Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to continue my remarks in support of the government's Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024. A full rewriting of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act will be what follows this bill. As I was saying earlier in the debate, this is a really key step, but it isn't the last step. There is more to come. As recommended by Graeme Samuel, the rewriting of the EPBC Act to bring it into the 21st century is what comes next. That in itself is a big piece of work, and I'm not just talking about the drafting of the document but about reaching a place where there are new rules that will actually work. We have been stuck with the John Howard environment laws, which aren't working for the environment. They're not working for business and haven't done for many, many years. Our laws need to be right, and they also need to be able to be supported by a majority of this parliament.

And, yes; to the naysayers, we are being ambitious in our environmental objectives. Our policy goal is Nature Positive, which describes circumstances where nature, including individual species and whole ecosystems, is being repaired and regenerated rather than being in decline. I was really pleased to have the minister for the environment in my electorate recently to look at an example where a threatened species, the parma wallaby, has been brought back from the brink thanks to the work of one family. Peter Pigott, better known as Uncle Pete's Toys, has for decades and decades committed himself to tackling the problems that the parma wallaby faces. That is fantastic example of what Nature Positive is.

Our ambition sits in a reality of what is here in this chamber and in the Senate, where we navigate a course between poles which are a significant distance apart. On the one side, the Liberals and Nationals don't want anything to change and just want to oppose and block improvements to environment laws. On the other side are the Greens, who I don't believe want a solution, because they're in it for the fight. I doubt I will ever forgive their actions in 2009, which led to the end of the CPRS and the end of climate action until our re-election in 2022. That was 13 years of delay and damage. We cannot let that be repeated on this very important legislation and that which follows.

I am choosing to vote for progress and for a really big change. The only questions on this legislation should be: Do we want an independent EPA or not? Do we want better data to inform environmental decisions or not? And do we want tougher penalties for those breaking environment laws or not? They are the choices that we are making today.

These changes don't come in a vacuum. Last year Labor passed legislation to establish the world's first nature repair market, creating a market to encourage private spending on projects that protect and restore biodiversity, not unlike the work that Peter Pigott up in Mount Wilson has done with the Parma wallabies. We also increased the reach of our environmental laws so the minister for the environment must assess all unconventional gas projects, including shale gas, which trigger our environmental laws.

As the second stage of our environmental law changes, this legislation is the tough cop on the beat that we promised. Environment Protection Australia, our EPA, is an important part of delivering the government's Nature Positive Plan. Passing this legislation will mean that we can get on with the nuts and bolts of setting up the new EPA before they're asked to administer the future new environmental laws. It allows a smoother transition of responsibilities from the department to the agency. We're establishing Australia's first national independent environment protection agency, with strong new powers and penalties to better protect nature.

The EPA would administer Australia's national environmental laws so that we're making better, faster decisions that better protect the environment. It is possible to do all those things. It would be charged with delivering accountable, efficient, outcome focused and transparent environmental regulatory decision-making. The EPA would be a truly national environmental regulator that Australians can be proud of. It would be responsible for a wide range of activities under Australia's environmental laws, including things like recycling and waste exports, hazardous waste, wildlife trade, sea dumping, ozone protection, underwater cultural heritage and air quality.

We're investing in people, our planning and our systems to speed up development decisions and to deliver quicker yeses and, where necessary, quicker noes. The government's offsets audit found that one in seven projects using environmental offsets under our environmental laws currently had either clearly or potentially breached their approval conditions. A separate audit found that one in four had potentially failed to secure enough environmental credits to offset the damage they were doing, and we see this right through Western Sydney with major projects—a total failure. This is unacceptable, and there's been so little enforcement of these rules. That's what the EPA will do—be the enforcer. The EPA as the tough cop on the beat will enforce the laws through new monitoring, compliance and enforcement powers.

As I said, the offset is one particular area that I think we can all see needs an instant improvement. One of the pieces of data that came out last year was that one in seven developments could be in breach. Now, let's just explain what that is. That is where a business has not properly compensated for the impact the development is having on the environment. When you look at pockets of Cumberland plain in Western Sydney, there has been double dipping in terms of saying, 'Here's a piece that we're going to set aside,' and then, a few years later, that same piece will be set aside for a different project. The failure to properly administer this has been just catastrophic for the Cumberland plain in Western Sydney. Of course, the Samuel review into Australia's environment laws found that the regulator is not fulfilling this very necessary function. Professor Samuel also found that serious enforcement actions are rarely used and that penalties need to be more than 'a cost of doing business'.

Preventing environmental damage and ensuring our laws are upheld is one of the most important things that we can be doing in this place. For example, if organisations commit to mitigating, or to an offset to make up for, an unavoidable impact on nature, the public should be confident that that commitment will be kept, and right now we know that confidence is extremely low. When we put this bill into context, stage 3 of our nature positive legislation will continue our broader efforts to halt and reverse environmental decline and protect nature. The EPA in itself will deliver proportionate and effective risk based compliance and enforcement actions using high-quality data and information. It will provide assurance that environmental outcomes are being met.

What I'd say is that most businesses do the right thing. We know that. Those of us who have been in business and who have worked with businesses big and small know that people, by and large, want to do the right thing. But we also know that businesses will do what they're required to do. When the penalties for breaking the law are too low and the risk of being caught is negligible, some companies and some individuals regard breaking the law as an acceptable cost of doing business, and that's why we're increasing penalties too. For extremely serious breaches of federal environment law, courts will be able to impose penalties of up to $780 million in some circumstances. In urgent circumstances, the EPA will be able to issue environment protection orders or stop-work orders to address or prevent imminent significant environmental risks and harm. The EPA will also be able to audit businesses to ensure that they're compliant with the environmental approvals that they have been given. The minister will retain the power to make decisions where they wish to do so and, in practice, will make decisions based on the advice of the EPA. The EPA will play a really important role in the full delivery of the Nature Positive Plan and beyond. I think that once this organisation is established—as it is in every other state—we'll be saying, 'Why didn't we have this sooner?'

One of the other parts of this legislation that we're debating today is around the Environment Information Australia aspect. That is a body to enable better availability and use of environmental data, both in planning and decision-making. These bills set up the head of Environment Information Australia so it's an independent position with a legislative mandate to provide environmental data and information to the EPA, to the minister and to the public. That independent position is to report transparently on trends in the environment, and that will support the actions and decisions that we take to halt and reverse the decline and, in turn, to protect and restore nature.

A nature-positive Australia is good for the economy, it's good for livelihoods and it's good for wellbeing. A community like mine, which lives within a World Heritage area, knows that it's more than the wellbeing of our community; it's the viability of our community that depends on this.

Stephen Bates (Brisbane, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024. Stakeholders and community groups have been clear that the Albanese government's new Environment Protection Agency will do nothing to prevent coal and gas expansion. This legislation is a cynical distraction from Labor's reneging on a promised overhaul of Australia's John Howard-era environment laws.

Habitat destruction and climate change are two of the greatest threats to the survival of Australia's wildlife. We are one of the most prolific land-clearing countries in the world, exacerbating the rising impact of climate change. As it stands, our current environment laws are ineffective at addressing these threats. Last year alone we hit a record number of species being added to the national threatened species list—an incredible 144. At the same time, in 2023, global emissions hit record highs. These stats are not independent of one another. Under our current environment laws, more than seven million hectares of threatened species habitat has been destroyed and 740 fossil fuel projects have been approved. This is not environmental protection; it's an environmental sellout to polluters.

Stakeholders such as Lock the Gate have described Australia's environment laws as 'not fit for purpose', and their analysis finds that this new EPA will be powerless to address the massive damage that greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel projects are inflicting on our environment. The Albanese government describes this EPA plan as a 'tough cop on the beat' for the environment when it is more like a new cop administering the same old broken laws that continue to wave through fossil fuel projects in the midst of a climate crisis. Instead of protecting nature, the government has broken its promise to fix our environment laws in this term and has delayed indefinitely critical reform. The government announced its Future Gas Strategy to keep supporting new climate-polluting projects through to 2050 and beyond, and now we've been delivered a budget with absolutely no new funding for nature or wildlife protection. It's becoming more and more obvious that protecting the environment is simply not a priority for this government. The case for full environmental law reform has long been crystal clear and continues to become more urgent every single day. Significant time and resources have been committed by experts and stakeholders over countless years to equip the government with what it needs and yet we've been told to believe that this is the best we've got. It's not even close to coming up to scratch.

