The Albanese government has committed to establishing a new environment protection agency with powers to decide whether or not developments proceed and to enforce laws designed to protect and restore nature.
Releasing the government’s response to a review of national environmental laws, the environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, confirmed the government would also introduce new national environmental standards against which conservation protection and major development applications will be measured.
It comes two years after the former competition watchdog Graeme Samuel delivered his review to the former Morrison government. The Coalition never formally responded.
Plibersek said revamped environmental laws would set standards that decisions about developments must meet and would “describe the environmental outcomes we want to achieve” to ensure better protection of threatened species and declining ecosystems.
“Our nature positive plan is a win-win: a win for the environment and a win for business,” she said.
“Our reforms are seeking to turn the tide in this country – from nature destruction to nature repair.”
The response, released at an event in Brisbane, includes proposed changes to conservation planning – formerly known as recovery planning – and a new three-tier system to guide where development can and cannot occur.
The government has also proposed applying the new national standards to regional forest agreements, which have been exempt from the current laws, and expanding the water trigger – which assesses the impacts of coal and coal seam gas developments on water resources – to include all forms of unconventional gas.
However, the government will not establish a long-called-for climate trigger and its response did not provide any detail of additional government funding to meet its aims of environmental restoration and zero new extinctions.
The laws would also remove the requirement in some cases for environmental offsets to be a “like for like” equivalent of destroyed habitat.
The government’s promised EPA will have the power to make decisions about whether developments that affect the environment can or cannot proceed – a role previously held by the federal environment minister. Under the proposed model, the minister would retain a call-in power for certain decisions.
The EPA would also have responsibility for enforcing and ensuring compliance with the law. The government has also retained aspects of the former Morrison government’s proposal to allow state and territory governments to make decisions under national laws.
Instead of wholesale deregulation, the Albanese government said it would allow states to apply to become accredited to make “single-touch” decisions under the act, subject to compliance with a full set of national environmental standards and with the EPA in an assurance role.
Plibersek said on Thursday the country’s environment laws “are broken” and the government would introduce the reform package in late 2023 with three principles in mind: national environmental standards, speeding up decision-making, and improving trust and integrity in the system.
She stressed Thursday’s response was a first step, with the detail and design to be worked through next year.
The government will begin by developing national standards for five priority areas: matters of national environmental significance, First Nations engagement and participation in decision-making, community engagement and consultation, regional planning and environmental offsetting.
Matters of national environmental significance, which would guide decisions about threatened species and world heritage areas, would be the first standard put to consultation in the new year, with the other standards to be developed in time.
A three-tiered system would introduce a traffic-light approach to development and environmental protection.
Development would be largely off-limits in areas considered to be of high environmental value, managed in areas considered of moderate value, and there would be no commonwealth approval required for “development priority areas”.
That would occur in conjunction with a new regional planning model that would set out where development can or cannot occur in a particular region. A similar proposal was made by the Morrison government earlier this year but it was criticised for being too focused on fast-tracking development rather than improving the environment.
The government said its approach was aimed at addressing the cumulative impacts of development and announced the first such plan would be developed with the Queensland government.
The government also plans to overhaul Australia’s troubled system of recovery planning by taking a new approach it said would strengthen protections by requiring decisions to be consistent with any type of conservation document. This rule previously applied only to species and habitats with an active recovery plan, which was a minority of threatened plants and animals.
Environment groups have welcomed some of the proposed major changes.
Rachel Lowry, WWF-Australia’s chief conservation officer, said a lack of enforcement was the “single greatest failing” of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, so the central role of an EPA was welcome, as was a proposal to establish a “red line” that would prohibit most development in environmentally sensitive areas.
However, she said the proposed timeline to introduce legislation in late 2023 was concerning because any real change would be unlikely to occur until 2024.
“Our wildlife and wild places cannot afford to wait this long for action,” she said.
The Wilderness Society welcomed the EPA and decision to apply national standards to forestry but said other key elements risked leaving in place a system too heavily geared towards environmental destruction rather than protection.
James Trezise of the Invasive Species Council said moves to modernise conservation planning were welcome but the package released on Thursday was “effectively silent” on managing threats to the environment. He said the government would not achieve its zero extinctions goal unless threats were tackled.
Tim Reed, the president of the Business Council of Australia said business would need to work closely with the government to “avoid creating more complexity”.
“The current system doesn’t deliver businesses certainty or facilitate environmental outcomes. Complexity makes project approvals too slow and a lack of clear accountability means we’re not getting the best environmental results, we need a win-win system,” he said.
