And that, for the first time, Australia has more alien plant species than native ones. But species extinction is powerfully specific and naturally attention-grabbing. Australia is already the world’s extinction superpower.
loading
We have already driven more mammal species into oblivion than any other continent, the report notes. Indeed, the Great Australian Oblivion was underway even as Josephine admired her exotic acquisitions.
Baudin collected two species of pygmy emu, one from King Island and the other from Kangaroo Island, which had evolved in isolation for millions of years. When they died of natural causes in France, they were the last survivors of their species. Meanwhile, European sealers and farmers had reached King and Kangaroo Islands and wiped out everyone else, according to the State Library of Victoria. The garden at Malmaison has been described as ‘Joseph’s ark’.
We pursue the extinction of our irreplaceable heritage at an accelerated rate. The latest State of the Environment report finds that the number of threatened species has increased by 8% over the past five years.
Plibersek noted the plight of the koala: “When we destroy these habitats, and when we don’t restore them elsewhere, endangered creatures lose their homes. And that has consequences. In February this year, koalas were officially moved from threatened to endangered in Queensland, NSW and the ACT.
“These sleepy creatures have grazed on Australian eucalyptus for more than 25 million years. And only this year, of all years, did they become endangered.”
Environment and Water Minister Tanya Plibersek. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen
But he points out that the fundamental solution is beyond saving individual animals, plants or places. It’s changing systems. It is the entire ecosystem that is collapsing, and this can only be countered by a change in human systems. Plibersek spent considerable time blaming Morrison for environmental neglect, but what will Labor do about it?
Plibersek grabbed headlines this week by pledging to join an international movement called 30×30. That is, to protect 30% of Australia’s land surface and 30% of its oceans by 2030, done through the creation of new national parks and marine sanctuaries.
But 30×30 is not as ambitious as it sounds. Already approximately a quarter of the land surface of the continent is protected; Plibersek says progress in the last 3 to 4 percent will be the most difficult. And already more than 30 percent of Australia’s oceans are protected; Plibersek says he is looking to increase the levels or intensity of protection for some areas.
loading
Plibersek’s key structural reform to stop Australia’s ecosystem collapse? To revise the general federal law that applies to land use and new development, the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, the EPBC.
When businessman and former ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel reviewed the act for the Morrison government, he found it outdated and ineffective: “It does not enable the Commonwealth to effectively protect environmental issues that are important to the nation.” It did not reach businesses or the environment.
“The most important of Graeme Samuel’s recommendations is to move from being process-oriented to focusing on results,” Plibersek tells me. As it stands, the act is about requiring defenders to check boxes; Plibersek wants to do this to achieve environmental goals. She says she will formally respond to Samuel’s review later this year.
Another critical task for Plibersek is the recovery of the Murray Darling Basin plan. He says that of the 450 gigalitres of water that is supposed to be diverted from agriculture to environmental use in the additional allocation promised to South Australia, only two gigalitres have been delivered. The minister says she has already met with the chief executive of the Murray Darling Basin Authority to tell him she needs to come up with a plan to meet the target.
loading
But the most immediate of Australia’s structural environmental reforms will be in parliament next week: securing the Albanian government’s 2030 greenhouse emissions target. And that’s not in Plibersek’s portfolio but that of Chris Bowen, Minister for Climate Change and Energy.
The Australian parliament has been the ossuary of good emissions policy for more than a decade. For this reason, Bowen says the government has designed the implementation of its planned emissions target without the need for legislation. It can use regulation and other measures instead. And Australia’s formal international pledge has already been submitted, replacing the Coalition’s 26-28% cut to 2005 levels by 2030 with the new promise of a 43% cut.
But the government would prefer to turn the target into law to give certainty to investors and companies. So Bowen will introduce the bill next week to enshrine it. The government has the numbers in the House, but will need the support of the Greens to win passage in the Senate. On the celebrated occasion in 2009, when a Labor government sought Green support for its emissions bills, the Greens killed the bills, condemned the government and ultimately condemned any meaningful federal climate action for a decade . The Greens preserved their virtue by handing control of climate policy to Tony “Climate change is bullshit” Abbott.
This time, the Greens approach the task more constructively. “Our preference is to improve and pass the bills and that’s the approach we’re taking to the negotiations,” Greens leader Adam Bandt tells me. “We are willing to change to achieve this, but the government must also be willing to change.”
The Greens make four demands. While they are willing to give up their preferred target of 75 percent to accept the government’s 43 percent, they insist on three measures to tighten the integrity of the 43 percent. Those three seem reasonable, and Bowen seems poised to reach an accommodation.
The fourth is the difficult one. The Greens want to ban the development of new coal or gas projects. This would break an Albanian campaign promise; it is non-negotiable for the government.
Could there be a side solution? May be. For example, Samuel’s review of the EPBC recommends that the law be changed to account for fugitive carbon emissions from new mining projects. This could open up a mechanism to limit emissions from new projects without banning new mines.
Putting the target into law would be a trophy for the government but not a necessity. Without that, the government intends to go ahead and implement it anyway. This increases Albanese’s bargaining power. The question for the Greens, as Plibersek says, is this: “They can agree or block. If they block, we’re stuck with Scott Morrison’s goals. It’s their choice.”
The essence of Australia’s situation is that change is imperative and everyone, not just political parties, must accept some adjustment. Nicolas Baudin chastised the officers who complained when he filled their cabins with kangaroos for the voyage to Josephine’s Ark for “preferring your own comfort and some temporary advantages to the greater success of the expedition and what can serve our country”.
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, opinion and expert analysis from Jacqueline Maley. Subscribers can subscribe to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter here.