Environment Information Australia won't stop extinctions. It will, at best, let us know that they're happening, all while speeding up approvals that destroy more habitat. The Samuel review highlighted that the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act does not support decision-making by First Nations people, whether it be their views, knowledge or aspirations for their own land and sea. As recommended in the review, First Nations people are entitled to expect stronger national protections of their cultural heritage that is consistent with international standards and inclusive of cultural heritage. Given these concerns, it's hard to see what the government has put on the table as any kind of necessary reform. The proposed Environment Protection Australia comes without teeth and without any strong mandate to enforce laws. It is little more than a rebranded government department.

After constant delays and lack of clarity from the government, including an inability to commit to the critical cultural heritage reforms that the Samuel review recommended, this broken promise at the 11th hour is unbelievable. It shows a complete disregard for the urgency of the issue at hand and makes it difficult to believe that this government has any real intention to deal with the now indefinitely delayed reforms. The Greens do not support the indefinite delay of critical environmental and cultural heritage law reforms. The government's diminished environment policy won't save our wildlife, won't stop native forest logging and won't stop the expansion of the fossil fuel industry. It's little more than a cave-in to polluters, and our environment will pay the price. The government should introduce a full package of environment laws to end native forest logging and to ensure that proposed coal and gas projects are properly assessed for their climate impacts so that we can actually stop the expansion of fossil fuels. That's how we stop climate change from getting worse and how we actually protect our environment. The government must also commit to a timeframe for an exposure draft of standalone First Nations cultural heritage legislation and full implementation of chapter 2 of the Samuel review.

This is a broken promise that sells out our environment and the millions of Australians who voted for and want climate action. Labor has caved in once again to the fossil fuel industry, which wants faster and easier approvals for its polluting and damaging new coalmines and gas mines. We're running out of time to save the planet, but this government wants our environment and our wildlife to wait while coal and gas companies get their applications fast-tracked so they can keep making more money and more pollution.

Carina Garland (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024. We went to the election promising a strong national, independent environment protection agency which would be a tough cop on the beat. We will do that through the body to be established, Environment Protection Australia. Through this legislation we are delivering on our very clear election promise. After a wasted decade under those opposite, we're getting on with the job of creating laws that will protect the environment. We are delivering on our programs, projects, policies and actions to create a nature-positive Australia.

No government has done more for the environment and for the climate than the Albanese Labor government. I wanted to be part of a government that delivered real action on climate change, and I wanted to push this change on behalf of my community because I know how important this issue is for my community in Chisholm. We have many wonderful local environmental groups who do really important work in advocating and caring for our local nature reserves, and advocating to people like me for the change they'd like to see in our country. I regularly meet with these groups to discuss both local environmental concerns and their broader concerns about climate change. Some of these groups who are making a positive difference for our environment locally include Baby Boomers for Climate Change Action, the Australian Conservation Foundation Chisholm branch, the KooyongKoot Alliance, the Friends of Scotchmans Creek and Valley Reserve, and Friends of Damper Creek Conservation Reserve.

I know my community in Chisholm shares my deep concerns about climate change. I'm really pleased to be a representative in a Labor government that wants to see our precious natural landscapes repaired, instead of continuing to see the decline that we witnessed under those opposite. Of course, it was unfortunately a wasted decade of environmental vandalism under those opposite.

We have a very clear choice now, as a nation. Do we want an independent environment protection agency? Do we want better data to inform environmental decisions? Do we want tougher penalties for those breaking environmental laws? Do we want Australia to be the first jurisdiction in the world to enshrine a definition of 'nature positive' in legislation? I know people in my community really want to see these things delivered.

Our new Environment Protection Australia, along with Environment Information Australia, will ensure compliance with environmental laws. It will improve processes for business. It will integrate environmental data collections. What this will mean is that there will be consistent and reliable information on the state of the environment across the country. This will inform decision-making, and it will track our progress against our goals, such as protecting 30 per cent of our land and oceans by 2030.

I think we can find agreement that the current regulatory system simply does not work. Our legislation will fix our laws, with the result being more certainty and less bureaucracy for business. We will make sure that we improve nature, that we protect our unique native plants and animals, and that we prevent extinctions. That's precisely what constituents in my community expect, and that's what we're going to be delivering under an Albanese Labor government.

Last year, we passed legislation to establish the world's first nature repair market. We also increased the reach of our environmental laws. The Minister for the Environment and Water must assess all unconventional gas projects, including shale gas, which trigger our environmental laws. Here, we are 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. We want to get them in place as soon as possible to help enable this important work. We have no time to waste. We will continue to consult on the broader reforms to our environmental laws so we can get them through the parliament.

Environment Protection Australia, our national EPA, is an important part of delivering the government's Nature Positive Plan. Passing this legislation will mean that we can get on with the job of setting up the new EPA before they are asked to administer new environmental laws. It allows for a smoother transition of responsibility from the department to the agency. Through establishing Australia's first national independent environment protection agency, with strong powers and penalties, we will be able to better protect nature. The EPA will administer Australia's national environmental laws to protect nature, to protect our environment and to also make faster and better decisions. It will be charged with delivering accountable, efficient, outcome-focused and transparent environmental regulatory decision-making. Importantly, this will be a truly national environmental regulator that Australians can be proud of. It will be responsible for a wide range of activities under our nation's environmental laws, including in relation to recycling and waste exports, hazardous waste, the wildlife trade, sea dumping, ozone protection, underwater cultural heritage and air quality.

The government's offsets audits found that one in seven projects using environmental offsets under our laws had either clearly or potentially breached their approval conditions. A separate audit found that one in four had potentially failed to secure enough environmental credits to offset the damage they were doing. This is unacceptable.

The EPA will 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 'a cost of doing business'. The minister recently released the audit of environmental offsets, and this echoes this shameful tale. It shows us that the current system is not working. Preventing environmental damage and ensuring our laws are upheld is one of the most important things we can do to protect nature. The EPA will deliver proportionate and effective risk based compliance and enforcement actions, using high-quality data and information. It will provide the necessary assurance that environmental outcomes are being met.

Of course, we know that most businesses do the right thing. But, when penalties for breaking the law are too low and the risk of being caught is negligible, some companies and some individuals may regard breaking the law as an acceptable cost of doing business. That's why we're increasing penalties too. For extremely serious breaches of federal environment law, courts will be able to impose penalties of up to $780 million in some circumstances. The EPA will be able to issue environment protection orders, or stop-work orders, to address or prevent imminent significant environmental risks and harm in urgent circumstances. The EPA will also be able to audit businesses and ensure that they are compliant with environmental 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 the advice of the EPA. The EPA will play a vital role in the full delivery of the Nature Positive Plan and beyond. The EPA will also advise the minister and the government of the day on how Australia's environmental laws can be improved.

Significantly, the EPA will not operate in a vacuum but, rather, will work closely with Environment Information Australia, as well as with state and territory governments. This will enable better availability and use of environmental data both in planning and in decision-making.

These bills also set up the head of Environment Information Australia, which is an independent position with a legislative mandate to provide environmental data and information to the EPA, the minister and the public. This is an independent position to transparently report on trends in the environment. This will support actions and decisions to halt and reverse the decline of nature and in turn protect and restore nature.

Environment Information Australia will work in collaboration with Australia's expert scientists and First Nations people to collect information and produce consistent tracking of the state of Australia's environment. We know that a nature-positive Australia is good for the economy, for livelihoods and for our wellbeing. But achieving a nature-positive Australia relies on good quality and useful environmental information. The information here will inform investment, policy and regulatory decisions by government; by the private sector; by community groups, academics and scientists; and by philanthropic groups.

