SURPRISINGLY, the Australian Greens senators in the Australian Parliament spend most of their time on non-environmental issues.
Since the start of 2006 the Greens have issued 418 press releases. But only 94, or less than a quarter, had anything to do with the environment — and that is using a very generous definition of the term “environment”. Senator Kerry Nettle has issued 104 press releases, but two — just two — on the environment!
Of 87 notices of motion the Greens Senators put before the Senate since March 2005, just 30 — about one third — related to the environment.
Take Senate Estimates on forestry, a forum where one would expect the Greens to turn up to in droves and quiz officials about Government policy and spending. Just once in the past six years have the Greens turned up, and that was after the former Minister, Senator MacDonald, shamed them into it.
And in 34 Senate question times this year, the four Green Senators have between them asked me not one — zero, zilch — questions in my capacity as Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation.
Thus, while the Greens claim to represent the environment, what they actually spend most of their time on is a left-wing, anti-American foreign affairs agenda.
Despite this, the Greens manage to maintain the façade that they are about the environment. How? They do it by continually lifting the environmental high bar.
Take Tasmanian forests. First the Greens wanted to save old-growth forests by moving our timber industry into plantations — for which they advocated tax breaks.
We did that, so then they wanted to save our “native forests” — that is, any forest which is not a plantation.
But then — guess what? — they cottoned onto the fact that some farmers are a bit nervous about tree plantations. So now they are against new plantations.
One of those Green triangles
In fact, I even saw one of those Green triangles on a car in Hobart the other day with the words: “save our farms” on it!
The Green Left is not concerned about the environment. What it is concerned about is political relevance — and fundraising.
Take the Wilderness Society. The Wilderness Society — that most militant arm of the Green Left — has an annual income of $11.3m, $9.3m of which it gets from fundraising — the bulk of which is tax deductible for the donor.
Do you think the Wilderness Society spends any of this money actually protecting the environment? Read the Society’s last annual report and you will see it’s all about fundraising and “campaigning”.
How much work does it do to address the real environmental issues of invasive species and salinity? How many hectares does it regenerate? How many trees does it plant? None that I can see.
So the Society is not about actually saving the environment itself. It is about environmental advocacy.
The Wilderness Society’s largest expenditure item — over $4.6 million, or 45% of its total expenditure, is on salaries and salary on-costs. With a $1.1m surplus in 2004-05, its net assets are growing at over $1 million per year.
To create political relevance, the Green Left has sought, for the past twenty years, to maintain the myth of an environmental “crisis” in this country. In reality, there isn’t one.
Australia does face significant environmental challenges: salinity and water the foremost amongst them. But we don’t face a crisis in our forests as the Green Left claim. We don’t face a crisis in land clearing.
In fact, for every tree cut down in this country, another four are planted. What we need is continued, practical environmental work.
And we need continued policies which balance the legitimate human need to utilise our natural resources with the responsibility to conserve for future generations.
Our challenge is to continually remind our fellow Australians that this balance can and is being achieved in a whole host of areas.
This is an edited version of a speech delivered by Senator Eric Abetz, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation, to the Australian Liberal Students Federation on 3rd July 2006.
