Outcome:	1. Environment		Question Nos: 18-20
Sub Outcome:	Protection, wise use, understanding and enjoyment of the Great Barrier Reef
Division/Agency:	GBRMPA
Topic:	CRC/MTSRF and Water Quality
Hansard Page ECITA:	75-76, 76-77, 77

Senator Wong asked:

18. Senator WONG—Mr Skeat, in terms of the $2.5 million that you have described, I am trying to work out your total funding commitments for CRC/MTSRF.
...
Senator WONG—This is a standing commitment of $2.5 million on an annual basis; is that right, Mr Skeat? Or is there another officer I should ask that question to?
Mr Skeat—$2.6 million has been budgeted in this financial year.
Senator WONG—Is that for 2006-07?
Mr Skeat—That is for 2006-07. I do not have figures in front of me for out years.
Senator WONG—What about for the 2005-06 year? Was there a similar amount?
Mr Skeat—Again, I do not have that figure in front of me, but we could provide that to you.
Senator WONG—If you could take that on notice for 2005-06 and any outer year estimates you have.

19. Senator WONG—What proportion of in kind is included in the $2.6 million?
Ms Chadwick—I would need to take that on notice.
...
Senator WONG—That is fine. Is there any actual cash transferred or is it all in kind?
Ms Chadwick—Yes, there is about $2 million in relation to water quality monitoring. Perhaps Mr Skeat could clarify that. And $465,000—
...
Senator WONG—Of the $465,000, do we know how much is in kind?
Ms Chadwick—That is cash.
Senator WONG—Which is the bit that is in kind?
Mr Skeat—There is an additional figure for in-kind contribution to research on the Great Barrier Reef, which I do not have in front of me. But we could certainly provide it.
Ms Chadwick—We will check that.
Senator WONG—That is the one you are taking on notice.
Ms Chadwick—Yes.

20. Senator WONG—Was there any additional allocation from the authority for research for the current financial year?
...
Mr Tanzer—I think we will have to take that on notice. It is not here in the notes. There are a number of other projects that we run, some in relation to the ARC centre at James Cook, and a number of other projects where we contract directly with providers, but I do not know the amount.
Senator WONG—You could take that on notice, could you not?

Answer/s:

The GBRMPA’s funding allocations for research are as follows:

Notes:
1.   	GBRMPA investment includes funds from GBRMPA appropriation, NHT Funds (Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Marine Monitoring Program), and the Special Appropriation. 
2.   	Not all investment in MTSRF 2006/07 Annual Research Plan aligned projects is being contracted through Reef and Rainforest Research Centre: some is being spent through direct contract with MTSRF Research Providers;
3.   	More generally, all GBRMPA funded research and monitoring is aligned with the broad objectives of the MTSRF, i.e. ‘Ensure the protection, conservation, sustainable use and management of environmental assets of the Great Barrier Reef and its catchments, tropical rainforests including the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area and the Torres Strait’.
4.   	MTSRF investment for future years will depend on the final form of the Annual Research Plan for the MTSRF;
5.   	Cash commitments for 2007-08 list existing commitments, not estimated final commitments.

Outcome:	1. Environment			Question No:  21
Sub Outcome:	Protection, wise use, understanding and enjoyment of the Great Barrier Reef
Division/Agency:	GBRMPA
Topic:	Research Projects – Tourism Use
Hansard Page ECITA:	78

Senator Wong asked: 
Senator WONG—So of that $80,000 nothing has been spent as yet; is that right?
Mr Skeat—No, I did not say that. The dollars that have been set aside to work with the tourism industry in relation to this looking after small-scale sites have yet to be spent.
Senator WONG—How much of the $80,000 has been set aside for that?
Mr Skeat—We would have to have a look at the figures and get back to you on that.

Answer/s:

The GBRMPA has given in principle support to a collaborative project with the tourism industry and the University of Queensland to investigate the use of solar powered water sprinkler systems to reduce ultraviolet light penetration into reef waters with a view to reducing the stress that leads to coral bleaching. At present $35 000 cash and $15 000 in-kind is proposed to be invested. This project is still being developed by the University of Queensland and has not yet commenced. Even if the research is successful, this method will only be useful for protecting very small areas of particularly high value, for example tourism sites. It will not be useful for protecting the overall Marine Park.

Outcome:	1. Environment			Question No:  22
Sub Outcome:	Protection, wise use, understanding and enjoyment of the Great Barrier Reef
Division/Agency:	GBRMPA
Topic:	Coral reefs
Hansard Page ECITA:	79-80
 
Senator Milne asked:
Are there parts of the Great Barrier Reef that have not recovered from the last coral-bleaching event and that you are actually managing for decline now?

Answer/s:
Significant damage to the Great Barrier Reef has occurred as a result of coral bleaching on three occasions in the last decade. In 1998 and 2002, coral bleaching affected over 50% of reefs, but only about 5% suffered lasting damage. There are good signs of recovery at the damaged reefs, but full recovery takes at least 10 years. A less extensive bleaching event occurred in 2006, with most bleaching confined to the southern Great Barrier Reef. Reefs around the Keppel Islands were badly affected, with 40% of corals killed. It is too early to observe recovery in this area.

The impact seen on the Great Barrier Reef to date is substantially below the global impact of coral bleaching, which caused severe damage to 16% of the world's reefs in 1998 alone. Management of the Great Barrier Reef aims to achieve resilience in the face of climate change.