We know that natural environment information and data is currently fragmented, its quality is uncertain and what is available is not always readily accessible and usable. So having a consistent and reliable resource for businesses enables better site choices to avoid removing high-value habitat for our unique plants and animals. When project proponents are more easily able to select sites with minimised impacts on nature, projects can be more easily approved and completed more quickly. Legislating for independent, consistent and authoritative environmental reporting and information will mean that no Australian government can hide the truth about the state of our environment. This sets us apart from previous governments.

These bills provide more transparency in the critical information and data that underpins regulatory decision-making; this was a key recommendation of the Samuel review. This delivers on our promise at the last election to provide consistent and reliable information on the state of the environment across the country. We know the work we're doing to define 'nature positive' is world leading. 'Nature positive' means improving our ecosystems, including the species that rely on and form part of an ecosystem. Creating a nature-positive Australia means that across the country nature is repairing and regenerating rather than continuing to decline. Our environment in Australia is a national asset and a responsibility for governments to protect. These bills make it a requirement for the government to commit publicly to national environment goals.

When we were first elected, Minister Plibersek released the official five-yearly report card on the Australian environment, the State of the environment report. We know the previous government received it but had kept it locked away until after the election, and, unfortunately, we found a catalogue of horrors. So much damage was done over the course of a decade to our environment, and that is a great shame. Our environment was in bad shape, and it was getting worse. It is absolutely critical that we act now to do what we can, responsibly, to protect the environment, so that generations to come are able to enjoy the amazing nature Australia offers.

I'm really proud to represent a government that takes its responsibility to nature, to the environment, seriously. I'm proud to be part of a government that's delivering real action for climate change, and I look forward to keeping on working with groups in my local community and across the country to meet our goals of protecting the environment.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor are utter climate frauds. Labor are utter environment frauds. We're debating these bills today, the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024 and the associated bills, but do you know what the environment minister did last night? The environment minister, yesterday afternoon, approved 151 new coal and gas wells to go ahead, with fracking to occur, in a Gina Rinehart backed project, where the environmental impact statement said it's going to clear 530 hectares of koala dispersal habitat. The federal environment minister is bringing these laws to parliament, and yesterday Federal Environment Minister Plibersek approved a Gina Rinehart backed coal seam gas project in inland Queensland that will clear endangered koala habitat.

When you are in power, in government, you have the ability to stop new coal and gas projects. You have the ability under the law to stop the clearing of koala habitat. When you've got that power, in the middle of a climate crisis, you should use it. Even the government's own reports say that the biggest threat to our environment and our biodiversity is the climate crisis, and the biggest threat to koalas is this continued land clearing of their habitat. For them to have the gall to stand up here in this place and say, 'We're all about protecting the environment', less than 24 hours after the federal environment minister gave the green light to Gina Rinehart drilling 151 new coal seam gas wells that are going to clear koala habitat—it is absolutely galling. You've got the power, Labor, to tackle the climate crisis and to save our koalas, and what are you doing? Using your power to open up new coal and gas projects and clear koala habitat.

The environment minister approved the new Gina Rinehart coal seam gas project to run to the year 2080. Members from this place go back to their constituents and say to them: 'We care about the climate crisis. We care about your kids. Please vote Labor.' They are lions in their electorate when it comes to climate change but then they come to Canberra and back these new gas projects running to 2080. The government told us we would be at zero emissions by 2050 then they come and approve projects that run to the year 2080. What kind of planet are we going to have in 2080 if Labor keeps approving coal and gas projects? What kind of future are we going to have for our forests and koalas if Labor keeps approving Gina Rinehart wrecking and clearing koala habitat for projects that can run to 2080?

Do you know what, Deputy Speaker Vasta? When we came in here to move a motion this morning to say, 'No, Labor needs to overturn its decision,' not one Labor member crossed the floor to come and vote with us, not the member for Wills, not the member for Cooper, not the member for Richmond, not the member for Macnamara, not the member for Moreton. None of them, who say they care about the climate crisis, had the courage to do what Senator Payman did last night, which was cross the floor and vote for what is right.

Labor pretends to care, but the one thing you're given when you come to this place is a vote. You are given a vote. That's one thing every member of this parliament has that other people don't have. It's the reason people send you to Canberra. Labor come to this place, don't have the courage to cross the floor to say, 'No, don't open up a new gas project.' Why? Because they back it. Every single Labor MP in this place backs opening up new gas to run to 2080 and clearing koala habitat. It shouldn't come as a surprise that it is becoming harder and harder to tell Labor and Liberal apart when it comes to gas and coal. They both now back coal and gas in the system past 2050 up to 2080. The year 2080! You are saying gas mines can run until 2080. You are utter climate frauds, Labor.

Now, there are things that we could do in this place. We could pass laws to toughen up our environmental laws because they're broken. They're John Howard-era laws. Do you know what? Labor promised before the election that they were going to introduce new environment standards. They were going to bring forward legislation to toughen our environment laws and they haven't done it. They promised that they were going to bring in legislation, as the review suggested, that would lift the standards so that we would stop clearing koala habitat in this country, so that we would stop doing things that wreck our environment, and they have refused to do it.

Labor have gone out and held a press conference and said, 'Oh, we might get around to it before the election. In the meantime, we'll bring in legislation, not for a powerful cop on the beat but for an agency that doesn't have any teeth to enforce laws that John Howard put in place.' If you want any proof that these laws don't work and need toughening up, look at the fact that, under our laws, our environment minister has approved a Gina Rinehart gas project to run till 2080, and it's not the only one. Thirteen former coal and gas projects have been approved under this government—13!

We're talking about expansion of coal and gas mines, and Labor have the gall to tell us they care about climate and the environment. Well, the world's scientists and your own department are telling you one clear thing: the biggest threat to our beautiful environment, our biodiversity and the animals and plants it sustains is the climate crisis. Coal and gas are the leading causes of the climate crisis. In the middle of a climate emergency, there is no room for opening new coal and gas projects, absolutely none. The first step to tackling a problem is to stop making the problem worse. You can't put a fire out while you're pouring petrol on it. As we head towards summer, where there are threats of fires and droughts, as we head towards not only winters but expanding seasons where there are threats of floods, Labor now has responsibility for the devastation people are about to face because Labor is doing what it can to make the problem worse. Emissions are up under this government, and Labor keeps approving new coal and gas mines, even when they've got the power to stop it.

It is no wonder more and more people are saying it is getting harder and harder to tell Labor and Liberal apart when it comes to coal and gas. I thought we got rid of Scott Morrison. People voted for action on climate and the environment at the election. But they are not getting it. What they are getting are broken promises to fix our environment laws and more coal and gas mines approved by Labor.

For all of those Labor members who were interjecting, I hope that they get up and say it's not a good idea to open up new coal and gas mines. But, in fact, we heard the opposite earlier today. We heard Labor members saying, 'Yes, let's keep opening up new coal and gas mines.' If even one single Labor MP has the courage to come and cross the floor and vote against new coal and gas mines in the way that senators have shown they can, then I will applaud them. I'll be the first to applaud them. But so far not one single Labor MP has been prepared to come to this place and oppose the opening of new coal and gas mines. They have backed their government and their environment minister to the hilt in backing new coal and gas projects. For that, they're going to have to answer to the public and they're going to have to answer to their kids and their grandkids about why in the middle of a climate crisis every Labor MP keeps backing opening new coal and gas mines to run out to the year 2080.

This bill, the government's plan, won't save koalas. It won't stop native forest logging, and it won't stop the expansion of the coal and gas industry. In fact, the extinction crisis and global warming will continue to get worse. This is a broken promise that sells out our environment and the millions of Australians who want climate action. Instead, Labor has caved in to the coal and gas industry, who want faster and easier approvals for their polluting and damaging new coal and gas mines.

