Senator Robert Bell The Australian Democrats are extremely disappointed with the Draft National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development and the Draft National Greenhouse Response Strategy. The Government should abandon the Draft Strategies and go back to the recommendations contained in the final reports of the ESD Working Groups. These recommendations should be developed into a clear implementation plan for ESD and for a national Greenhouse Response. The Democrats are also extremely sceptical about the public comment period ending on 21 August 1992. The public consultation process during last year's ESD process was tacked on at the last minute by the Government due to pressure for public input by environmental organisations, however, the consultation process was sadly lacking in resources and failed to harness public interest or involvement. This year's public consultation process is another charade of involvement. It is quite clear, from the quality of the two draft strategies, that the bureaucrats have hi-jacked the ESD process and are highly resistant to any ownership of the process from outside the Government bureaucracy. The Democrats welcomed the decision by the Australian Conservation Foundation and the World Wide Fund for Nature to boycott the recent ESD Consultative Forum in Canberra. We were also pleased to see a unanimous criticism expressed by industry and union groups who attended the forum of the government's handling of the process. The two day forum broke up after one day, with embarrassed Government officials promising that they would act on industry's concerns. Why is there united opposition - from green groups, industry and the trade union movement - to the Government's handling of the issue? To answer this, we need to compare the final reports of the Nine ESD Working Groups with the Draft Strategies produced by the Government committees. The purpose of a strategy is to develop an action plan. This means identifying a responsible agency or agencies to implement a recommendation, identifying a specific target to be achieved where this has not already been done by the Working Groups (such as a 20 per cent reduction in greenhouse gases) and a timetable for achieving the target (by 2005). Performance mo nitoring is also essential to monitor progress towards achieving the target. The Draft Strategies are not action plans. They do not focus on implementation of the nearly 500 recommendations made by the Working Groups. Instead, the Strategies are full of watered down recommendations that suggest implementation where feasible, or after a further cost benefit analysis, or further consideration by another committee or Ministerial Council. The Government has failed to recognise that the vast majority of recommendations contained in the Working Groups' reports were supported unanimously by the key parties in the ESD process and that there was a strong consensus for their swift implementation. Another problem with the Draft Strategies is that they point to many government programs and policies already in place which are retrospectively interpreted as being ESD initiatives. This is deliberately misleading. To someone unfamiliar with the process, the Strategies would give the impression that we are well on the way to achieving ESD. This is far from the truth! The intersectoral issues - issues that affect all industries, rather than issues which are sector-specific - have been dealt with very poorly in the Strategies. This, however, is not a surprise as they were dealt with badly during the ESD process last year. Many of the issues, such as biodiversity and population, have been referred to more committees or Ministerial Councils for yet more consideration. The following is a brief comparison of some of the recommendations in the Working Group reports with the Draft National Strategy for ESD. The recommendations made by the Energy Production and Use and Transport Working Groups have been dealt with in the Draft National Greenhouse Response Strategy. Agriculture Recommendation 15 of the Agriculture Working Group (AWG) - that indicative or mandatory targets be set for reductions in specific classes of chemicals. The Draft Strategy recommends that the merits of setting indicative, not mandatory, targets be assessed by the Australian Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Council. Recommendation 8 - that State and Territory Governments review regulatory procedures to require authorisations for clearing native vegetation subject to strict criteria. The Draft Strategy recommends only a review of all relevant legislation relating to land clearing. Fisheries The Draft Strategy reports that the Australian Fisheries Council is currently considering a report based on the recommendations of the ESD Fisheries Report, which it will consider in greater detail at its meeting in September. It therefore does not comment on the recommendations in the Fisheries Report. Forest use The Draft Strategy does not propose any recommendations for action on 'ecologically sustainable forest use', as the recommendations in the ESD Forest Use report have apparently been addressed in the recently released Draft National Forest Policy Statement. The Democrats are again, very disappointed in the National Forest Policy Statement. The policy will allow the continuation of logging of old growth forests and wilderness areas until the end of 1995. Manufacturing Recommendations 9 to 14 of the Manufacturing Working Group dealt with employment issues under ESD in the manufacturing sector. In particular, Recommendation 9 stated that studies should be commissioned as soon as possible and no later than the end of 1992 to assess the impacts on employment of polices arising from the ESD process. The Draft Strategy ignores these recommendations. Recommendation 17 - that best practice environment management (BPEM), including environmental auditing, be added to the National Industry Extension Service. The Draft Strategy ignored this recommendation. Recommendation 20 - that the Commonwealth Government implement an environment management industry development strategy. The Draft Strategy turned this into: "An option for the Commonwealth Government would be to consider support to allow the [Environment Management Industry] Association to prepare an industry strategy. Recommendation 42 - that the Commonwealth Government develop a national strategy for the management of chemicals. The Draft Strategy recommended an intergovernmental mechanism be established to examine existing arrangements for regulation and management of chemicals. Recommendation 47 - that there should be a register of contaminated sites. The Draft Strategy stated that the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council is further considering the issue of a public register of contaminated sites. Mining Recommendations 9 to 11 of the Mining Working Group dealt with community returns (i.e. royalties) from mining. Recommendation 11 suggested governments give "close consideration" to, amongst other things, resource rent royalties. The Draft Strategy stated that governments and mining companies hold a diversity of views on preferred royalty arrangements and that Australian and New Zealand Mining and Energy Council (ANZMEC) is continuing to study the issue. Recommendation 37 - that all mining operations be subject to minimum environmental standards, which are consistent between governments. The Draft Strategy states that ANZMEC will "look at" introducing minimum environmental standards. Tourism Recommendation 2 - that governments recognise in legislation that integrated land use plans, based on ecological systems or biophysical regions, are the central components of a multi- tiered land use planning process, and that regional planning based on biophysical regions and ESD principles be implemented throughout Australia by 1996. The Draft Strategy recommended the reconsideration of Schedule 2 of the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment, Recommendation 3 deals with many aspects of environmental impact assessment (EIA). In particular, Recommendation 3(a) states that EIA should include specific requirements to assess the impact of neighbouring areas and regional resources to determine the cumulative, interactive and long-term environmental impacts of development projects. The Draft Strategy recommends that EIA be reviewed within individual jurisdictions (i.e. by individual state governments). Recommendation 18 - that penalties for non-compliance with environmental regulations be introduced, along with performance bonds. The Draft Strategy stated that these types of regulation needed to be more fully investigated. Clearly, the recommendations of the Working Groups have been severely watered down. It is now up to the Government to listen to the criticism expressed by all parties involved in the process and withdraw the Draft Strategies. The way forward is to develop a clear and concise implementation plan for the recommendations contained in the Working Group reports. Please, write to the Prime Minister and urge him to:
Source: oz.esd, 11 August 1992.  |
||||
