Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today, on 6 June, in support of Labor's Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024, Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024 and Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024. I mention the date of 6 June because, as all sensible people know, this is Queensland Day. I'm wearing a maroon tie today, and I'm sure my whip would note the maroon tie, because I think there was a game of rugby league last night that was apparently quite significant—but I digress.

These bills introduce reforms that will build a nature-positive Australia. Before I go to the substance of the bills, I want to particularly thank Labor Environment Action Network, LEAN, volunteers from all around Australia for the great work that they have done to ensure that this legislation came to the chamber. I particularly call out their leader, Felicity Wade, and also, in Queensland, Peter Casey and his team of incredible volunteers who've done so much for the environment over the years.

What does 'nature positive' actually mean? The short answer is: repair and regeneration rather than decline and destruction. It means strengthening our ecosystems and all their component parts. It also means recognising our unique environment as a natural asset to be protected and strengthened—recognising the environment as an asset.

When Labor came to government two years ago, the Minister for the Environment and Water released the State of the environment report. This is a five-yearly report. It is a report card, if you will, on what is happening in the environment. It should've been handed down in December 2021, when the Morrison government was on this side of the chamber, but the former minister, the now deputy opposition leader, did not release the report. That was undoubtedly because the report card stated: must try harder.

I don't mean to be flippant, as the decade of environmental neglect from those opposite is definitely no laughing matter. The report said that the Australian environment was in very bad shape and was declining. To this day, it is sobering reading, a national catalogue of shame. The report said that Australia had lost more mammal species to extinction than had any other continent—and remember that most of our mammals are found on no other continent. The report card said that Australia had more foreign plant species than native species. The report described how land the size of Tasmania had been cleared. It's hard to imagine the scale of ecosystem destruction.

The report also noted that up to 80,000 pieces of plastic per square kilometre are littering our oceans and that the flow of Murray-Darling tributaries had reached record low levels. I say that as someone who grew up beside those rivers—besides the Balonne River.

How cowardly was it of the former minister not to release that report with that last election looming? The coalition, the party of climate change deniers, had spent their decade in office promising schemes they would never deliver, cutting funding and, yes, even notoriously laughing at the plight of Pacific island nations faced with rising sea levels. Do you remember that from the member from Dixon? He was standing under that boom mic laughing at the plight of our Pacific island family, our own neighbours. This subsequently spoiled relationships in our own backyard, making it more dangerous for the next generation of Australians and enabling other actors who are not necessarily intent on doing good to go into the Pacific region.

The coalition sabotaged the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, they ignored the Samuel review, they set recycling targets but didn't deliver, they reduced the size of marine parks and they cut funding to the department by 40 per cent. Is it any wonder they received an F—F for fail—on their report card. By the end of their time on the Treasury benches, the coalition had all the freshness and vitality of Weekend at Bernie's II. Now, in their third instalment, they've actually got Bernie running the show when it comes to the environment.

With all that on their record, it's alarming that the Leader of the Opposition still wants to weaken our environmental laws and give the go-ahead to damaging projects like Clive Palmer's coalmine right beside the Great Barrier Reef. The only renewable resource that the coalition believes in is ignorance.

You can see that, in May 2022, the Albanese Labor government had urgent work to do both to address the environmental vandalism and the related effects of a decade of neglect and to design measures to repair and regenerate our environment. Last year, we passed legislation that established the Nature Repair Market, which is a world first. We also enhanced our environmental laws to ensure that the minister must assess all unconventional gas projects that trigger the environmental legislation that the Commonwealth government is able to implement. Remember, we are bound by that thing called the Constitution in terms of what we can make environmental laws about.

The nature protection suite of bills is the second stage of our plan, and I'm proud to be talking about them today. This second stage of reform focuses on stronger environmental powers, faster environmental approvals, more information about the environment, and greater transparency. The legislation is good for the environment, good for the people of Australia and good for business. We're fixing laws so that they are less bureaucratic and provide more certainty for business. However, the key focus remains on repairing our environment. It is important that we let businesses know what they can and can't do, because most businesses, if they get certainty about a decision early, can move on and do more positive things. But, as I said, the key focus remains on repairing the environment, protecting our unique flora and fauna and preventing extinctions.

I recently hosted a community forum with the Wilderness Society in my electorate. From the discussions at that gathering, I know that this is what my constituents and all Australians want. We all value our environment and we're proud of its uniqueness. Australians expect Labor to look after the environment, and that's what we're delivering with our Nature Positive Plan. No government has done more for the environment and climate than the Albanese Labor government.

It was an election promise to establish an independent Environmental Protection Agency, to be called Environment Protection Australia, or the EPA. The minister describes it as 'a tough cop on the beat'. This agency will be strong, national and impartial and will ensure compliance with environmental laws to better protect the environment and, as I mentioned earlier, make faster decisions. It's important to note that the EPA will be enshrined in legislation as an independent statutory authority, giving it that arms-length protection. It will be separate from the department and the government and will have its own chief executive officer and commensurate budget.

It's crucial that we establish the EPA as soon as possible. It will enable a smoother process during the transition of responsibilities from the department to the agency. And we need it up and running before it is tasked with implementing our new environmental laws. The EPA will implement and integrate environmental data collection. We need to have meaningful, consistent and reliable data to make evidence based decisions that will support our drive to protect 30 per cent of our land and oceans by 2030.