Two of the greatest threats to Australia's wildlife are habitat destruction and climate change. Under our existing laws, 740 fossil fuel projects have been approved and millions of hectares of critical habitat have been cleared. This is not environment protection; it's an environmental sellout to the big polluters. We are running out of time to save our planet, to save our precious environment, to save our koalas from the threat that they face. But Labor wants our environment and our wildlife to wait, refusing to bring in legislation to strengthen our environment laws. What we're seeing is that Labor is more concerned about appearing to do something than actually doing something. The system is broken in this country when coal and gas corporations who donate to Labor and Liberal are able to then keep getting their coal and gas mines approved and keep clearing our beautiful forests. If native forest logging is still permitted under Labor's laws, then the laws aren't good enough. If opening new coal and gas projects is still permitted under Labor's laws, then the new laws are not good enough.

We say to you in this parliament: when millions of people across the country vote for a change, let's deliver that change. Let's deliver that change. Let's pass laws that stop new coal and gas projects. Let's pass laws that stop native forest logging. Let's pass laws that protect our environment and our koalas. But Labor is refusing to do that. Actions speak louder than words. Actions speak louder than words. On this very day that we're debating it, it's less than 24 hours after environment minister Plibersek approved a new massive coal-seam gas project with 151 new gas wells because Gina Rinehart asked for it. That is what this Labor government is doing with its actions.

People across this country want our environment protected, and they are increasingly seeing through this government. They are seeing through this government that says, 'We care about housing,' and then comes to this place and gives billions in handouts to wealthy property investors that push up the price of housing out of the reach of renters and deny millions of renters the chance to buy their own home. They hear this government say, 'We really want to take action to reduce inequality,' and then the government come into this parliament and give every politician and billionaire a $4½ thousand a year tax cut while leaving millions of people living in poverty. This government say, 'We are concerned about the cost-of-living crisis,' and then they come in here and say that there are billions of dollars for handouts to coal and gas corporations but not enough to fund a rent freeze or make child care free or to put dental into Medicare. They come in here and say, 'We've got an environment law for you, and under this law all of John Howard's and Tony Abbott's bad legislation remains, as far as protecting our environment is concerned,' and then the minister goes out the back after the debate is over and signs off on the clearing of koala habitat and the opening of new coal seam gas wells—because Gina Rinehart asked for it.

People are seeing through this government. People know that we are facing some big crises in this country—a housing crisis, a cost-of-living crisis, a climate crisis, and an environment and extinction crisis. There was hope when we had a change of government that Labor would work across the parliament to pass laws that actually tackle the crisis. Instead, we are seeing these bandaid answers that are more about getting a headline than actually fixing the deep problems that this country is facing. Labor keeps taking the public for mugs, thinking, 'If we just pass a bill that has "environment" scrawled on the front of it in crayon, people will give us a tick.' Well, no. Under this law, it will still allow coal and gas mines to be opened. It will still mean the minister can keep approving the clearing of native forest and koala habitat. It will still mean that environmental destruction will proceed apace. That is why this bill should be so much better and why people are getting angrier, and we are going to keep holding this government to account for its broken promises and its failure to tackle the crises that this country is facing.

Libby Coker (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our government is fighting climate change head-on, with a concrete agenda and a conviction to drive better outcomes for our precious, unique environment. Over the last two years the Albanese government has dramatically increased renewables in the energy grid, committed to more protections for Commonwealth marine parks, invested in new recycling ventures that reduce waste and is acting to remove feral animals from significant environmental landscapes—and so much more. Importantly, this legislation before us today includes groundbreaking reform, with the establishment of a national EPA that will provide greater protection for our natural assets and significant heritage sites, with significant penalties for breaching our environmental laws. Under the Albanese government, we are setting our nation up for a nature-positive future.

The bills before us today will play a key role in securing that future. These bills—the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024, the Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024 and the Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024—comprise one of the most significant steps taken by a federal government in more than a decade. They will establish two organisations that are set to reshape how we protect our environment and tackle climate change: firstly, the independent, national environment protection agency, and, secondly, Environment Information Australia. Together these two agencies will strengthen our nation's ability to address climate change. The EPA will be a tough cop on the beat. It will be able to issue environment protection orders or stop-work orders to anyone breaking the law. It will also be able to audit businesses to ensure they are compliant with environmental approval conditions. These laws will bring maximum fines for breaches of environmental laws into line with punishments for serious financial offences such as insider trading and market manipulation. For extremely serious breaches of environmental law, courts will be able to impose fines of up to $780 million or send offenders to prison for up to seven years.

The new EPA will provide better guidance and education to make sure that businesses are clear about the rules. We know that under the current arrangements mistakes are made and breaches do occur, and that's why our environment minister ordered the department to conduct an offset audit last year. The audit found that around one in seven developments could be in breach of its offset conditions, and, as a result, for the first time, a dedicated team has been set up to proactively audit offsets for projects approved under national environmental law. These results underscore the need for urgency to strengthen enforcement, because stronger enforcement means better outcomes for our environment. The EPA will be able to play an important role in monitoring issues related to offsets. In addition, the EPA will be responsible for enforcing other federal laws relevant to recycling, hazardous waste, wildlife tracking, ozone protection and, importantly, air quality.

When it comes to meeting our ambitious goals like protecting 30 per cent of our land and oceans by 2030, we need to ensure the EPA has all the data it needs to get the job done. That's where the EIA comes in. It will provide reliable, consistent data to track Australia's progress against our international obligations and ensure Australians have a clear picture of how we're tracking in our push to protect more of our country's environment. Of course, we have access to data now, but the crisis we face demands more resources, and that's what the EIA will be able to provide.

The data we do have, which comes from various sources, makes clear that our environment can't withstand an opposition which stands in the way of environmental reform—an opposition that is happy to gamble with our environment, with climate change and with our energy and economic security by pausing the delivery of renewables and instead promising untested, uncosted and unreliable nuclear reactors across Australia. Meanwhile, the Albanese government is delivering on its reliable renewables plan, which is the only plan supported by experts to deliver the clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy that Australians deserve. It's a plan that makes sense. It's a plan that delivers green jobs and that will strengthen our energy security, drive down emissions and play a massive role in addressing climate change. As part of our work to address climate change and better protect our environment, we're delivering on our commitment to protect more of what's precious—our amazing native species, our coastline and our bush.

All of us on this side of the House recognise that, for too long, we've seen the devastating consequences of a changing climate, with extreme heat and devastating floods forever changing Australia's environment and how we live. It's a challenge that was ignored by the former government, and it's a challenge that demands action now. And that's what these bills are all about.

Passing this legislation will mean that we get on with the job of setting up the national EPA. It will allow a smoother transition of responsibilities from the department to the agency and underpin the establishment and administration of new environmental laws and penalties. With this considered, everybody agrees that the current regulatory system just doesn't work. Our government is committed to fixing these laws to make sure they improve nature, protect our unique native animals and plants and prevent extinctions. That's what my communities expect, and it's what we are delivering.

Importantly, the bill outlines that the minister will retain the power to make decisions when required and in practice with advice from the EPA. It should be noted that the EPA will play an important role in advising the minister and the government of the day on how Australia's environment laws can be improved. The bill also defines, for the first time, the term 'nature positive' and introduces a requirement to report on Australia's national progress towards that outcome. This will be the first time that any country has defined 'nature positive' in legislation and put in place national reporting against this objective. In short, 'nature positive' means improving our ecosystems, including the species that rely on and form part of our ecosystems. Creating a nature-positive Australia means that, across Australia, nature is repairing and regenerating rather than continuing to decline. Requiring reports to be prepared and published online every two years, instead of every five years, will allow us to get onto the front foot and better apply and track protections which are most needed. That's why the State of the environment report includes a new requirement to report on the progress of the government's national environmental goals. The bill makes it a requirement for government to commit publicly to national environmental goals.

