A massive coal boom is amongst us and in the process it is turning our beloved Great Barrier Reef into a massive industrial estate. On the 31st of January 2014, the Environmental Minister, Greg Hunt and environmental authorities have approved the expansion of mining and coal ports located along the Great Barrier Reef, commonly known as Abbott Port.[1]
The federal government’s planned mining and coal ports development will see to be three times bigger than anywhere else in the world.[2] Even though coal exports are fundamental for Australia’s economy to survive, it is all about ‘location, location’ and the Australian Government’s choice of the world heritage listed site is seen environmentally and ethically wrong by many. Minister Greg Hunt had danced around the Commonwealth and State legislation to allow the expansion of coal mining by the use of the terms ‘monitoring and reducing risks’[3], but when it comes to 3 million cubic metres of seabed being dumped into our Great Barrier Reef, are reducing the risks sufficient enough or should the legislation be reformed to align with the new environmental threats?[4]
The expansion of these coal ports will include a heavy amount of what is called dredging. This is the act of digging up earth and minerals to expand waterways, harbours and in the case of the Great Barriers Reef, create port infrastructure and enable easier coal exports and imports.[5] Dredging is a large risk to the already eroding reef as it will increase the chance of derogation of water and smothering of native flora and fauna. The 2014 campaign manager; Felicity Wishart of the Australian Marine Conservation Society, expressed her concern for new port infrastructure where she said: “It seems the mining interests that are proposing this want to go with the cheapest and the fastest option, and that’s just to dump it on the reef”[6]
The issue of the eroding reef has been present since the industrialisation of Queensland and the need for more fossil fuels. Just over 40 years ago in 1971 a similar case took place where a 2560km section of the Great Barrier Reef was classified as ‘dead coral’ by the cane growers of Cairns.[7] This dead coral was further depicted as the next step in expanding the mining of limestone minerals. The case went to the Queensland Mining Wardens Court where the evidence presented by the Wildlife Preservation society of Queensland and other environmental activists gave the judge reasonable doubt that this mining would damage the Reef. Furthermore the Queensland government brought up the issue of sovereignty and the ownership of the Reef as there was no clear ownership expressed under the 1900 constitution. It was later ruled that the mining would not commence under the grounds that the industrialisation would cause criminal folly as according to John Burrst ‘”The so called ‘dead reef’ provides the vital feeding and breeding of multiple organisms . . . The so called ‘dead reef’ is in fact the very basis and living heart of the Reef”[8]
The past case would be applicable to the dredging of the Great Barrier Reef if the actual issue was presented before the Courts, but due to the introduction of the Marine Parks Act 2004, agreements can be made without the Courts intervening.[9]
The issue is the legislation put into place in 2004 where under division 1 of the Marina Parks Act it explores the restrictions the restrictions on entering into an agreement in concern of the use f the marine parks. This is seen in more detail in section 52 of division 1 where it clearly states ‘ A commercial activity agreement cannot authorise the carry out of major earthwork, or installation of a permanent structure, in a marine park.[10]
Technically under this piece of legislation a major earthwork would include dredging as it would cause a disturbance to the ‘natural or cultural resources in a marine park.’ The government planned the proposed mining infrastructure to be three times larger than anywhere else in the world, and increase ship traffic from less than 2000 ships annually passing through the Great Barrier Reef in 2011, to 10,000 by the end of the decade.[11] This increase will threaten the ecosystem in the Marine Park. It appears to be straightforwardly illegal for the proposed Abbot Port to go ahead, but the Marin Parks Act is not all black and white.
There is one legal loop hole that is keeping the mining companies smiling, where in section five of the Environmental Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 it exempts the dumping of controlled waste.[12] This means that technically seabed dredging is legal as it is not seen as radioactive material which is classed as ‘material that has an activity of more than 35 becquerels per gram’.[13] This legislation then overrides the legalities of the Marine Park Act 2004, as federal legislation does in fact over rule state. The combination of the federal legislation and the compromising words of ‘monitoring and reducing risks’ is slowly allowing the governments coal exports to be approved.
The big question is should legislation be reformed
so the state and federal combined create a clearer, more black and white
picture of the legislation? At the moment environmental legislation is vague
and contradicting, it creates many loop holes that the large mining companies
can skip around. “Due to this, the Great Barrier Reef is now slowly moving
from a prestigious world heritage listed site to the list of the most
endangered heritage listed sites in the world”.[14]
The combination of increased ship traffic and the dredging of the seabed
will mean up to 200 million cars worth of pollution being pumped into our air,
an increase in spills and less chance are beloved reef will survive.
Kelly Nguyen is a 2nd year Law student studying a Bachelor of Laws at the University of New England (UNE).
[1]. GBRMPA
Media, Strict conditions placed on approval for Abbot Point permit (31 January
2014) The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
<http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/media-room/latest-news/corporate/2014/strict-conditions-placed-on-approval-for-abbot-point-permit>.
[2]. Greenpeace,
Save the Reef. . . from coal, Greenpeace Australia Pacific
<http://wwworg/australia/en/news/climate/Save-The-Reef-From-Coal/>
[3]. GBRMPA
media, Above n1, 5.
[4]. Alexander
White, 'Has the Great Barrier Reef just been approved for destruction by the
Australian Government?', The Guardian (online), 19 December 2013,
,http://www.theguardian.com/environment/southern-crossroads/2013/dec/2015/great-barrier-reef-destruction-abbot-point-greg-hunt>.
[5]. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, What is dredging?, United States
Department of Commerce, 1.1
<http://www.oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/dredging.html>
[6]. Australian
Marine Conservation Society, Conservationists, tourism workers fear impact of
Abbot Point reef dredging (11 December 2013)
<http://www.marineconservation.org.au/news.php/149/conservationists-tourism-workers-fear-impact-of-abbot-point-reef-dredging>
[7]. Phobe
Ford, Consilience: Saving the Great Barrier Reef (Honours Thesis, University of
Sydney, 2011) 4.
[8]. Ibid.
[9]. Marine
Parks Act 2004 (Qld) s.1.1.52.
[10]. Ibid.
[11]. Above
n2.
[12]. Environmental
Protection Act 1981 (Cth)
[13]. Ibid
s.4(1)(c).
[14]. Barbara
Norman, 'Australia courting danger with the Great Barrier Reef', The Bull
(online) , 3 February 2014
<http://www.thebull.com.au/premium/a/43756-australia-courting-danger-with-the-great-barrier-reef.html>