn't want to say whether this particular space will constitute a no-go zone under laws that haven't been written yet. Of course, that will all need to be determined in relation to future projects. We are operating within the laws we have at the moment. But I feel entirely comfortable that the strong conditions that we've attached to this mean that this project can occur in a way that is not going to have those unacceptable impacts on the environment. Again, just to remind you, this project has the capacity to deliver enough power for over 400,000 homes and to equate to taking a million cars off the road in terms of the emissions avoided. So, there are significant environmental benefits that will come from this project, while of course ensuring that it doesn't have those unacceptable impacts. And in fact, these conditions, what we're designing them to do is to actually increase the population of some of these critically endangered species above the levels they're at at the moment.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, there is one thing I do want to ask you. The decision doesn't actually follow the State Environment Protection Authority's directive. It was overturned on appeal, to be clear. But it required the wind farm to shut down for five months of the year to protect the migrating orange-bellied parrot, the OBPs as they’re known. Why haven't you followed that, the five-month shutdown?
MURRAY WATT: Yes. So, you're right, Patricia. When the Tasmanian Government first considered this project a few years ago, they attached a condition that would have required the wind farm to shut down for five months of the year. But you're also right that that condition was challenged in the courts and was overturned and thrown out by the courts based on a lack of evidence that it was needed. We've considered all of that. We've considered the scientific evidence, we've considered the court decision, the evidence that went to the court. Where we've got to on this is a requirement on the proponent prior to commissioning of this project that they will need approval from me as the Minister for a Bird and Bat Management Plan, which will set out what they are going to do to avoid turbines and blades of turbines impacting and hitting those birds. And one option within that plan might be a temporary pause on part of that wind farm for part of the year. That is yet to be determined, and that will occur, as I say, prior to the commissioning of this wind farm. But having looked at all of the evidence that was presented to us, we didn't think that it was necessary to set that five-month shutdown, noting that it was also overturned by the courts.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: But potentially it could shut down for that long if you determined that it was necessary?
MURRAY WATT: I wouldn't want to predict the sort of length of a shutdown or exactly the number of turbines that would shut down. I mean, what I would say is that in arriving at these conditions, we have discussed them with the company building the project. They think that that kind of condition is workable, and they've obviously made a decision that they think the project is viable, even if a temporary pause on some of the shutdowns were to occur.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Okay, Minister, given you've made this decision, and it is a really controversial decision, as you know, will be challenged no doubt, no final decisions have been made, but I suspect you're going to have a bit of a battle with this in terms of, you know, protest and then maybe real life challenges through the system. Is this you sending a message, right? If you are prepared to make a decision like this on an ecosystem that's as fragile as this, on an issue that is clearly as contentious, that this is the approach you'll take on these big renewable projects.
MURRAY WATT: I think the message that's being sent here is that while I'm the Minister, I will be applying the law. I won't be going into it with preconceptions about whether a project should go ahead or not go ahead or have conditions, I'll apply the law. I'll listen to the advice from my department. They will work constructively with proponents and all of the other interest groups who've got a view on this. But we will always make our decisions based on evidence and based on the law. As I said, the broader point is that we do need to have these renewable energy built in our country. But we need to do that in a way that manages and minimises environmental impacts, and we think that we've achieved that with this decision.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Minister, when are we going to see the legislation for, you know, your fast-track EPBC reforms?
MURRAY WATT: As you would have seen this week, Patricia, I've said that we will be bringing forward the introduction of that legislation by around six months, and we'll be introducing it to the Parliament this side of Christmas. I don't expect that we will be publishing a draft of the full bill prior to its introduction. You know, it's one of those things that you've got to weigh up consulting to death versus actually getting on and doing this. You would be aware that there has been consultation about this point for several years.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Well, I know you have been to WA a lot. It's a beautiful place. But what does that tell us? I mean, are you trying to appease the mining industry? The Premier? Why does WA get so many visits?
MURRAY WATT: Well, WA isn't the only place that's had the good fortune to be visited by me since becoming the Minister. But I have been there three times, and I don't think it's any secret that last time round, some of the views coming out of Western Australia played a role in that legislation not moving forward. So, that's why I've consulted. I think I've met with the Premier now four times. It might even be more. Obviously, various people in, not just the mining industry in WA, but environment groups there as well, to ensure we're getting a full picture. But I think I'm now up to probably high 40s, mid-40s of meetings, roundtables, forums. I've done more today with different stakeholders because what we want to do is try and build the broadest possible coalition of support for this legislation. I've said before that we are open to passing this legislation with either the Opposition or the Greens, in an ideal world with both. And I think that the best chance of getting this bill through the Senate is if we have environmental groups, business groups backing it in. And, you know, I feel positive about that because the one thing all those groups agree on is that the current laws are broken. They're not working for the environment; they're not working for business. We've got to come up with a better solution, and other parties are going to have to come to the party when this goes to the Senate as well.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Just finally, Minister, there's been a lot of condemnation for Bob Katter, including you. You've been critical of him. Condemnation and words are one thing, but will there actually be action by the Parliament for a politician to be threatening a journalist.
MURRAY WATT: Yeah, well, as you say, Patricia, I've already today criticised Bob Katter's conduct. I think it's completely unacceptable for any human being, let alone a politician who should be setting up a higher standard.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: So, should he be censured? I mean, will the Parliament consider that?
MURRAY WATT: I mean, I'm not going to pre-empt the parliamentary processes. That will obviously be considered, but you know, Bob Katter has prided himself on being a colourful character. You can be a colourful character without threatening people. And I think he went way too far yesterday.
PATRICIA KARVELAS: Thank you for your time.
MURRAY WATT: Thanks, Patricia.