Last year Labor passed legislation to establish the world's first Nature Repair Market. We also increased the reach of our environmental laws so that the minister for the environment must assess all unconventional gas projects, including shale gas, which trigger our environmental laws. Our government will continue consulting on the broader reforms to our environmental laws so that we can get them through the parliament. I encourage the opposition, the Greens political party and the rest of the crossbench to engage in this process in good faith.

On top of this, our recent budget also provides $19 million to process assessments for priority renewable energy related projects and $65 million for extra research into threatened species so sensitive areas can be more easily avoided and suitable projects can be more quickly approved based on robust, existing, publicly available data. The budget also secures Australia's position as a global scientific leader, investing $371 million to rebuild and upgrade our research station on World-Heritage-listed Macquarie Island. This will boost our capacity to monitor climate and greenhouse gas emissions and accurately forecast droughts and rainfall. We've also locked in $35.6 million to continue developing the processes and systems needed to administer our world-first Nature Repair Market. This builds on our more than $500 million investment to better protect our threatened species, as well as to crack down on feral animals and weeds. We're also driving Australia's transition to a circular economy, investing $23 million to develop a new national circular economy framework; continuing to tackle problematic waste streams, such as packaging; and getting on with the development of much-needed new recycling schemes for solar panels. This comes on top of the $1 billion state, federal and industry investment to increase Australia's recycling capacity by over one million tonnes.

In closing, with our budget measures and through the nature-positive reforms, we will continue the fight to protect our native species, our amazing coastal environments and our expansive hinterlands that can be enjoyed into the future. This is a responsibility that our government accepts without question, and it is a responsibility that underscores our mission to act as stewards of our precious natural assets for the sake of generations to come.

Max Chandler-Mather (Griffith, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let's be clear about what the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024 and the related bills are about. They're about facilitating the expansion of coal and gas, making coal and gas billionaires richer—giving them bigger profit margins—accelerating climate change and screwing over ordinary Australians and the billions of people across the world that will be impacted by devastating climate change. Labor has backed down on even promising to pass their already weak environmental laws and now are bowling up a bill that will allow for the expansion of coal and gas.

Let's talk about who's happy about this bill and this backdown. The Minerals Council of Australia is one of the supporters of this backdown and this bill. They happen to represent—they're the lobby group for—some of the largest coal and gas corporations in Australia and across the world. The Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia called the reforms 'better for business'—which is funny, because I assume that these bills were meant to be about being better for the environment. And don't take the Greens word for it. The Australian Conservation Foundation said they were 'frustrated and deeply disappointed' by this backdown. The Wilderness Society said the proposed EPA:

… lacks the independence and integrity needed to shield development and environmental decision-making from undue influence by vested interests.

Let's talk about undue influence by vested interests. We know, and the government's own department has said this, that the key destructive factor for Australia's environment, the key driver of climate change in Australia is the expansion of coal and gas. It accelerates climate change and destroys Australia's environment. And today, of all days, to have government members stand up in here and claim to care about climate change when the environment minister has just approved 151 new gas wells, a giant coal seam gas project for Senex, who are part-owned by Gina Rinehart's company, Hancock Prospecting—by the way, Senex, have made $1.2 billion of revenue in Australia and have not paid a single cent in tax. This is from publicly available ATO data. It's genuinely incredible.

Labor claim to care about the environment. Their plan is net zero by 2050, and yet they continue to approve coal and gas projects out past 2050. These 151 approved gas wells will be running out past 2080. We have already been told by the world's scientists that we are on track for exceeding 1.5 degrees of warming in the next few years. There's an 80 per cent chance of that happening in the next few years. Now that doesn't sound like much, 1.5, but the effects are going to be devastating and we are already feeling them in Australia: record heatwaves, bushfires, floods. Too often the victims of these are ordinary Australians who die tragic and awful deaths as a result of climate crises, as a result of floods and bushfires made worse by climate change, destruction of our local habitat, our natural habitat and the environment.

What is most remarkable is to hear Labor members in this place get up and talk about the effects of climate change, talk about the devastating effects of climate change, and then pretend—I don't know. Genuinely, I don't know. Either they pretend that they haven't heard it or they just have some sort of bizarre cognitive dissonance that separates the fact that the key driver of climate change is the expansion of coal and gas mines and that their government keeps approving and expanding coal and gas. You can't think about those two things at the same time and not realise there's some sort of contradiction.

The other thing the government does is try to claim Australia's a big part of a global order and they're all making efforts to stop climate change—except for the fact that Australia is one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels in the world. In fact, the only two countries ahead of us on the exportation of fossil fuels are Saudi Arabia and Russia—hardly welcome company. So that means that Australia has a crucial global role that it could play in tackling climate change. Instead, it is pouring more fuel on the fire and making climate change worse. How can they claim—the Labor Party, the government—on one hand that they care about the environment and they care about climate change when on the other hand they're actively pursuing decisions that are making the problem worse? How can you do that? How can the government do that?

Let's be clear about this bill. This bill will allow for the approval of new coal and gas projects and destroying local environments. The decision today by the environment minister—151 new gas wells—will bulldoze huge swathes of koala habitat before we get to the fact that gas has an impact. And let's be clear about the impact that gas has. The lie at the heart of the Future Gas Strategy is that somehow gas is cleaner than coal. Gas produces methane, and methane is literally 80 times more potent than CO2 at warming the planet. It is accelerating the rate of climate change in this country. And let's be clear about who this ultimately benefits, because this is the most sick thing: in the context of a massive cost-of-living crisis, in the context of an environmental crisis, the context of a climate crisis, the only people the expansion of gas is benefitting are billionaires, are big fossil fuel corporations who get away with paying barely any tax.

There's a claim, another complete mistruth—it's not factual; it's a lie—that Australia has a shortage of gas. Australia is the biggest exporter of gas in the world, or sometimes second-biggest behind Qatar. There's not a shortage of gas in this country. What happens right now is the gas gets mined and shipped overseas while accelerating climate change, while those same gas corporations often pay zero dollars in tax. In some years companies like Chevron, Santos and Woodside will make tens of billions of dollars in income and will pay, in dollar terms, less tax than a teacher.

Then we come to this backdown on environmental laws and this joke of a bill that, again, as is so typical of this government, makes it look like they're doing something verbally and rhetorically. But at the same time they are taking actions that are doing the complete opposite thing and accelerating climate change. Where does this end? If the government has its way, and the Labor and Liberal parties have their way—and let's be clear: no wonder it is getting harder to tell Labor and the Liberals apart, because this is basically a reheated Scott Morrison strategy—is the government really suggesting we're going to get to 2050 as the world punches past 2½ degrees warming, and as we have record numbers of heatwaves and billions of climate refugees moving across the world, the complete bleaching and death of our Great Barrier Reef and precious places in Australia, and the continued logging of native forests? Are we going to get through all that to 2050? And is the government really suggesting that, at that point, it's going to continue to expand coal and gas mining? There are coal projects that this Labor government in this term have approved that are due to function past 2070. How, on the one hand, can this government claim they support net zero by 2050 but then on paper approve coal and gas projects that go past 2050? Genuinely, it would be great to have an explanation for that.

What would an alternative pathway look like? We could be debating new environmental laws that have a climate trigger—that where approvals of new projects in Australia take place they need to take into account climate change because it is the biggest threat to our local environment. That seems pretty reasonable. I would argue it seems deeply illogical to the vast majority of Australians that we have environment laws that don't force the minister to take climate change into account. We could then ban the expansion of coal and gas—ban it right now. We could fairly tax our existing gas projects and our existing coal projects as we phase them out over time. We could collect trillions of dollars in revenue and use that to help people transition out of fossil fuels, to help build alternative wealth creating industries, to help tackle the cost-of-living crisis right now. Australia could do that. Countries like Norway have a sovereign wealth fund of over a trillion dollars because they fairly tax their resource industry. Over here we just have more fossil fuel billionaires.

