Doorstop, Melbourne

MURRAY WATT, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: Thanks very much for coming along today. There's nothing more Australian than the ‘fair go’ and that's why today I'm opening nominations for Australia's National Heritage List, encouraging all applications from Australians for the places that we should list for their important heritage value in Australia. This year we're having a special theme, and that is that we're encouraging nominations that celebrate the places and stories that make Australia a fairer and more inclusive society.

Applications will be open until October the 16th, so I encourage people to get on the departmental website to make those nominations. The reason that we’ve put this theme forward is for reasons including this very building that we're standing outside today - the Royal Exhibition Hall here in Melbourne - a place that is on our National Heritage List recognising the fact it was where the very first sitting of the Federal Parliament in Australia was held before we had Canberra as the capital city.

It's the birthplace of Australian parliamentary democracy and that's why it's on our National Heritage List. Places like the Eureka Stockade are on our National Heritage List because that's the place where we saw workers take action to protect their conditions, as they should. So it's those kinds of places and stories that we want to see more of on our Heritage List to celebrate that fair go and inclusive society that Australia is all about.

Now of course today at the National Press Club we saw a different vision for Australia. We saw a vision from Pauline Hanson for a more divided, more chaotic Australia that will send a shiver up the spine of every Australian worker. What we saw from Pauline Hanson today was her say that we need a complete overhaul of Australia's workplace laws that are delivering the extra wages into workers’ pockets that they need to pay their bills.

What we saw from Pauline Hanson today was her saying that it's too hard to sack workers in Australia at a time when people desperately need to hang on to their jobs to pay their bills. And what we also saw from Pauline Hanson today was her calling for massive cuts to health spending - the health spending that is making it more affordable for Australians to go and get a doctor's appointment.

So that's why I say what we're seeing from Pauline Hanson is a vision of Australia that would be more divided, more chaotic, would make life a lot harder for Australians and would send a shiver up the spine of every Australian worker. Happy to take questions. JOURNALIST: Do you have any reaction to the heckler going past appearing to be in support of Pauline Hanson?

MURRAY WATT: Well, I mean it's not surprising that in Melbourne as in other parts of the country we see some people supporting Pauline Hanson just as we see some people oppose her as well. But the reality is that Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party have always voted with the Liberal Party for lower wages, lower spending on health care and lower spending on housing at a time when people need more of that, not less.

And we saw that reflected in her speech again today. JOURNALIST: Do you accept though that this appears to be Pauline Hanson's biggest hunting ground for the next few months, considering it's irrefutable there is a huge distaste in Victoria with the Labor Government. MURRAY WATT: Look, I think it's very clear that One Nation have ambitions to win seats right across the country, whether it be here in Victoria or other parts of the country.

And that's why it's so important that Australians take a look at what she had to say today. Pauline Hanson is fantastic at making complaints, but she is terrible at putting forward solutions for those complaints. Today what we saw her complain about was children living in poverty when she votes against wage rises for those kids' parents.

We saw her complaining that medicines are too expensive when she votes to make medicines more expensive. So every time she has an opportunity to make life easier for Australians, she decides to vote with the Liberals to make it harder. JOURNALIST: What do you think it said about the political debate, the fact that there was a protest almost minutes after she started speaking?

MURRAY WATT: Well, Australians have strong views about politics, and I have to say, as someone who's spoken at the National Press Club, I've had a protest take place while I was speaking at the National Press Club as well. Pauline Hanson is not unique here. Pauline Hanson is a politician.

She's a career politician. I know she tries to pretend that she's something different, but Pauline Hanson is a career politician who has consistently voted with the Liberal Party to cut wages, to cut spending on health and cut spending on housing at a time when we need them more. JOURNALIST: Do you think her speech was an attack on the Labor Party or on both major parties?

MURRAY WATT: I lost count of the number of different people that Pauline Hanson attacked over that speech. She's attacked the Liberal Party, attacked the Labor Party, attacked the media, attacked individual journalists and called them names. None of that is providing solutions for the very real struggles that Australians are going through right now.

What Australians need right now is a government that is utterly focused on supporting them with their cost of living problems. That's why right now we are trying to pass legislation in the Parliament to deliver another tax cut for Australian workers and Pauline Hanson is saying she's voting against that. It's why in a couple of weeks’ time Australians will get a tax cut from Labor that One Nation and the Liberal Party opposed.

So it's all very well to go to the Press Club and reel out a long list of grievances. What matters is how Pauline Hanson and One Nation vote, and when they vote, they vote with the Liberal Party to make life harder for working people. JOURNALIST: Can I just get you on the Great Barrier Reef?

MURRAY WATT: JOURNALIST: So under these new EPBC laws, the Federal Government will have authority over land clearing if it affects the Great Barrier Reef. Can you just explain how that will work? MURRAY WATT : Yeah, sure, so one of the major changes that we put through in those major reforms to the federal environmental law last year was to remove an exemption that has always been in place under that law for agricultural land clearing.

And what that means is that farmers who want to clear their land will simply have to follow the same rules that every other industry does, which is that they need to assess whether their land clearing is likely to have a significant impact on something that we protect at a national level. And if they do, then they have to send that to our department for assessment and approval.

Just like what happens now for someone building a wind farm or a property development or a mine. Now that is going to create a major change for the benefit of the Great Barrier Reef. We know that one of the major impacts on the water quality for the Great Barrier Reef is caused by sediment runoff from inappropriate land clearing happening in the Great Barrier Reef catchment.

