I must say that one of the aspects of society I find most baffling is why certain voices have a higher impact than others in terms of influencing government policy, programs and funding.

Most governments in Australia are under severe financial constraint at the moment… incomes are down, costs to govern are up, natural disasters are costing more and more, and many sectors are being told that there is less or no money to fund their activities.

The Environment is one of these sectors. The environment is one of those issues where there has never been enough funding and the rhetoric from all levels of government has never been matched with resources to actually tackle the problems that they recognise, yet it is often one of the first areas to be cut when governments economise.

Environmental restoration is something that is generally recognised and resourced during times of surplus; as a sweetener for something that is unpopular (for example, the Natural Heritage Trust and National Landcare Program being funded from the sale of Telstra); or from additional levies that mean that real Treasury dollars don’t have to be allocated (for example, in NSW, the Climate Change Fund is a levy put on all electricity sold… half goes to fund environmental programs and half goes to Treasury). Still, even in times of “plenty” the fact that almost all environmental metrics are heading in the wrong direction shows that investment is not enough, and/or is poorly managed.

In tougher economic times, even this funding tends to dry up. More of the hypothecated funding like the NHT/NLP or CCF is spent on internal government programs and the on-ground works are unfunded. This is the situation now. The Australian government has significantly reduced the funding going to on-ground works funded through the NHT, have delayed funding for some programs and have constrained funding to Natural Resource Management bodies around Australia.

Where my confusion lies is that while governments are, with great eloquence, explaining why although they recognise the parlous state of the environment that there just aren’t enough funds to spend on it, they continue to be influenced by those advocating for government funding for privatised toll roads, subsidies for developers and businesses like mining and petrochemical companies, and they are willing to go into debt for ‘critical’ infrastructure like hospitals. While I agree that the government should go into debt for important things, what is more important than the environment that supports our entire economy?

The Biodiversity Council recently reported that the Australian government spends fifty times more public money subsidising activities and industries that harm nature than they do investing in protecting and restoring nature. The scale of debt that governments are willing to spend on industry and infrastructure dwarf environmental expenditure, such as spending $1b a kilometre for Melbourne’s East West Road Link or $473 million per kilometre for Sydney’s West Connex, or subsidising the Australian aviation industry to the tune of $5.6 b during COVID. This compares to less than $500m a year the Australian government spends on biodiversity across Australia.

Governments need to listen to other people alongside those that already hold their ear. They need to accept that we need to invest in environmental restoration now, as the task becomes greater, more expensive and less likely to succeed each day that we don’t act.

The recent Nature Positive Summit demonstrated that the Australian government is pegging its hopes on private investment being voluntarily applied through their Nature Repair Market. AABR, and other eNGOs have formed the opinion that there are many flaws with what it being proposed, there is little understanding of environmental restoration science and practice among those developing the system and there is a risk that the program could be gamed, with significant profits being made, but few real outcomes, much as been seen with various carbon and biodiversity market programs around Australia.

AABR engages in many public consultation and exhibition processes of State/Territory and the Australian governments. We are always keen to add the voice of members through our submissions. If anyone is keen to get involved, please contact the Secretary.

Peter Dixon, President, AABR

president@aabr.org.au or call 0478 741 111