That could be a pathway, but it would mean breaking the stranglehold fossil fuel corporations have over our political system. I don't think people realise just how powerful they are. We saw Labor make a promise, going to the election, to bowl up a series of pretty weak environmental reforms—and the government can't even agree to those. They've backed down on those at the behest of fossil fuel corporations—they were celebrated when they backed down by the Mineral Council, the chief lobby group of fossil fuel corporations—and now we have a situation where they're not going to be taxed at all, in some instances.

Some of the biggest and most powerful fossil fuel corporations in Australia, in some years, as they have last year and in previous years, have paid less tax in dollar terms than a nurse or a teacher in Australia, and they then encounter environmental laws that allow them to expand coal and gas out past 2050, accelerating climate change, and they wash their hands of the consequences. Are they going to be the ones that pay for the cleaning up after the next floods, bushfires and heatwaves? Are they going to be the ones having to pay for the next climate related deaths? Are they going to be the ones having to pay for the insurance people can't afford to pay any more on their homes, for rebuilding their homes and livelihoods, for rebuilding communities? Absolutely not. They'll continue to not pay any tax. They'll continue to get favourable laws.

We've seen situations in the past in this term of government where the head of Santos can write to the government and ask them to change the law to make it easier for their gas projects to be approved, and then months later the minister will go and do it. What about the people on low incomes right now who need poverty payments, with their payments currently forcing them to live in poverty, raised above the poverty line? What about renters who need a freeze or cap on rent increases? Could they write to the government and demand the government take serious action for them? Apparently they can try, but they'll be ignored because they don't have the financial power and weight that those fossil fuel corporations do. This is what this debate is about today. It would be great to hear one Labor member in this place get up and explain how it's possible to expand coal and gas mining past 2050 and still claim that this government cares about climate change or the environment.

Answer some of those questions! How can we tackle climate change if this government keeps approving and expanding coal and gas projects past 2050? How is it that the government of Australia, one of the biggest exporters of fossil fuels in the world behind Saudi Arabia and Russia, can claim they're tackling climate change when they're adding more fuel to that and expanding the exportation of fossil fuel corporations? How is it that you made a promise to the electorate about a series of environmental reforms that this government can't even keep? How is it that the only people celebrating this backdown and this bill that we're debating right now are the Minerals Council of Australia and other fossil fuel corporations? Answer those questions, and then maybe we'll start getting to the truth.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We won't take lectures from the Greens political party, who voted 41 to 32 in the Senate in December 2009 to side with the climate deniers over there and to not take action on climate change. Hundreds of millions of tonnes of carbon pollution is in the atmosphere because the Greens political party say one thing and do another. The Greens housing spokesperson over there can't find a housing proposal in his own electorate he'll support. He comes in here and gives us platitudes of support for public, social and affordable housing, but he can't find one that he'll support locally. I see that in his walking out now.

The Greens say one thing and do another. You can't find an environment group that won't support the legislation. I noticed that three Greens spokespersons spoke beforehand in this debate. Not one addressed the actual contents of the bills before the chamber. They know that every conservation group supports this legislation. They won't support it. They'll side with the coalition on it as they did in December 2009 when opposing the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. Don't believe that they want to take action on climate change as the Leader of the Greens said, because, when given chances to do so in the past, they haven't. When given chances to do so in terms of housing, they haven't.

They are great heroes here, but, when they go back to their electorates, they don't do the right thing. We won't take any self-righteous lectures from the Greens in relation to this. We know that the environment groups support this legislation. The Australian Conservation Foundation welcomes the government's announcement that they will set up an agency to enforce environmental laws, which is something previous governments failed to do. The WWF says that the EPA is a 'potential game changer'. The Australian Marine Conservation Society says that these new institutions are 'essential and welcome'.

The Greens are opposing this. They can't find an environment group that supports them on this legislation. I notice that not one of the three Greens people that spoke on this bill actually addressed its contents. You know why? If they addressed the contents of this bill, they'd realise how positive this bill is for nature. It's absolutely positive. We are doing the right thing here and taking steps. I imagine you'll see one Liberal and National Party person after another getting up and siding with the Greens in relation to this issue as the Greens end up voting with them on this particular legislation.

I want to speak on what the legislation is actually going to do and explain how positive nature legislation will have a positive impact on the environment and what this legislation is geared to achieve. I'm pleased to speak on Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024, the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024 and the Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024. We're making significant investments here to protect more of our natural world. Those opposite, and the crossbench and the Greens as well, are going to say that they want to take action, but when given the chance to actually vote for it, they won't. We're going to fix up more of what's been damaged and care for the places we love. The Greens act like they're pure, holy and righteous all the time—that they're the only ones who care for the environment. Well, they're not. They give us lectures all the time in this place, but look at what they do, not what they say.

We had a decade of waste under the previous coalition government. They left institutions to manage the state of despair and the repair that we need to undertake in relation to the environment. Through our Nature Positive Plan, we're doing more than ever to protect our natural world and fix up more of what's been damaged. We are supporting sensible development and good local jobs. We've already completed the first stage of the reform. We passed legislation to establish the world's first nature repair market and expanded the water trigger to apply to all unconventional gas projects. We are now moving quickly to deliver Environment Protection Australia and Environment Information Australia. It's something that we said we would do. It is the environment and business that will benefit from the second stage of our Nature Positive Plan. These changes will protect the environment and support sensible development. They will deliver stronger environmental powers, faster environmental approval, more environmental information and greater environmental transparency.

The key measures include the first national independent Environment Protection Agency, with strong new powers and penalties to better protect nature, with $121 million in the May budget for this new body—but the Greens aren't going to support it. Seriously! There will be more accountability and transparency with the new body called Environment Information Australia, which gives businesses easier access to the latest environmental data, and will release State of the environment reports every two years and report on progress on our national environmental goals, with $51.5 million set aside in the budget for this, but the Greens aren't going to support it. There will be faster environmental approvals on projects, thanks to a $100 million investment, including renewables and critical minerals, but the Greens aren't going to support it. Combined with a significant investment in funding, this stage of reforms will deliver better environmental protection laws, and that's really important.

The key feature in the first piece of legislation is really critical, and that is the establishment of our first national Environment Protection Agency with new powers and penalties. We talked about it in the election campaign, and some of my colleagues have talked about the EPA being the tough cop on the beat in relation to the environment. It will be able to issue stop-work orders to prevent serious environmental damage and proactively audit businesses to ensure they are doing the right thing. Under the changes, the Minister for the Environment and Water will ask the new EPA to examine illegal land clearing and offset conditions as a priority, after a recent audit found one in seven developments could be in breach of their offset conditions. Penalties will increase to align maximum fines with punishments for serious financial offences. Courts will be able to impose fines of up to $780 million or send people to prison for up to seven years for extremely serious, intentional breaches of federal environment law—and the Greens won't support it.

The second bill before the house is the Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024, which sets up a statutory and independent head of the new Environment Information Australia, EIA, which will provide up-to-date and transparent environmental data and information. It will be a reliable source to help business make faster and easier development decisions. The EIA will release State of the environment reports every two years, instead of five, so we have a better understanding of what's going on.

We're creating a nature-positive Australia, and that will mean nature is repaired and regenerated faster and will be less likely to continue to decline. The government's doing more than ever to protect our country's natural treasures, native plants and animals, so nature can continue to repair. We're not just doing this to protect the environment; we are doing it because it is the right thing to do. It's the ethical and moral thing to do. Last year, the government passed critical legislation to establish the first nature repair market, driving business and philanthropic investment in nature repair and threatened species protection. The budget locks in $35.6 million over two years to develop the processes and systems to administer the scheme. It builds on the more than $500 million investment we are undertaking to better protect our threatened species, such as koalas, quolls and Australian sea lions, and crackdown on feral animals and weeds.

My own electorate of Blair has many wonderful natural assets including attractions like Flinders Peak in the Flinders-Goolman Conservation Estate, White Rock in the Spring Mountain Conservation Estate in Ipswich, several state forests in the Somerset region and a number of koala conservation corridors and projects that our government has provided grant funding towards. I want to thank the environment groups in these areas for the work they're doing. We're developing stronger protections for precious environmental assets like these through the reforms we're undertaking here.

