Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

In Australia, we pride ourselves on having a pristine natural environment—from white sandy beaches to forests teeming with life and birdsong to the quiet power of our central desert. Our spiritual connection and economic dependency on nature are indisputable. More than half of Australia's GDP is moderately to highly dependent on nature, such as tourism, food production and, indeed, pharmaceuticals. Seventy per cent of our food is reliant on pollinators like bees, insects and bats. The economic argument I've outlined complements the spiritual fulfilment we derive from nature. Yet in the Australiastate of the environment2021 report, which the previous Liberal government suppressed, our environment was described as poor and deteriorating as a result of increasing pressures from climate change, habitat loss, invasive species and resource extraction.

Australia has one of the highest rates of species extinction, with more than 100 endemic species becoming extinct or extinct in the wild since colonial settlement, with scientists describing some of these extinctions as predictable and probably preventable. The facts are sobering. Australia has lost more mammal species to extinction than any other continent. For the first time, Australia has more foreign plant species than native. Habitat the size of Tasmania has been cleared. Plastics are choking our oceans—up to 80,000 pieces of plastic per square kilometre. Flow in most Murray-Darling rivers has reached record low levels.

The Samuel review gave a devastating assessment of the EPBC Act, which we are now undertaking reform to. In April 2024, Professor Samuel described this act and its associated regulations as 'gobbledygook' and said the regulatory framework had been an abysmal failure at protecting our environment over the past 25 years. In response, our Nature Repair Market Bill, a world first, was passed at the end of last year, and it included expanding the water trigger to include unconventional gas.

This second tranche of reform that I'm talking about now will establish the national Environment Protection Authority as a regulator and the Environment Information Australia as a harvester or gatherer of data and information, to be used in as close to real-time as possible to better inform our decision-making. This legislation package, including the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024, aims to foster a sustainable future by enhancing environmental protection, improving information transparency and ensuring smooth transitions in regulatory frameworks.

This Labor government not only intends on repairing nature but making it Liberal proof. We intend on delivering a Nature Positive Australia, and we need to after a decade of energy chaos, climate denialism and the climate wars; it goes on and on. To that we can add the dereliction of duty with respect to the environment. Nature Positive means repairing nature to leave it in a better state than we found it in, going above and beyond the minimum of repairing loss alone. This will be the first time that any country has defined Nature Positive and introduces a requirement for Australia to progress towards that outcome.

The EPA bill is the cornerstone of the Nature Positive legislation. It seeks to establish EPA, or Environment Protection Australia—an independent statutory body dedicated to enforcing and regulating environmental standards across the country. The creation of the EPA is a significant step towards ensuring that environmental protection is not only a priority but is also effectively monitored and enforced. The EPA will provide independent oversight, comprehensive environmental standards, public participation and transparency and enhanced monitoring and reporting.

Under Labor, we will fix our laws so they are less bureaucratic and provide more certainty for business. But we will also make sure that they improve nature, protect our unique native plants and animals and prevent extinctions. These are ambitious goals, but they have to be ambitious, given the scale of degradation that we are currently facing. The EPA would be a truly national environmental regulator that Australians can be proud of, responsible for a wide range of activities, including recycling, hazardous waste management, wildlife trade, sea dumping, ozone protection, underwater cultural heritage and air quality—one of my favourite topics. We are investing in our people, planning and systems to speed up development decisions, deliver quicker 'yeses' and, where necessary, deliver quicker 'noes'.

An audit ordered last year by Minister Plibersek, who I commend for driving this legislation, found that around one-in-seven developments could be in breach of their offset conditions. That is where a business had not properly compensated for the impact a development was having on the environment. This is unacceptable. The 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 environmental laws found that the current 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 simply the cost of doing business.

Our bills respond to these deficiencies. That's why we are increasing penalties for serious breaches of federal environmental laws. Courts would be able to impose penalties of up to $780 million. The EPA will be able to issue environment protection orders or stop-work orders in order to prevent imminent, significant environmental risk or harm. The EPA would also be able to audit businesses to ensure they are compliant with environment approval conditions. The minister will retain the power to make decisions where they wish to do so and, in practice, will make decisions based on advice of the EPA.

The EPA would work hand in glove with Environment Information Australia, or the EIA, as well as state and territory governments to enable better use of environmental data both in planning and decision-making. We recognise that informed decisions require reliable data. Centralised environmental information will help facilitate better decision-making. Achieving a Nature Positive Australia relies on good data and useful environmental information. This information will inform investment, policy and regulatory decisions by government, the private sector, community groups, academics, scientists and philanthropic groups. In other words, it's available for everyone.

We know that national environment information and data is fragmented. Its quality is uncertain, and what is available is not readily accessible and usable. When businesses are more easily able to select sites which minimise impacts on nature, projects can be approved more easily and completed more quickly and save money, both for the taxpayer as well as for business. Legislating for independent, consistent and authoritative environmental reporting will mean that no Australian government can hide the truth about the state of the environment like the previous government did, to their enduring shame. The bill also provides more transparency of the critical information and data that underpin regulatory decision-making. This was a key recommendation of the Samuel review. It delivers on our promise at the last election to provide consistent and reliable information on the state of the environment across the country. This bill will require reports to be published online every two years instead of every five years. It will allow us to get on the front foot and better apply and track protections where they are most needed.

Australia's environment is a national asset and responsibility. We are the stewards of our environment. This is why the state of the environment reports include a new requirement to report on the progress of the government's national environmental goals. The bill makes it a requirement for the government to commit publicly to national environmental goals. When Labor was first elected, Minister Plibersek released the official five-yearly report card on Australia's environment. This is known as the State of the environment report. The former government received it before Christmas 2021 but chose to keep it hidden, locked away in the back cupboard, until after the 2022 federal election because the findings were so damning. It was a distressing read, and it shows just how much damage a decade of Liberal and National Party neglect—in fact, ineptitude—did to our environment. The Leader of the Opposition in his budget reply this year stated that he would defund the Environmental Defenders Office and speed up approvals to unlock gas. Conspicuous was any mention of protecting the environment. That should send a shiver down the spine of every single Australian who enjoys recreating and travelling through this great land. In contrast, establishment of an EPA and EIA future-proofs our environment from bad governments and commercial overreach. Importantly, it has broad support across environment, business, farming and community groups. A few of these groups have put forward testimonials in support of this. Professor Graham Samuel said: 'The government and the minister are doing everything exactly as they should be doing. I don't underestimate the complexity of what has to be done. From the ACF:

The ACF welcomes the government's announcement that it will set up an agency to enforce environment laws—something previous governments failed to do.

And the WWF, World Wildlife Fund, said, 'The EPA is a potential game changer.'

By establishing robust regulatory frameworks, improving data accessibility and a ensuring smooth transition, the Albanese government's nature-positive plan sets the stage for a sustainable and resilient future. This legislation not only addresses current environmental challenges but also lays the foundation for long-term ecological health, economic prosperity and social wellbeing. It is a crucial step towards ensuring that Australia remains a vibrant, healthy and thriving nation for generations to come. I commend this bill to the House.

See this speech in context