Fight back needed for a stronger federal environment law

April 16, 2024
Issue 
Protesting for a just transition for fossil fuel workers and a safe climate in Gadigal/Sydney, December 2023. Photo: Zebedee Parkes

Climate, environment and water campaigners are fighting what they see as Labor鈥檚 walk back on its promised reforms to the main environmental law, the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act聽(EPBC).

They are concerned it is moving to speed up the approvals process for large-scale gas developments and disarming water trigger laws, which only passed late last year.

Environmentalists and Greens and independent MPs won a major victory, late last year, when Labor agreed to extend the water trigger in the聽EPBC to cover coal and gas projects.

However, industry and business seem to have since persuaded Labor to water down its environment-friendly reforms聽in its 鈥溾 package聽and speed up approvals of new gas projects.

聽concluded in October 2020 that many changes were needed, including new national environmental standards, within two years. Labor in opposition criticised the Coalition for only introducing piecemeal reforms.

The review also concluded that the current聽EPBC 鈥渄oes not clearly outline its intended outcomes鈥 and that 鈥渢he environment has suffered from 2 decades of failing to continuously improve the law and its implementation鈥.

It noted that the EPBC is 鈥渃omplex and cumbersome鈥 and it 鈥渞esults in duplication with State and Territory development approval processes鈥.

New EPA

Labor announced on April 16 it would establish two new agencies 鈥 (EPA) and Environment Information Australia 鈥 to make decisions on developments and enforce regulations 鈥 thereby separating the decision-making from the EPBC.

A coalition of environment groups responded the same day saying they were concerned the new proposed agencies were about fast-tracking fossil-fuel projects.

Kirsty Howey, Executive Director of Environment Centre NT said 鈥減ushback from self-interested and well-resourced mining and gas magnates鈥 had led to Labor鈥檚 鈥渃apitulation鈥.

Dave Copeman, Director of Queensland Conservation Council, said environment minister Tanya Plibersek鈥檚 delay in the long-awaited fundamental reform means that Australia will have an EPA 鈥渨ithout all the tools it needs to protect nature鈥.聽

鈥淎ustralia does need a Federal EPA,鈥 said James Overington, Executive Officer of Environment Tasmania, but 鈥渋n the absence of underpinning legislation, and when the Minister can override its decisions, we are struggling to see how there will be any reliable benefits to nature鈥.聽

David Bacon, President of the Conservation Council of South Australia, said Plibersek must 鈥渉ow and when the plan to 鈥榯urn the tide from nature destruction to nature repair鈥 that she announced in December 2022 will be delivered鈥.聽

Glenn Walker, Head of Nature at 聽asked how the new agencies would relate to the EPBC to deliver improved nature laws.

鈥淭he EPA will not have the teeth it needs until a strong national nature law also comes into place.鈥 He said it is 鈥渆ssential鈥 the 鈥淓PA is given powers to assess and reject large coal and gas projects where the climate impacts on nature are assessed as significant鈥.

鈥淔ollowing the hottest year on record, it鈥檚 completely untenable that the existing nature law fails to allow this 鈥 another reason why it鈥檚 critical that the government gets on with the job of introducing the new nature law into parliament as soon as possible.鈥

Water assessments

Plibersek has also said she wants to establish an 鈥渁ccredited approval鈥 scheme for States and Territories to take control of assessing environmental and water resource impacts and the power to approve their own massive coal and oil projects.

But environment organisations fear that devolving federal environmental approval powers to the States and Territories in separate legislation would render it toothless.

said the proposed change would聽be a 鈥渂etrayal鈥 and that the States and Territories cannot be trusted to properly assess聽environmental and water resource impacts聽on fossil fuel projects.

Currently, such assessments have to be made聽federally.

Kelly Albion for聽 said: 鈥淔our months after we won our campaign to expand the water trigger to unconventional gas projects in NT [Northern Territory] and WA [West Australia], the government鈥檚 proposed changes would put precious water at risk everywhere.

鈥淭he states and territories simply cannot be trusted with water protection.

鈥淥ffshore oil and gas have huge environmental impacts and the potential to unleash a climate bomb.

鈥淢assive gas projects like North West Shelf in WA, Barossa in the NT and drilling off the Surf Coast in Victoria will have a massive impact on our already warming climate,鈥 Albion said.

The government鈥檚 proposed changes to the environmental approvals process for large gas projects were rejected in March by Greens, Teals and Independent MPs.

Albion said changes to the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA) regulations on oil and gas project approvals would hand power to resources minister聽Madeleine King and weaken environmental protections and the consultation process.聽

鈥淜ing is a big supporter of the industry, repeating the lie that gas is an incredibly important part of efforts to reach net zero鈥, Albion said.聽

King has rejected聽suggestions that changes to the EPBC聽are about bypassing environmental laws and fast-tracking new gas projects.聽 聽environment groups鈥 concerns.

Georgina Woods, who heads 鈥檚 聽research and investigations team, said Labor only expanded water trigger protections on gas and coal assessments last December聽under pressure.

If聽Labor goes ahead with 鈥渁 mechanism to hand those powers back to states and territories 鈥 it will breach a very clear election commitment.鈥

Woods likened Labor鈥檚聽Streamlining Environmental Approvals Bill, which did not pass, to former Coalition PM Scott Morrison鈥檚 鈥溾 mining approvals system in 2020. It would have created a 鈥溌爋f major projects, she said.

It would have handed responsibility to states to approve and manage major project development impacts on threatened species, habitat and biodiversity, as well as World Heritage areas.

鈥淪tate and territory governments have proven time and again that they can鈥檛 be trusted with our water,鈥 Woods said. A federal approval role on water is needed 鈥渢o prevent coal and gas projects draining our groundwater and polluting our creeks and rivers鈥.

First Nations' input

First Nations peoples have long called for the听贰笔叠颁聽to be聽strengthened聽and for a greater say in heritage and environmental management on their lands.聽

聽said聽in 2021聽that the Morrison government鈥檚 bid to delegate environmental approvals to states and territories raised 鈥渞ed flags鈥.

鈥淎nytime you think of someone trying to streamline the process, alarm bells can go off,鈥 Lowe told NITV.

鈥淭he 鈥榬ed tape鈥 is there for a reason, to make people follow process, follow procedure and, in this case, making sure the environment is protected, as much as you can when you鈥檙e mining.鈥

Environment, climate, heritage and water defenders are organising a week of protest -聽#WeRise聽鈥 from April 29 to May 10.聽

They are calling for an end to new coal and gas projects and for federal laws to enshrining climate, environmental and heritage protections.

The national week of action,聽#WeRise聽鈥 like the flood waters and flames, is organising under the slogan: 鈥淟abor: keep us safe 鈥斅燦o more coal and gas!鈥

You need 91自拍论坛, and we need you!

91自拍论坛 is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.