We're working to support faster and clearer decisions for business. I don't know if the Greens understand it, but we actually live in a free-enterprise economy. Indeed, the budget provides $134.2 million to strengthen and streamline environmental approval decisions on priority projects. These include renewables and critical minerals. That greater certainty for business will help drive investment in nation-building projects. When the minister first announced the Nature Positive Plan, she said she would take some cooperation, compromise and common sense to deliver it, and that's how we've done it.

The government's delivering stage 1 of the plan that we adopted last year. We will fully deliver stage 3 of the reform to make environmental laws less bureaucratic and fit for purpose by continuing to consult with stakeholders for further updates to these laws. The minister and the department have already consulted around 100 groups, held public webinars which 3,000 people have attended and received 2,500 submissions. So we're not doing this without support. We know that environment groups and the public support this legislation. A comprehensive exposure draft of the laws will be released for public comment before being introduced into parliament. So we're moving as fast as we can to put this legislation—it's big and complex, and we need to get it right—but it's part of what we said we'd do before the election,. It is part of our election commitment, and we're doing what we said we would do. The current act is about a thousand pages, so the legislation is similarly weighty.

There's some criticism from those opposite and particularly from the Greens political party. There's a saying that, if the noise in one ear is roughly equal to the noise in the other, it shows you've probably got the balance about right. Don't take it from me; take it from Professor Graeme Samuel who recently said, 'This criticism from those opposite'—and indeed from the Greens—'is simply unwarranted because change is going to happen, and we've got to get the right result from proper consultation.' He told a recent Senate inquiry: 'Just sit and wait; take a chill pill. What we're going to get will satisfy all their aspirations, as set out in the Nature Positive Plan.'

We're going through a complex process. It's been an abysmal failure over the past 25 years and we need to get it right. 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. Professor Samuel has called out the mining industry, especially the WA chamber of mines, saying that its claims that the government's proposed update of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, the EPBC Act, would signal the end of mining were 'utter rubbish'. He said, 'The mining community needs to understand the proposed reforms are designed to protect the environment whilst safeguarding and simplifying approval processes by compressing state and federal approvals into one process.' He said, 'Neither side would get 100 per cent of they want, but we should be aiming for 80-plus per cent.' It's a good example of 'don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good', which is a message that the Greens political party could adhere to, just for once.

In addition, key stakeholders, as I outlined before, have supported this legislation. It's interesting that Professor Samuel was commissioned by the former coalition government to review the EPBC Act yet they ignored his recommendations in government and now in opposition are against the proposed reforms coming out of that process as well as the establishment of the EPA. It's another example of the coalition opposing everything for political expediency. It's pure obstructionism and opposition for opposition's sake.

When we were first elected, the minister released the official five-year report card on the Australian environment, the Australia state of the environment 2021 report. The former minister and now deputy opposition leader received it before Christmas. She chose to keep it hidden, locked away until after the federal election. It's a catalogue of horrors, and it shows just how much damage a decade of Liberal and National party neglect did to our environment.

The report says that the Australian environment is in very bad shape and getting worse, and that we need to take action. Is it any wonder our environment fared so badly under the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments? We had the spectacle of the now Leader of the Opposition, when he was a minister in the previous government, laughing about rising sea levels in the Pacific. A decade of climate denialism is an environmental crime. It says a lot about the Leader of the Opposition, who wants to water down Australia's environment laws introduced by John Howard when he was prime minister. And, last week, we saw the opposition's risky and expensive nuclear reactor plan, which would be an absolute disaster for the environment, given concerns about nuclear safety and waste. Talking to constituents in the country areas around Ipswich in my electorate last week, most of them were pretty clear that they don't want the nuclear gamble in their backyards. One of the coalition's two proposed nuclear reactors are in my home state of Queensland—Tarong Power Station in the south Burnett, which is just across the border from my electorate. They're proposing seven locations, but who is to say that they won't expand to more places, like Swanbank in Ipswich and Wivenhoe Power Station located in my electorate?

The real irony here is that while we're trying to create certainty for business through our nature-positive laws, the Liberal and National parties' nuclear announcements are creating greater uncertainty, and they're supporting the Greens political party as well. (Time expired)

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Regional Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These Nature Positive (Environment Protections Australia) Bill 2024 and the related bills yet again represent Labor's spin. As the Australian columnist Robert Gottliebsen pointed out earlier this year, 'nature positive' is lifted straight from George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four newspeak: calling something positive when it's anything but.

The Albanese Labor government's revised nature-positive proposals are only positive for bloated bureaucracy and more green tape for business, farmers and other job creators. The development of this bill has been anything but the transparent government that we were promised before the May 2022 election. The hallmark of this government's work is that nondisclosure agreements have been used extensively, and industry bodies have reportedly been shown only fragments of the bill. Given the government's practice of guillotining debate, I have to wonder how much time I'm actually going to have on this, so let me get to the facts quickly!

In the last two financial years, there have been 109 referrals for environment protection and biodiversity conservation, or EPBC approval, for renewables projects, compared with 72 for the mining industry. I hasten to add that less than three per cent of referrals come from agriculture. Many proposed mining projects are for rare earths and critical minerals for the green fantasy of an energy grid underpinned by batteries. Let's be clear: there are insufficient resources in the world for every country's wish list for batteries. There is grave danger in putting all our eggs in the battery market when, for instance—and as the co-chair of Parliamentary Friends of Hydrogen—I'd say there might be other technologies that might surpass EV technology. Of course this includes nuclear energy. The sad reality of Greens policy is that batteries are not included. Yet the weak Prime Minister is trying to appease the Greens, who are throwing their toys out of the cot and screaming that we aren't taking action on climate change fast enough. Time and again, we see the Greens political party whining to the responsible adults in the room about economic policy, demanding more money be thrown at their pet projects. Coalition governments fix the budget mess those opposite create, but the Greens are making it harder and harder to get our economy back on track. The subsidies in renewable energy alone are shrouded in such secrecy and obfuscation that there ought to be a major inquiry into the misinformation and falsehoods of the government and captured agencies in the energy debate. The playing field is anything but level and yet we are told time and time again that renewables are the cheapest.

The Australian public are no fools. They see their power bills and they have called the climate con job for what it is. And farmers in my electorate know that the climate agenda is coming for their prime agricultural land. Minister Plibersek has rejected the proposed expansion of the Port of Hastings, which would have paved the way for offshore wind development. Tasmania has gone cold on offshore wind too. Don't get me wrong—if the environmental credentials in offshore wind don't stack up, by all means reject them. My concern for my electorate of Mallee and for regional Victoria is that Labor's push for radical renewable energy targets will see it look to onshore wind to meet those targets. For some reason, Labor is happy to run roughshod over environmental and agricultural land as opposed to projects at sea. It is as though the whales and dolphins vote and regional Australians don't.

Already, the Victorian planning minister Sonia Kilkenny has been given powers to fast track the planning aspect of the renewables rollout on land, laying aside any lack of social licence and community concerns. The Albanese Labor government's May budget committed $20 million to help fast track renewable energy project approvals. Most concerning is a document the Victorian government have tried to hide—that if offshore wind projects fail, they will need to use up to 70 per cent of Victoria's agricultural land. State ministers are already using ministerial orders and new powers to sideline community concerns, so that threat to 70 per cent of Victoria's agricultural land looms very large. Nationwide, Labor's doomed green energy targets right through to 2030 require that 22,000 solar panels be installed every day and 40 wind turbines per month. By 2050 there is to be 28,000 kilometres of new transmission poles and wires, which is equivalent to almost the entire coastline of mainland Australia.

As we have seen in Mallee, with the 400-kilometre VNI West transmission line and wind turbine proposal, state Labor claim to have green credentials but have been ignoring local concerns about the impacts on native species. Victorian Labor will do untold damage, racing from the current situation of 37 per cent of energy from turbines and panels to their political target of 95 per cent in just 11 years. To be clear, there is no social licence from farmers and farming communities for this abuse. I know this because I meet with my farming communities.

