Greens and crossbench senators have told the government not to “hide behind” Peter Dutton and Gina Rinehart and instead work with them on a better deal for the environment.
The Greens environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, and independent senators David Pocock and Lidia Thorpe offered to support legislation to establish a new environment protection authority (EPA) and a separate new agency to manage environmental information, if the government agreed to a series of proposals to strengthen environmental protections.
The government has been locked in negotiations with both sides of parliament to try to pass the bills after it delayed a broader package of legislation to fix failing national environmental laws.
In a report by a committee examining the bills, tabled late on Monday, government senators recommended an amendment that would give the environment minister power to create national environmental standards, as recommended by Graeme Samuel in his review of Australia’s nature laws in 2020.
Guardian Australia understands the government does not intend to adopt this recommendation, and its position that a standard-making power not form part of the bills remains unchanged.
While travelling in Western Australia last week, Anthony Albanese said the government would consider watering down its proposed EPA model to try to secure the Coalition’s backing.
This would involve dropping a plan to allow the regulator to make decisions about development proposals – meaning it would handle compliance and enforcement only, something the mining industry has lobbied for.
The Coalition is still seeking a comprehensive set of amendments to the bills. This would include changes to the proposed penalty regime and “most importantly, the introduction of the full overhaul of the EPBC [Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation] Act, as has been outlined in the Coalition’s dissenting report”, the opposition environment spokesperson, Jonno Duniam, said.
Hanson-Young said if the government did a deal with the Coalition it would be “nature negative” and “bad for forests, bad for nature, bad for wildlife, bad for the climate”.
“Don’t run away and hide behind Peter Dutton and Gina Rinehart,” she said.
“Roll up your sleeves, let’s get to work – let’s actually protect Australia’s environment.”
In letters to the PM and the environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, the Greens and crossbenchers called on the government to amend the bills to deliver “immediate, tangible impacts for nature protection”.
“While we reiterate our disappointment at the government’s broken promise to implement comprehensive environmental law reform in this term of parliament, we consider this legislation an opportunity to work together to begin implementing some of the urgent protections nature needs ahead of the election,” the letter says.
In addition to amendments that would strengthen the EPA’s independence, the letter urges a commitment to address native forestry by ending the exemption from Australia’s environment laws for logging covered by a regional forest agreement (RFA).
They are also seeking integration of climate considerations into the environmental assessment process – but the letter does not use the term “climate trigger” – and greater inclusion of First Nations knowledge and expertise in environmental governance and decision-making.
Plibsersek said the government was talking to all parties. “From the beginning, I have said that delivering improvements to national environment laws would require a bit of common sense, cooperation, and compromise,” she said.
“But I think Greens voters would be disappointed if the Greens party delayed a tough new environment watchdog like the EPA with strong new powers,” she said.
“Or if they tried to stop fines for serious environmental crimes going up from around $15m to $780m, or if they voted against increasing the frequency of the state of the environment report from every 5 years to every 2 years.”
Pocock said it was vital that the EPA was truly independent.
After the tabling of the senate committee’s report on Monday, Duniam said “the Coalition’s comments make clear our reservations that the government’s bills are ill thought through”.
“We are unable to accept these bills in their current form,” he said.
He accused the government of “trying to get what they think is a win in the portfolio this term of parliament … no matter the cost”, and without adequately considering potential risks and benefits to the environment or the broader economy.
Independents in the lower house have also called for the exemption granted to RFAs to be removed.
At a separate media conference on Monday morning the independent MP for Mackellar, Sophie Scamps, said the exemption should be removed before Australia hosts a global nature positive summit in Sydney in October.
She also called for a clean out of the NSW Forestry Corporation board.
