After decades of stagnation, Australia’s environmental laws are finally getting an overhaul. But here’s the catch: will this hard-won compromise actually save our natural world?
Today marks a pivotal moment for environmental protection in Australia. Labor has finally brokered a deal with the Greens, ending years of gridlock and paving the way for long-overdue reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. The Senate is expected to pass these changes today, the last sitting day of the year.
This reform couldn’t come sooner. Our 25-year-old environmental laws are woefully outdated, leaving Australia’s unique species and ecosystems in dire straits. Threatened species are disappearing at an alarming rate, while climate change pushes entire ecosystems to the brink of collapse.
But here’s where it gets controversial: neither Labor nor the Greens are celebrating this as a complete victory. Labor Senator Michelle Ananda-Rajah admitted the bill is “not perfect,” while the Greens argue it falls “woefully short” on climate action.
So, what’s the deal? Environment Minister Murray Watt negotiated with both the Coalition and the Greens, resulting in a compromise that, while imperfect, is a step forward after five years of stalemate.
The original reform bill, introduced in October, proposed significant changes, including national environmental standards, a new federal agency, and bioregional planning. These were generally positive steps. However, this is the part most people miss: the bill also contained concerning elements like broad ministerial discretion, a vague “national interest” exemption for fast-tracking projects, and a controversial “restoration fund” that critics say incentivizes biodiversity loss.
Additionally, the bill excluded native forest logging from federal oversight and planned to devolve decision-making to states, raising concerns about pro-mining agendas.
The Greens secured key concessions, including stronger protections for native forests, a ban on fast-tracking new coal and gas projects, and limitations on ministerial discretion. They also achieved a major win by removing a longstanding exemption for the logging industry in areas covered by Regional Forest Agreements.
But is it enough? While the Greens celebrate these victories, they acknowledge the bill falls short of their ambitious climate trigger. The “pay to destroy” mechanism, allowing developers to offset biodiversity loss through a restoration fund, remains a significant concern.
The Liberals also secured wins, with changes to the definition of “unacceptable impacts” potentially making it harder to reject harmful projects.
Will these reforms truly stem the tide of environmental damage? The bar is low, given the weaknesses of the current laws. The revised bill incorporates some recommendations from the 2020 Samuel Review, but much remains uncertain. The success of these reforms hinges on robust public investment and strict enforcement.
The real test lies ahead: will these changes translate into tangible conservation and recovery for Australia’s beloved wildlife and landscapes? Only time will tell. What do you think? Are these reforms a step in the right direction, or do they fall short of what’s needed to protect our environment? Let us know in the comments.