Whilst not being across the specifics of the GBR spoil case or the latest Oz Gubmint pronouncements, I've long thought that the problems we face in achieving and improving economic - environmental balance are two fold:
(a) not costing/pricing externalities - mainly pollution of various sorts - pollution (of any kind) enters the "common domain" owned by everyone and access to that "common" needs to be charged at a fair price - there are also localised effects that should not exceed appropriate limits, and other "fineprint" such as some parties being noteably harmed more that others (in certain isolated cases, which may require specific consideration).
(b) not nurturing new technologies anywhere near enough - markets are dumb - markets don't invest enough in unknowns, though occasionally a "visionary" with public or private capital may come along - there needs to be a better framework/mechanism for new technologies (with potential "common domain" benefits) to be nursed to a size/state where free markets can take over.
As both of the above are broadly market failures, and, in my belief, the responsibility of addressing market failure rests with Government, then I believe it's Government that must act to address these issues - they don't necessarily have to provide
all of the funds, but investment and corrective action is unlikely to proceed without them.
-------------
I don't want to debate these points - I'm not looking for an argument - I just thought I'd share some idle thoughts.
