One startling statistic about the budget has flown under the radar this year. Funding for nature made up 0.3% of total spending. That's less than one third of one percent of the budget.

To put that into perspective, for every $100 spent by the Federal Government this year, only 30 cents will go to activities that benefit nature. 30 cents. And it gets worse, because that 30 cents declines to 10 cents in 2029. That's down from $1.10 per $100 under the Rudd-Gillard governments.

But let's take it a step further and narrow down to the money allocated specifically to on-ground conservation activities. These are the programs that directly protect nature, like establishing new conservation areas, restoring habitats for native animals like koalas, or combatting invasive species. Here, the picture is even worse. The Biodiversity Council calculates funding for on-ground nature programs is only 0.06% of the Budget. That's $1 for nature out of every $1,667 spent by the Government. In other words, practically nothing.

Our main program for preventing new extinctions, the Saving Native Species fund, only has funding for 2 more years. And it's less than $40 million per year.

Australia is a world leader in extinctions: number one in the world for mammal extinctions and number two for biodiversity loss. These are not records we should be proud of.

So, it's great this Government has committed to no new plant and animal extinctions, and to conserving 30% of its land and marine areas by 2030. But these are just commitments. They're just words. The great thing about the Budget is it allows us to evaluate whether the Government is doing what it takes to achieve those commitments. And this Budget shows all too clearly that it is not.

At the same time as providing minimal funding for nature protection, it's pouring far more money into activities that harm nature: fossil fuel subsidies, including fracking projects that damage water tables; native forest logging; and projects that clear native vegetation. When the odds are stacked against it like this, Australia's unique and ancient biodiversity will continue to die off — on this Government's watch.

This isn't just a problem for environmentalists. It's a problem for all Australians. The good thing is that we know it's smart economic management to invest in nature. Nature underpins everything else in the budget. A strong economy is impossible without a healthy environment. Our prosperity would crumble without well-functioning ecosystems to provide us with potable water, clean air, healthy and productive soil, pollinators for fruit and nut trees and other crops, and mangroves for storm and flood protection. None of these things are nice-to-haves. They are absolutely critical.

So, what kind of spending do we need to put nature on a better footing? Is it 10% of the budget? 5%? It's actually not that large a number: leading scientists and ecologists from organisations such as the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists and the Biodiversity Council have calculated that to put Australia's environment on a more secure footing would cost only 1% of the budget. Only 1%. That's about $8 billion per year. A lot of money, but an incredibly worthwhile investment.

Research shows that the more a country spends on conservation, the fewer species it loses. That 1% of the Budget would go to tackling invasive species, stopping new extinctions, protecting 30% of Australia, and restoring Australia's degraded landscapes — in other words, habitats. 1% to stop us going backwards and set us up for a healthier, cleaner future.

Most Australians want this to happen. Australians care about nature and want the Government to do more to protect it. 95% of Australians believe that spending on nature should be increased to 1% or more. 1% is doable. It's well within the realm of possibility. But only if the government treats nature as a priority.

Budgets are about priorities. They're the one time in the annual political calendar when governments have no choice but to lay all their cards down on the table. Following the money, this budget makes it clear as day — this government simply doesn't prioritise nature.

My question for the Government is: to meet the Government's commitments to no new extinctions and conserving 30% of Australia's land and sea by 2030, what advice are you relying on that has led you to reduce funding for nature?