Trish Cook (Bullwinkel, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'll just take a moment to get over that, before I go into my speech, because I'm just so shocked by the previous speaker's comments. I'd like to quote from Graeme Samuel, when he was asked recently about this review—oh, you're not going to listen to this? Goodbye! Maybe later—because he says: 'I can't understand why there's opposition from the coalition. It doesn't make sense, particularly as the then minister Sussan Ley embraced the report. She knew what was in it. Now, what minister Watt'—the quote goes on—'has produced is exactly what the report recommended. It's all there. I've been through and I've done a comparison between my report and the legislation and the environmental standards.' So it shocks me to hear the opposition speaking in such a tone and losing sight of the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is the environment, and I rise today to speak strongly in support of this historic reform to Australia's environmental laws. This is a great day! It's a great day for me, it's a great day for Labor government and it's a great day for hope for the environment. Here's a quote from Prime Minister Bob Hawke. It reads:

When the earth is spoiled, humanity and all living things are diminished. We have taken too much from the earth and given back too little. And it's time to say enough is enough.

My commitment to protecting our environment wasn't forged here in the halls of Canberra. It was forged at my home in the electorate of Bullwinkel, standing side by side with my community. It was forged walking through the degraded banks on the Darlington wetlands, championing the local volunteer groups who are rehabilitating this precious ecosystem. It was forged while kneeling in the soil of the Darlington Community Garden—another environmental project which I was proud to help establish—watching my community come together to build something sustainable, local and green.

My commitment was also tangible in the restoration of the Friends of the Native Triangle group to continue the environmental protection legacy and rehabilitate local grounds. Those local projects reinforced a fundamental lesson for me: a community's health, its ecosystem and the environment's health are inextricably linked. It is our duty to be good custodians of the environment that we all rely on, as has been done by First Nations peoples for millennia. We are unable to build a prosperous future for our children if we do not protect the air they breathe, the water they drink and the natural world that sustains us all.

I care for my community and I care for our environment. My own electorate of Bullwinkel is a truly beautiful electorate, filled with bushland and walking trails that trek beside the Mundaring weir, which is a protected drinking water source for Perth and the Goldfields region. It's filled with Australian natives, including fauna like the black cockatoos, which all need our protection. I'm proud to be part of the Labor Party that is doing just that.

This is why I'm so proud to be a member of this Labor government. When it comes to hard work, like the nation-building work of environmental reform, it's always Labor that delivers. Here's a little bit of history: Labor is the party that has delivered in every single major environmental reform in Australia's history. It was Labor that saved the Franklin. It was Labor that protected the Daintree and Kakadu. It was Labor that built Landcare, which is now an institution that is copied across the world. It was Labor that built the largest network of marine parks on this planet. And it is this Albanese Labor government that is finally, meaningfully, and ambitiously addressing the existential threat of climate change. These bills continue that legacy of environmental responsibility.

There is a clear and widely accepted need for this reform, which is why the opposition leader commissioned the report five years ago. For a decade, the EPBC Act has been failing. We know this for a fact because that 2020 independent review, led by Professor Graeme Samuel AC and commissioned by the now opposition leader, delivered a comprehensive and scathing report. The Samuel review found that the current EPBC Act is not delivering for the environment—which we all know—and neither is it delivering for business or for the community. It is slow. It is cumbersome. It is ineffective. And our environment is paying the price. The opposition leader was handed that report five years ago and, for all those five years, it sat on the shelf. Faced with a critical and urgent challenge, the coalition did nothing for the environment.

Well, we're not walking away. The Labor government tried last year with the nature-positive laws, and now we're doing the job this year. This bill delivers on the recommendations of the Samuel review. Our approach is balanced. It's pragmatic. And it aligns perfectly with the three pillars of reform that Professor Samuel recommended: firstly, stronger environmental protection and restoration; secondly, more efficient and more robust project assessments; and thirdly, greater accountability and transparency in decision-making.

