Terri Butler should make a statement about the Toondah scheme: OPINION – Richard Carew

2,200 people marched through Cleveland on Mothers Day protesting against the Toondah scheme

A dispute between Labor and the Greens in the Federal seat of Griffith over the controversial Toondah Harbour scheme at Cleveland raises an important question. Is it legitimate for Labor’s environment spokesperson, Terri Butler, to stay silent on an issue described by the Brisbane Times (before last Sunday’s huge protest event attended by “thousands”) as “one of the most pressing south-east Queensland environmental issues”? 

When questioned about the Toondah scheme, before the protest, Terri Butler said:

“As the intending environment minister – and I do hope I am the environment minister – I actually can’t express views on individual projects because to do so could put at risk any decisions I might make down the track”.

The Greens challenger in Griffith, Max Chandler-Mather, the next day called out Terri Butler over her silence. He pointed to political donations of “$87,000 to Labor since 2015” from Walker Corporation (Walker) and the Palaszczuk Government’s pro-Toondah decision making.

This week Terri Butler told the Westender magazine:

“If an Albanese Labor Government is elected, I will be the environment minister and so it would be irresponsible to prejudge the outcome of any statutory obligation I may be called upon to exercise”. 

During an election campaign, voters naturally expect and have a right to be told what a candidate’s (and a Party spokesperson’s) position is on important issues, such as Toondah Harbour.

Terri Butler’s silence on this issue creates a dangerous precedent for our democracy.

A legitimate question is this. Should Terri Butler’s personal ambition to become the next Environment Minister (if she wins, and Labor wins) be more important than voters’ right to know what her position is on Toondah, as Labor’s current environment spokesperson?

Terri Butler is leaving it up to voters to decide whether she and her Federal Labor parliamentarians are for or against the planned destruction of protected wetlands and the habitat of critically endangered migratory shorebirds. That is risky.

Doesn’t Labor need to counter the public perception of bias arising from the acceptance of political donations from Walker since 2015?  

And what about Palaszczuk Government decisions favouring Walker? They include the ‘green light’ announcement in June, 2015, to continue with the Newman LNP Government’s PDA over the Toondah wetlands, the expansion of the real estate scheme to 3,600 apartments revealed in November, 2015, the secret development agreement signed in February 2016, and supporting Walker’s appeal against the Information Commissioner’s order for the public release of the agreement.  

Terri Butler is not currently a decision maker and may never be. She is a spokesperson. If Labor wins, Anthony Albanese may appoint someone else as Environment Minister. Butler needs to make a statement about Toondah.

If she comes out against the proposal, assuming she is opposed, any concerns she holds about personal bias impacting future decision making, if Labor wins the election, would be dispelled if another Labor MP is appointed Environment Minister.

However, if Terri Butler wants to put her personal ambition ahead of the public’s right to be informed of Federal Labor’s position on Toondah, there is an alternative to silence. She could make a short, factual, informative statement about important Ramsar Convention and EPBC Act requirements.  

There would be no risk of judicial interference with a potential decision made by her if she made a statement which does not pre-judge. Something similar to this:

“As one of 172 signatories to the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, Australia has agreed to the ‘conservation’ and ‘wise use’ of our Ramsar listed wetlands – including the Moreton Bay Ramsar site, declared in 1993.

We also agreed there needs to be ‘urgent national interests’ before we have a right to ‘delete or restrict’ boundaries of a Ramsar site (Article 2.5). 

The Ramsar Secretariat has reminded the Federal Government of our commitments in a submission on the Toondah plan.

Our federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act (section 138) requires that in deciding whether or not to approve an action (such as the Toondah plan) .. “the Minister must not act inconsistently with Australia’s obligations under the Ramsar Convention”. 

These important issues, among others, will need to be considered carefully by the Federal Environment Minister, whoever that might be, when deciding whether or not to approve Walker Corporation’s plan for the Toondah Harbour wetlands at Cleveland.”

The below plan from Walker’s latest (2018) referral under the EPBC Act, shows the PDA boundary (red lines), the Ramsar site boundaries (blue dotted line) and the Walker development footprint (in pink) which includes 3,600 apartments. 

If Terri Butler says nothing at all about Toondah, voters may judge Terri and other Labor candidates accordingly.

Richard Carew
Environmental Consultant

(Richard is a former lawyer who ran his own Brisbane CBD legal practice for 35 years before retiring in 2019.)

Published by Redlands2030 – 13 May 2022