I return to that great irony—more EPBC referrals for renewables projects than mining. Are the Greens chaining themselves to farm gates, urging that we lock the gate against wind turbines and the blanketing of pristine bushland with solar panels and transmission lines? No; they're not. They're too busy raging against Israel. The farmers in electorates like Mallee are locking their gates and protesting outside parliaments, and I pay tribute to these farmer custodians of the land. They care about the continuing health of the land for the birds, the snakes, the bats and other species. The Nationals are listening to the custodians of the land, to the farmers and community members who want to continue their generational food and fibre businesses with a globally small but nonetheless rapidly falling carbon footprint. Farmers care about their local environments, landscapes and the long term future—make no mistake.

There are already state laws requiring environmental factors to be considered, such as the environmental effects statement or EES process in Victoria. In fact, an increasing number of wind turbine projects, transmission lines and mining for battery minerals are being referred to EES processes as well. At last check, there were five renewable projects under EES in my state since January 2022. Of the six mining projects under EES, three are for critical minerals such as battery resources. I hasten to add all three are in my electorate. So let's be very clear about nature positive. The jury is well and truly out about how genuinely nature positive renewables and critical mineral projects are. Don't get me wrong—if they tick the truly environmental boxes and if there is genuine social licence, go for it. That is not what we are seeing in Victoria. The Albanese Labor government wants to step over the current state based environmental assessment processes and create another layer of bureaucracy through this bill. You just can't get enough bureaucracy.

Labor's new federal environmental protection agency, the EPA, will be given $120 million to operate, but I note that Minister Plibersek's so-called war on feral cats has failed to fire a shot, with not one cent allocated in the May budget, despite the minister saying in September, 'If we don't act now, our native animals won't stand a chance,' saying that cats kill six million animals every night in Australia. By contrast the former coalition government announced $724,547 in funding in Mallee alone under our Threatened Species Strategy Action Plan to improve feral cat and fox management and to reduce their impact on the south-eastern red-tailed black cockatoo and the black-eared miner. Labor waved the white flag on feral cats but will create a double-up EPA, administering the same laws that Professor Graeme Samuel, after he reviewed the EPBC Act, described as 'woefully inadequate'. He certainly didn't recommend the EPA this government intends to create today.

This bill creates both the EPA and a new organisation called Environment Information Australia; however, neither currently have federal laws for them to actually oversee. After two years of selectively consulting in budget-lock-up-style consultations and hiding her plans from the Australian public, Minister Plibersek proposes using taxpayer funds to hire more bureaucrats, without any legislative machinery for them to operate. Labor want to double-down on the dual state and federal Aboriginal heritage processes and duplicate the environmental approval process as well. By contrast, the former coalition government created the one-stop-shop approach to approvals.

During the first five quarters of the coalition government, there were 269 EPBC Act referrals for assessment, and 94.8 per cent of them were decided on time. During the first five quarters of the Albanese Labor government, there were 280 EPBC Act referrals for assessment, and only 79.6 per cent of them were decided on time. Yet earlier this month Minister Plibersek claimed that 51 EPBC approvals for renewable projects since the May 2022 election were somehow more than the coalition approved in nine years in power. In April the minister tried to claim she had approved onshore wind projects three times faster than the former coalition government; however, industry analysis indicated that the minister had approved 10 offshore windfarms in 23 months in office, the same if not fewer than the number approved by the Morrison government over the same period of time—and let's not forget COVID. The minister might want to get her spin right before making outlandish claims.

The coalition government was heading towards accrediting states and territories to make more assessments in accordance with new national standards recommended by the Samuel review. We need to reduce unnecessary duplication and bureaucracy. In keeping with localism and federalism, rather than more centralised power and funding to Canberra, we should make those closest and most accountable for poor decision-making determine project outcomes that consider local impacts and, crucially, social licence.

When it comes to approvals under a future-changed EPBC Act, let's bear in mind the mentality that environmental bureaucracies see 'the changing climate', or emissions, as a 'mandatory consideration in environmental planning'. This green bureaucracy wants to embed climate considerations in all roles and functions of government. We are seeing it spread further afield, beyond environmental agencies, to agencies like the National Health and Medical Research Council, who are telling Australians that meat is bad for their personal health because it has a carbon footprint!

The minister is threatening monetary fines of up to $780 million and jail terms for businesses judged to have breached environmental obligations, enforced through stop-work orders and audits. Labor is scaring off job-creating investment and destroying Australia's productivity. Worse still, this bill will allow significant ministerial powers to be transferred to an unelected and unaccountable EPA CEO, who will be able to act with near impunity—so, too, the head of Environment Information Australia. We already know that, with weak ministers in the cabinet, bureaucracies are already using a snake's nest of power and resources to push their own agendas. Through this bill the EPA would be empowered to issue far-reaching environmental protection orders and huge new penalties on businesses.

Added to this complex mix and cost of delaying projects is the role of activist groups like the Environmental Defenders Office, or EDO, which stages lawfare against resource projects. Australia is the second-largest target in the world, behind the USA, for environmental lawfare. We are seen as a soft target. The EDO's reputation has been severely tarnished by its conduct over songlines in the Northern Territory in the Santos Barossa case and over allegations of witness coaching. Leader of the Nationals, David Littleproud, said in May that there will be no funding going to the EDO under a coalition government. The EDO relies on state and territory government grants and philanthropy, underpinned by $8.2 million over four years from the Albanese Labor government, continuing Labor's protection of economic vandals.

In conclusion, these bills only add more cost, bureaucracy and red tape, enabling a Labor government agenda that is anything but positive for nature. Labor are railroading regional communities for renewable projects that do more harm than good. Yet again, Labor robs regions to buy votes in the inner cities.

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill is an important part of the Albanese Labor government's nature-positive plan, and, importantly, part of delivering on our election commitment to implement strong environmental law reforms in line with the Samuel review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

These national environmental laws are a critically important part of the way that governments protect our natural environment here in Australia, and an important part of how we approach the climate crisis. The reforms of these laws are something that, since I was elected in 2019, has been a key part of my focus as a member of parliament and something that my constituents have been really engaged with. It's a topic which I have also spoken about in the parliament many times. In the last term, when the Samuel review was released, I, like many of my constituents, was dismayed by the response of the Morrison government through then minister Sussan Ley. At the time I said the Samuel review provides a great opportunity for this parliament to act to better protect the environment, but of course it took the election of a Labor government to ensure that that opportunity was grasped.

Because of course it is the Labor Party that has delivered all of the significant environmental reforms of Australia's history. It was Labor in the 1970s, under Gough Whitlam, who appointed the nation's first federal environment minister, Moss Cass. Also during the Whitlam government, Australia also saw the nation's first environmental impact inquiry, which established that sand mining on Fraser Island was untenable. One of the core tenants of Whitlam was embedding environmental outcomes while building the nation and its prosperity—something that is not mutually exclusive.

In the 1980s, Bob Hawke's Labor government saved the Franklin River from being dammed. It was his government that kicked off Landcare, which is such an important part of the protection of our natural environment to this day. They put in place protections for the Daintree, Kakadu and 170,000 hectares of forest in the Tasmanian World Heritage area. Hawke's government reformed the native forest industry and protected the most important old-growth forests across the country. Under Hawke and Labor, Australia led the international push in 1989 for the prohibition of mining in Antarctica, ensuring to this day that that continent remains a serene place of natural beauty, peace and science. Under the Rudd and Gillard governments, Labor built the largest network of marine national parks in the world and set Australia on a path to a low-carbon future.

In this term of parliament, we've introduced the world-leading Nature Repair Market to foster environmental stewardship and nature repair around the nation. We've reformed the water trigger to protect our incredibly valuable water resources. And we have increased the reach of our environmental protection laws so the minister must assess all unconventional gas projects, including shale gas, which trigger our environmental laws.

Debate interrupted.