And now, as a result of our changes to environmental law, that sort of clearing - if it's going to have a significant impact on the Great Barrier Reef - will need to be assessed by the Federal Government, and approved. That is a really big step forward to protecting the Great Barrier Reef. It's obviously a natural wonder that we want to preserve from an environmental point of view, but the Great Barrier Reef also supports 77,000 jobs in Australia and we want to keep those jobs, not lose them.

JOURNALIST: So how early would the Federal Government step in? And is it, as you've kind of highlighted already, is it essentially bringing it in line with how it will ordinarily work for anyone else? MURRAY WATT: So right now if someone wants to build a mine or a wind farm or undertake a property development that's going to have a significant impact on the Great Barrier Reef or threatened species or any of those other things that we regulate at a federal level.

If they want to do that, then they need to seek a federal assessment and approval. But up until our reforms last year many forms of agricultural land clearing didn't need that kind of assessment and approval, even if they were going to have those significant environmental impacts. So this change that we put through is really about levelling the playing field between the agriculture sector and every other industry sector.

It will go a long way, as I say, to protecting the Great Barrier Reef, but also to protecting really important threatened species around Australia. JOURNALIST: Has it been effective so far? Can you say how many times the powers have been used?

MURRAY WATT: Yeah, so obviously these changes only commenced at the end of last year, so it's still relatively early days. But my department is already investigating a number of instances of land clearing that appear to have breached those laws. If it stacks up that that land clearing is in breach of our laws, then we will take serious action that involves very big fines for people who are breaching that law.

JOURNALIST: Can you give us a ballpark on how many? MURRAY WATT: Look, I'd have to come back to you with an exact number, but I know that it is in the dozens of incidents that my Department is investigating as we speak. We're also doing a lot of work to educate landowners as well because we recognise that this is a change.

Landowners need to understand what that change is, what they can and can't do. So there's a lot of work going on around that as well. JOURNALIST: And how long have those parties, I suppose, been getting investigated for - how long has this process been?

MURRAY WATT: Yeah so there were some forms of land clearing that were taking place even before we passed those changes of the law that were in breach of the laws as they stood then. So they've been under investigation for some time. But obviously when you change the law in a significant way like we have, and that commenced in December last year, then new investigations have been launched since then as well.

JOURNALIST: Another one, so the UNESCO is considering adding the Great Barrier Reef to its endanger list when it meets next month. Are you concerned, or how concerned are you, they could make that decision and is the Government doing enough to protect it? MURRAY WATT: Yeah, so both I and my department are working very hard to ensure that UNESCO does not put the Great Barrier Reef on the endanger list.

We're so fortunate to have the Great Barrier Reef on the World Heritage List, as we are to have this very building we're standing next to on the World Heritage List as well, and we want to keep it that way. If UNESCO were to say that the Great Barrier Reef were in danger, that would be a devastating blow to our tourism industry right around the country, not just in Queensland.

So we're fighting hard to persuade UNESCO that that step is not necessary and in doing that, what we're pointing to is the fact that we have delivered on every single commitment that we gave UNESCO to improve the health of the Reef and also with those further changes to land clearing laws as well to ensure that the Reef is better protected going forward as well.

JOURNALIST: But what would be the impact if it was added to the endangered list? MURRAY WATT: Well if UNESCO were to decide that the Great Barrier Reef were in danger, then as I say, that would send a very poor message to the rest of the world about coming and seeing the Great Barrier Reef. I don't know about yourselves, but I've had the great fortune to do a little bit of snorkelling on the Great Barrier Reef even quite recently.

And we know that it is under pressure as all other reefs are around the world, but there is spectacular marine life right now as we speak in the Great Barrier Reef and we want people from around the world to come and enjoy it. JOURNALIST: The fact that it's even been considered by UNESCO as in danger, surely that more or less points to inaction by your Government?

MURRAY WATT: No, I wouldn't put it that way, what I'd say is that the fact that UNESCO is keeping an eye on the Reef demonstrates that the Great Barrier Reef and coral reefs all around the world are under a lot of pressure. We know that climate change is having a massive impact on coral reefs here in Australia and right around the world. We know that agricultural practices in some cases have had an impact on the Great Barrier Reef, and that's why we've changed the law to reduce that impact as well as spending billions of dollars as a government on restoring the Reef to make it safe for generations to come.

So UNESCO has recognised the effort that our Government has taken. They've recognised the fact that we now have a government that believes in climate change. We saw again from Pauline Hanson today say that she doesn't believe in climate change and she wants to get rid of the department that regulates it.

We understand that there's really great economic importance to taking action on climate change as well as environmental importance as well. JOURNALIST: Just lastly, would it have any impact on the laws relating to land clearing? MURRAY WATT: JOURNALIST: Yeah, so if the decision was reached, what impact would it have on land clearing?

MURRAY WATT: Yeah well look, I actually think that the changes that we've made around land clearing laws will help us convince UNESCO that it is not necessary to put the Great Barrier Reef on the endanger list. Obviously it would be a matter for UNESCO to make any decision that it wants to about our position going forward. JOURNALIST: And specifically relating to the land clearing, you'd still have the authority, even if there's protections placed on the Great Barrier Reef?

MURRAY WATT: Absolutely. It's the Australian Government and the Australian Parliament who choose what laws to pass, not UNESCO or any other international body. The issue for UNESCO would be that they do have the capacity to decide that the Reef or any other World Heritage listed area is in danger.

But I'm very confident that we'll be able to persuade UNESCO that the action we're taking, including these recent changes to the law, mean that we don't need to have that listing done. Okay? Thanks guys.

We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of country throughout Australia and recognise their continuing connection to land, waters and culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past, present and emerging.