Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Labor is committed to a nature-positive Australia.

Our economy, our livelihood and our wellbeing all depend on the health of our natural world.

We are delivering more than ever on programs, projects, policies and on-ground activities to create that nature-positive Australia.

We want a country in which nature is being repaired and is regenerating rather than continuing to decline.

At the last federal election, Labor made a promise to establish an environment protection agency.

To ensure compliance with environmental laws.

To improve processes for business.

And, with Environment Information Australia, to centralise data collection and analysis. So there is consistent and reliable information on the state of the environment across the country—to inform decision making and track our progress against our environmental goals.

Everybody agrees that the current regulatory system doesn't work.

We said we will fix our laws so they're less bureaucratic and provide more certainty for business.

And so that they improve nature, protect our unique native plants and animals and prevent extinctions.

That's what the community expects and that's what we're delivering.

We have had hundreds of hours of consultations with more than 100 representative groups.

We've held public webinars that around 3,000 people have attended.

We have received around 2,500 submissions from people and groups passionate about these laws.

We are consulting extensively and comprehensively. That is the mature way to develop good policy.

We have taken the advice of Professor Graeme Samuel, commissioned by the former government to report on how the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act could be improved.

We've already completed the first stage of reform. In late 2023, we passed legislation to establish the world's first national Nature Repair Market and expanded the water trigger to apply to all unconventional gas projects.

We're now moving quickly to establish an environment protection agency and Environment Information Australia. These are crucial elements of our plans to create a nature positive Australia, and we want to get them in place as soon as possible—so they can begin their important work.

We will keep working on the remainder of our reforms outlined in the Nature Positive Plan so we can get them into the parliament and passed.

Combined with significant additional funding, this stage of the reforms will deliver stronger environmental powers, faster environmental approvals, more environment information and greater transparency. These are big steps forward, for the environment and for business, and it's all new under this government.

Environment Protection Australia, our EPA, is an important part of delivering the government's Nature Positive Plan.

Staging the rollout will mean that some of the teething problems which often occur in setting up new agencies like EPA from scratch would be dealt with before they are being asked to administer a whole new set of environmental laws. It allows a smoother transition of responsibilities from the current department to the new agency.

We are establishing Australia's first national independent environment protection agency with strong new powers and penalties to better protect nature.

EPA would administer Australia's national environmental laws to better protect our environment and make faster, clearer decisions.

It would be charged with delivering accountable, efficient, outcome-focused and transparent environmental regulatory decision-making.

EPA would be a truly national environmental regulator that Australians can be proud of, responsible for a wide range of activities under Australia's environment laws, including in relation to recycling and waste exports, hazardous waste, sea dumping, ozone protection, underwater cultural heritage and air quality.

This independent agency's work would include regulatory work, such as issuing permits and licences and undertaking compliance and enforcement.

It would play an important role in educating industry, business and the community to help them navigate our environmental laws.

By providing better guidance and education, we can make sure businesses are clear about the rules, so they can do the right thing.

We're investing in our people, our planning and our systems, to speed up development decisions—to deliver quicker yeses and—when necessary—quicker noes.

EPA would be the tough cop on the beat, enforcing our laws through new monitoring, compliance and enforcement powers.

The Samuel review into Australia's environment laws found that the regulator is not fulfilling this necessary function.

Professor Samuel also found that serious enforcement actions are rarely used and that penalties need to be more than just the cost of doing business.

Our audit of environmental offsets echoes this shameful tale. It tells us that the current system is not working.

Preventing harm and checking and enforcing requirements is one of the most important things we can do to protect nature.

For example, if a project proponent promises to provide an offset to make up for an unavoidable impact on nature, the public should be confident that that promise will be kept.

Our bills respond to those findings of both the Samuel review and the offsets audit, while we continue to work on the rest of our environmental law reforms. Stage 3 of our reforms will continue our broader efforts to halt and reverse environmental decline and protect nature.

EPA would deliver proportionate and effective risk-based compliance and enforcement actions, using high-quality data and information. It would provide assurance that environmental outcomes are being met.

Most businesses do the right thing. We know that.

But when penalties for breaking the law are too low, and the risk of being caught is negligible, some companies or individuals regard breaking the law as an acceptable risk, an acceptable cost of doing business.

That's why we're increasing penalties, too. For extremely serious breaches of federal environment law, courts would be able to impose penalties of up to $780 million in some circumstances.

Only individuals or corporations deliberately doing the wrong thing need to fear these penalties. These are the maximum penalties available. A court would still maintain discretion in deciding what penalty to impose in each case.

EPA would be able to issue environment protection orders—or 'stop-work' orders—to address or prevent imminent risks of serious damage to protected matters in urgent circumstances. EPA would also be able to audit businesses to ensure they are compliant with environment approval conditions.

Creating EPA would promote public trust in environmental decision-making through publication of information, transparency of decisions and providing opportunities for the community, including First Nations people, to inform decision-making processes.

We were clear in our Nature Positive Plan that our EPA would be independent—the first national, independent EPA in this country—that it would have its own budget and that it would be led by a chief executive officer.

This bill delivers that. It establishes EPA in legislation as an independent statutory agency, separate from the environment department and the government.

The CEO would have the discretion to perform their functions, and exercise their powers, without being subject to the direction of a minister or anyone else.

But they would be expected to operate consistently with government objectives. The environment minister can issue the CEO and EPA with a formal statement of expectations.

Through statements of expectations, the minister can provide greater clarity about government policies and objectives relevant to EPA, including the policies and priorities the agency is expected to observe in conducting its operations.

The CEO must respond with a statement of intent.

The exchange of statements recognises the independence of the statutory agency.

This is common for government statutory agencies—like the Australian Taxation Office, the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Securities and Investment Commission.

EPA's performance against these statements would be examined when independent reviews of the administration of EPA are undertaken.

These reviews provide opportunities to test the operation and performance of EPA and its CEO, and the settings the government has put in place over their remit.

Early and regular reviews hold EPA and the government to account.

Hiring and firing of the CEO are significant and important tasks, not to be taken lightly.

The Governor-General would have the power to appoint or terminate the CEO.

Good practice, enshrined in the Australian Public Service Commission's merit and transparency policy, upholds that appointments should be open, transparent and merit based.

That is our clear intent.

Similarly, termination must be justified. This bill would provide clear grounds for termination of the CEO by the Governor-General, including failure to carry out statutory duties, dishonesty, financial mismanagement or misbehaviour.

This CEO would be supported by an advisory group, to ensure that they have access to the expertise they need to do their job.

This is a big step, an important step in delivering our Nature Positive Plan. We want the EPA to be in place as soon as possible.

Our EPA would initially operate within the department to administer Australia's current national environmental laws, until it becomes an independent statutory agency on 1 July 2025.

New compliance powers and penalties would come into effect as soon as possible following passage of this legislation.

Responsibility for assessing environmental approval applications would be delegated to the CEO of EPA.

The CEO of EPA would also be a delegate of the minister who can make approval decisions, as currently occurs with the department.

The CEO cannot subdelegate their decisions any further. Only the minister can choose to whom to delegate their EPBC Act decisions.

The minister would retain the power to make decisions where they wish to do so. And, in practice, decisions the minister makes would be based on the advice of EPA.

EPA would play an important role in the full delivery of the Nature Positive Plan and beyond.

EPA would advise the minister and the government of the day on how Australia's environmental laws can be improved.

EPA would work closely with Environment Information Australia, as well as with state and territory governments, to enable better availability and use of environmental data, both in planning and decision-making.

I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context