Senator BARTLETT (2:57 PM) —My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage and also the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Is the minister aware of the report released today by the roundtable, comprising some of the nation's largest investors in rural Australia, plus the CSIRO and the Australian Conservation Foundation, which details ways of ensuring private sector investment in land and water repair? Minister, the report highlights that, with strong government leadership and an integrated package of tax offsets and concessions, $12.7 billion over 10 years in private investment delivering environmentally positive outcomes could be generated with a cost to government of just $360 million per year. Will the government accept the requirement for real leadership in this area and put forward tax measures aimed at delivering major environmental outcomes rather than simply considering tax policy as a way of buying votes through hints at income tax cuts?

Senator HILL (Minister for the Environment and Heritage) —The question again demonstrates the fundamental misunderstanding of the Australian Democrats in relation to this government's taxation policy. We believe in lower taxation because it helps build business success. That helps create wealth, which helps us fund good causes. I think we have demonstrated in the last 5½ years that, if you keep taxes, interest rates and inflation down, all Australians actually benefit. Furthermore, it gives you the opportunity to invest in an unprecedented way at an unprecedented level in Australia's natural resource issues.

I remind the honourable senator that this government established the Natural Heritage Trust with over a billion dollars, which has been invested in natural resource projects in this country covering both conservation and sustainable primary production. That financial investment is now to be enhanced by the national action plan on salinity and water quality, which will bring with it a further investment of $1.4 billion directed at specific catchments in difficulty. As I said, this is an unprecedented level of public investment in these issues and complements the very substantial private investment that land-holders and land managers are already putting into these very challenging issues. So the answer to the question is that, if you go down the government's path, if you ensure economic success as the starting point, you will be best able as a government to meet your other responsibilities, including the very important one of repairing the natural resource damage that has been done in this country and putting in place natural resource processes that will better ensure sustainability in the long term.

Senator BARTLETT —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. I would inform the minister of the finding of the report—which he has not indicated he is aware of—which was put together by some of the nation's largest private investors in rural Australia. The report found that `current government responses to the environmental threat are unlikely to arrest a reverse to declining trends in landscape health'. Given that finding from some of the nation's largest investors in rural Australia, why is the minister not accepting their request for real leadership in real tax reform that will encourage further private investment in this area? Is the minister also going to indicate the Prime Minister's willingness to respond to the recommendations put forward by his own Community Business Partnership in a report initiated by the Democrats which contained other recommendations for tax measures that support and encourage use of the land for conservation purposes? Given that this report and other reports have found that we are still going backwards in terms of the health of our land and water, why is the government refusing to act further in this crucial area?

Senator HILL —As the honourable senator knows, this government is looking at further tax reform to assist in better natural resource outcomes. But these reforms are not to put taxes up; these reforms are to bring taxes down—to provide incentives and support. This government is interested on that side of the ledger. What this government is not going to do is increase taxation for whatever purpose. We have demonstrated that we can meet the major responsibilities we have in relation to better natural resource management through running a good economic outcome, and we can help do that by helping keep taxation down. We believe that is the right way for the future, and that is the way that we are going to continue to advocate. Madam President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.