Senator BARTLETT (Leader of the Australian Democrats) (6:03 PM) —I want to speak on the annual report of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust. I am particularly pleased to note the report because the Australian Democrats played a significant role in ensuring that the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust was set up. It was an election proposal of the Howard government which, in its initial form, was grossly inadequate. The concept of providing good protection for some of the former Defence Force lands around Sydney Harbour was good but the mechanism that was initially proposed by the Howard government was extremely poor. However, in yet another example of the Senate proving its worth—and particularly how essential it is to have a party like the Australian Democrats holding the balance of power because that party is willing to work constructively with whomever is in government—we were able, through a Senate committee inquiry, through ongoing negotiations with the government and people in various parts of the community in Sydney, and through debate in the Senate, to significantly improve the legislation establishing the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust.

We met with some resistance because it was an idea put up by the Howard government and, not surprisingly, some people who are supportive of conservation looked suspiciously at conservation initiatives put up by this government. But natural suspicion, in my view, is not sufficient reason to pass up the opportunity to examine whether good results can be achieved. This is an example of good results being achieved. Whilst the final legislation was not precisely as the Democrats would have liked, there is absolutely no doubt that it was not only significantly better than the original legislation but also massively better than the alternative, which was no legislation and no protection at all for these Defence Force lands. These lands are incredibly significant, particularly for an area such as Sydney Harbour which, as we all know, is a very beautiful area but which, unfortunately—as we also know—has been treated very poorly in terms of its foreshores. There has been inappropriate development there and most of those foreshores have been lost to the public.

The Labor Party at the time took a very antagonist approach. I presume that was driven by the fact that the Carr Labor government in New South Wales were antagon-istic to the proposal. They just wanted the Defence Force lands handed straight back to them. From the Democrats' point of view that would have been worse than leaving the land in the hands of the Howard government—because the Carr Labor government's record in relation to the use of lands on the foreshores of Sydney Harbour is absolutely atrocious. To hand over to the Carr government prime harbourside land, on some magnificent heads in Sydney Harbour, would have been asking for disaster. Instead, through a cooperative approach in the Senate, we have achieved the establishment of this trust. It still has some way to go but the areas which the trust has protection of are now guaranteed protection—they cannot be sold off, which is what would have been at risk if the legislation had been rejected. Even now it surprises me that not only the Labor Party but the Greens party continued to oppose the legislation even though the alternative meant no protection for those incredibly important lands on Sydney Harbour.

Those lands are not only environmentally significant but also incredibly significant in terms of Sydney heritage values—Indigenous heritage as well as post-European settlement heritage—and include areas that are just beautiful in their own right. There is also military heritage. Cockatoo Island, an undiscovered and barely known area in Sydney Harbour of incredible historical significance, is now finally open to the public to some extent and is possibly to be rehabilitated. These are incredibly historic areas that I was not aware of and I would suggest most people in Sydney were not aware of.

The opportunity for this trust to work on a long-term plan for not just the restoration and protection of those lands but also their opening up to the public—particularly of Sydney but also of the rest of Australia—is a magnificent achievement. Inasmuch as it was initiated by the Howard government they deserve credit, but frankly this is one occasion when I am willing to engage in some self-promotion and say that it was the Democrats in particular who ensured that those lands were not only protected but properly protected. It is good to see from this report that the trust is still making positive progress. There are still some things we need to keep an eye on—it is not all perfect by any means—but it is a hell of a lot better than the alternative would have been if we had followed the approach of Labor and the Greens and left these lands vulnerable. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.