In that community forum, I was shocked to see how much land is still being cleared in Queensland that does not reach the trigger point for the EPBC Act. I see my next-door neighbour nodding in agreement. It is a concern that people are able to do broadscale tree clearing in significant old-growth parts of Queensland and they do not have to consider all the koalas and other things that are in that environment. That's something that we need to work on with our state counterparts.

The EPA will also have the responsibility of fixing the current regulatory system, which everyone agrees has major flaws. Its decisions will uphold regulations and be transparent, accountable, efficient and focused on nature positive outcomes. I'm sure that the National Party, with their new-found enthusiasm for ensuring that no trees are cleared for solar panels or wind farms, will also embrace the idea that nature is protected for the inherent benefit of that asset rather than just for the anti-renewable jihad that they're on at the moment. The idea that you can have somebody riding around tilting at windmills—I can just see the member for New England on his old donkey, tilting at the windmills, saying: 'We must stop it. We must stop these dragons from taking hold of our landscape.' It's bizarre to think that that line of argument is occurring in 2024. So the EPA is going to have a big responsibility.

We want the EPA to be something Australians have faith in and are proud of. The EPA will be a truly national regulatory body, responsible for issues that affect us all, from recycling and waste exports to hazardous waste, dumping at sea, the wildlife trade, improving air quality and protecting the ozone and underwater cultural heritage. That's a wide range of responsibilities, and they are all necessary to repair and regenerate our environment. Having a tough cop on the beat is crucial when you consider that the Samuel review found that the regulator is not fulfilling this function. This was backed up by a government audit which found that one in seven projects using environmental offsets under current legislation had either obviously or potentially breached their approval conditions. An additional audit indicated that one in four projects had potentially failed to secure enough environmental credits to offset the impact their project was having on the environment. This unacceptable situation must stop.

The Samuel review also showed that serious enforcement action are seldom implemented, and recommended that penalties need to be stronger—not just the cost of doing business. That's why this legislation increases the penalty for a serious breach of federal environmental law up to $780 million in some circumstances. The EPA's strong new regulatory powers to monitor and enforce compliance are a key part of the generating trust in the new body. If an organisation does not mitigate against environmental damage or commit to an offset then Australians deserve to trust that the EPA will ensure there are serious consequences. The EPA will use high-quality data to deliver proportionate and effective compliance and enforcement decisions to the minority of businesses who intend on doing the wrong thing. The EPA will also have the power to enforce a stop-work order in urgent circumstances where the risk to the environment is both significant and imminent. This will reassure Australians that environmental protection outcomes are a priority.

Another aspect of the work of the EPA will be to advise the minister in government. They'll be able to make decisions as required but, in practice, decisions will be made on the advice of the EPA. The EPA will also be required to provide feedback on improvements to environmental laws. They will work closely with the head of Environment Information Australia—the ABS for the bush—which is a position that will be established through these reforms. The head of Environment Information Australia will be an independent position with the legislative mandate to provide transparent information and environmental data to the EPA, to the minister and to the public. Environment Information Australia will work with scientists, First Nations people and other experts to collect information and to produce reliable and consistent tracking information on the state of the environment. This will enable the EPA and state and territory governments to have better access to reliable data for planning and decision-making. Good data is the foundation of driving a nature-positive Australia.

This data will not only be used by governments but it will also be used to provide evidence for investment and for policy and regulatory decisions by the private sector, by community groups, by academics, by scientists and by philanthropic groups who are doing great work in revegetation. One example of the use of better data is choosing better sites for development which minimise the impact on their environment and high-value habitats. When a minimal impact site is chosen, projects are able to be approved more quickly and more easily.

I have mentioned the word 'independent' multiple times in this speech; that's by design, because of the EPA is all about ensuring independence in reporting. This means that no more Australian governments can hide the truth about the state of the environment and hold it over to a more politically convenient time. The stakes are too high for political games. The reports will come out every two years—not five—under this legislation. We know that there's more work to be done and I am hoping that the opposition, the Greens, the Independents, the Teals and all the crossbench engage with us on these reforms in good faith. There's too much at stake. These bills respond to the Samuel review and our own audits, and set us up for the next stage of our complex environmental law reforms. We have chosen to protect our environment. We have the opportunity to repair and replenish. I urge all MPs: to look at the benefits of the strong EPA; to say yes to tougher penalties for those breaking environmental laws; to say yes to better data to inform future planning and decision-making; to say yes to defining what it means to be nature-positive in law; and to say yes to more programs, projects, policies and actions to create a nature-positive Australia. I commend the bills to the House.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That all words after "House" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

(1) notes that the Government has broken its commitment to create laws that protect nature;

(2) notes that these three bills will not protect wildlife, will not stop native forest logging and will not stop the continued expansion of coal and gas;

(3) calls on the Government to amend this legislation to:

(a) end native forest logging and the destruction of critical habitat;

(b) assess projects properly for their climate impacts to stop the expansion of further fossil fuels; and

(c) commit to a timeframe for an exposure draft of standalone cultural heritage legislation".

Labor have broken their promise to reform our environmental laws. Under the existing laws, hundreds of fossil fuel projects have been approved, millions of hectares of critical habitat have been cleared and record numbers of species have been added to the threatened list—that is patently not environmental protection. Instead, Labor have listened only to their mates, their generous donors in the fossil fuel industry, and delayed these crucial reforms. Environmental protection can wait but if you're a fossil fuel company Labor won't hesitate to act on your directives.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unfortunately, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate will be resumed at a later hour, and, given your speech was interrupted, you'll be granted leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.