This is about getting the balance right. It's about delivering laws that are better for the environment and better for business. This means stronger environmental protections to protect and restore our precious natural habitats. Together with our action on climate change, such as the safeguard mechanism, this means easier processes and faster decisions that are required for building homes, renewable energy infrastructure and critical minerals projects—all things our nation needs for our future.

As of 31 October, this government has approved 111 renewable energy projects, producing enough electricity to power more than 13 million homes. Under this government, renewable energy generation has reached new records. It's gone up in volume by around 30 per cent since we came to government. In October around half of all electricity in the national grid came from renewable sources—the highest monthly rate on record. Coal generation is down to only 46 per cent. Our plan is working. We need these environmental reforms to get quicker decisions so that we can deliver the energy transition faster, and that's what Australians voted for.

What do these reforms do? First, they establish a national environmental protection agency, the EPA. The EPA will be a strong, independent regulator responsible for education, compliance and enforcement, with powers independent of the minister. Second, we are inserting a new ministerial power to make national environmental standards. This was the central recommendation of the Samuel review. These standards will finally set clear, enforceable expectations for proponents and decision-makers. Third, we are fixing the broken offsets framework. We are moving from 'no net loss' to 'net gain' for the environment. Fourth, for the first time these amendments will define what we consider to be unacceptable impacts for each protected matter—clear no-go zones to prevent irreversible loss unless a project is proven to be in the national interest. Fifth, we're introducing new emissions disclosure requirements in line with the Samuel review. It's not a climate trigger. We have that covered by the safeguard mechanism, but we will require major project proponents to disclose their scope 1 and scope 2 emissions and their plans to reduce them, consistent with government policy. Sixth, we will codify the involvement of First Nations peoples in environmental governance, creating new statutory advisory functions for the Indigenous Advisory Committee. Seventh, we are streamlining access pathways, cutting green tape by rationalising three existing pathways into one. Eighth, we are reducing duplication by fixing the inflexible and unresponsive bilateral agreements with states and territories, ensuring they can deliver assessments and approvals if they meet our new national environmental standards. Ninth, we are delivering proper landscape-scale approaches through bioregional planning. By doing the upfront work to map areas, we can give certainty to industry about where development can and can't occur, while protecting areas of high environmental value.

This isn't trivial. Analysis shows that these efficiencies will deliver annual savings of at least half a billion dollars—and potentially as much as $7 billion—to the national economy. This legislation is not a tug of war between the environment and the economy. The coalition and the Greens may try to assert that, but it's not true. This reform delivers a balanced package. It delivers more efficient and robust project decisions, meaning more renewable projects can be decided on more quickly, helping with energy costs and lowering emissions. At the same time, it delivers stronger environmental protection and restoration laws.

The need for this change is urgent. Our environment cannot wait any longer, and neither can our economy. The message from environmental groups is also very clear. The three biggest environmental groups have welcomed the confirmation from the Minister for the Environment and Water, Murray Watt, that these amendments will improve the country's national environment laws. They're also happy about the inclusion of significant increases in fines and new enforcement powers. The Australian Conservation Foundation, Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund want the new EPA. They want environmental protection orders which will help stop potential offenders in their tracks and stop the excuses for not acting on their complaints. They support it, business supports it and the roundtable industries support it, and they want parliament to get on with this job.

Where are we now? The nature-positive laws got stuck in the Senate for six months. The Liberals wouldn't pass them; they said they went too far. The Greens wouldn't pass them; they said they didn't go far enough. We need to get this done. They have had plenty of time to digest the Samuel review, on which these bills are based; the opposition leader was in support of that review five years ago. Quite frankly, Australians are demanding environmental reform.

To the Greens: please do not let perfection get in the way of progress. Nothing has happened for the environment for some time. The EPBC Act is over 20 years old. We need to get on with this job. These reforms are pragmatic. They are strong. They are balanced. They deliver for the environment, they deliver for the economy, they deliver for community groups such as the ones I belong to in Bullwinkel and they deliver for the boardrooms in the city. Every day we delay is a day our environment is degrading further. I commend these bills to the House.

See this speech in context