Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim has submitted a proposal, under standing order 75, today. It is shown at item 13 of today's Order of Business:

Australia needs environment laws that actually protect our environment, including saving our native forests, critical habitat and the climate.

Is consideration of the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

With the concurrence of the Senate, the clerks will set the clock in line with the informal arrangements made by the whips.

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The plunder and pillage of the environment is being brought to you courtesy of big mining and the Labor Party, who they have bought up with their donations. The fossil fuelled Labor Party is now responsible for fossil fuel disaster after fossil fuel disaster—as the climate crisis worsens, as extreme heat worsens, as floods worsen, as fires worsen, as people are being crushed under the cascading impacts of the climate, cost-of-living and housing crises.

The Minister for the Environment and Water talks the talk of 'now or never' on environmental protection but then walks the walk of environmental destruction. That is what these reforms unleash: a path to fast-track the destruction of nature, a path to fast-track coal and gas. They are protecting a system that created the climate crisis. They are protecting the profits of billionaires and corporations. What needs protection is our ever-dwindling biodiversity and wildlife-rich native forests. What needs protection are communities on the front lines of climate driven disasters, who suffer again and again and again, both here and in the Global South. National interest should be about protecting people and the planet—not greed, not corporate profit, not flogging off our precious mineral resources for the war machine.

That Labor is open to doing business with the coalition on the environment should tell you all you need to know. The Nationals have shown their true colours by dumping net zero. The least Labor could do is rule out doing any deals with the climate deniers and the environmental vandals on the EPBC reforms. But I'm not holding my breath, because Labor's environmental playbook runs something like this: draft laws at the behest of big business and the mining lobby; give permission to some backbenchers to express concern; pitch yourself as the sensible Centre while fast-tracking logging, land clearing and the destruction of First Nations land and country, polluting the atmosphere and somehow trying to blame the Greens. We see through this; the community sees through this. The emperor with no clothes has nowhere to hide.

The Greens are not here to play your petty political games; we are here to stand up for nature. We are here to stand up for our communities. We are here to work with First Nations people and those on the front lines of the climate crisis. We will not be scared by your rubbish tactics. We will not back down in standing up to protect our environment and our climate.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The matter of public importance before the Senate is that Australia needs environmental laws that actually protect our environment, including saving native forests, critical habitat and the climate. When the MPI was first proposed, I thought immediately of a famous businessman. I'm not going to reveal his name until after I've read an important quote:

Climate change poses clear, catastrophic threats. We may not agree on the extent, but we certainly can't afford the risk of inaction.

  …   …   …

Climate change and energy use are global problems …

…   …   …

We need to push ourselves to make as many reductions as possible in our own energy use first—and that takes time. But we must do this quickly—the climate will not wait for us.

  …   …   …

… becoming carbon neutral is only the beginning. The climate problem will not be solved by one company reducing its emissions to zero, and it won't be solved by one government acting alone.

The climate problem will not be solved without mass participation by the general public in countries around the globe.

That was Rupert Murdoch. I'm not sure it has been read by Sky News or 'Sky after dark', or if they've got the missive, but their own master has very similar views to this senator.

The traditional environmental law approach is primarily regulatory, and we are going to debate a bill, which is before the other place, that is going to attempt to recast the environmental trade-offs between mining or commercial activities—in other words, the fruits of economic liberalism—against nature herself. The bill is structured—as I have seen, although I am not completely conversant with it since it's over 1,000 pages because of the diligence of the minister and his staff. I would challenge the chamber to think about the binary nature of that. Where is the voice of nature injected in that debate? There are other approaches in other countries that take a completely different journey to solving that problem. Nature is given a role and a guardian. Before you dismiss me, Acting Deputy President, as someone at the edge of legal thinking, we give corporate personhood status to our corporations, so why does nature miss out? Where is the arbiter of what nature has to give to us for our enjoyment and endless consumption? Who speaks for her? No-one. The minister signs a missive as judge, jury and executioner.

Perhaps, when we reflect on the coming debate, we might think that we should take a completely different approach. It's happened in New Zealand and Ecuador, and other countries have taken this approach. This is not a new thought of mine. If you seek to search the archive, I have made similar comments in state parliament—but not to such a warm and receptive audience as in this Senate!

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In such a full house as this!

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a full house!

I do believe that we need to evolve our thinking on how we deal with nature. I have said this in this chamber before, but, as a conservative, I believe I have a moral obligation to support, endorse, encourage, grow and enrich the compact between past, present and future generations. That compact must be at the heart of any environmental regulation. I don't believe it's something that is of the left or the right, because nature sustains us.

I believe that the conservative tradition has been corrupted with an overemphasis on economic liberalism and its benefits, and I think there needs to be a recasting. But I propose not the point of view of heavy-handed regulation but a restructured way of drafting our legislation that puts nature at the heart of all decision-making. I don't consider that at all a radical concept, as a lawyer of over 30 years standing.

Charlotte Walker (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australia needs environmental laws that actually protect our environment, and that's exactly what the Albanese government is delivering through our Environment Protection Reform Bill. This is a once-in-a-generation overhaul of the EPBC Act, finally building a system that protects nature, gives businesses certainty and gets things moving again after years of delay.

Our reforms are based on the independent Samuel review. Professor Graeme Samuel himself said that this bill captures the intent of his recommendation to stop the decline of Australia's environment and to start the repair. In fact, Professor Samuel gave a direct message to the Greens when he released his report. He said:

… here is an opportunity to have a major reform and it takes you a long way forward of the current position

That was five years ago. Since then, sadly, some of the Greens have done what they always do—block, delay and grandstand—instead of getting behind reforms that will actually make our system better. We should also remember that Professor Samuel's report was handed to the former environment minister Sussan Ley in 2020, and, for years, nothing happened. They chose to ignore advice that would have improved outcomes for the environment, for industry and for local communities.

Labor is turning that around. We're doing the hard work to fix the laws that the Liberals brushed aside and that some Greens prefer to posture over rather than improve. The Australian people sent a clear message at the last election. They are tired of inaction. Australians don't like it when the Senate blocks reform for self-promotion, and they really don't like when that obstruction endangers the environment. If we're going to roll out renewables and cut emissions, we need clear, fair laws that make it possible to build transmission lines, solar farms and battery projects without trashing our ecosystems. If we're serious about the energy transition, we need these laws. If we're serious about solving the housing crisis, we need these laws. If we're serious about protecting the environment, we definitely need these laws. So when the Greens stand in front of this reform, they are not helping the planet; they're holding it back.

Our reforms will finally create an environment system that protects what matters and makes it easier to do the right thing. They are built around three key pillars: stronger environmental protection and restoration; quicker, more consistent project approvals; and greater accountability and transparency in decision-making. We will establish Australia's first national environment protection agency, an independent body with the power to enforce the law, audit safe processes and ensure compliance. This will mean real accountability for environmental breaches and an end to the rubber-stamping we have seen in the past. We will also set national environmental standards that make crystal clear what is acceptable and what is not. They will protect important habitats, give businesses certainty and make sure decisions are consistent and fair. For the first time, we will define unacceptable impacts—areas of harm that simply cannot be approved, like the destruction of World Heritage sites, critical habitats or wetlands of international significance. These laws will also deliver net gain for the environment, meaning that, where impacts do occur, they must be fully offset and compensated for, improving on the current no-net-loss approach. We are increasing penalties for serious breaches, giving the courts stronger tools to respond to those who flout the rules.

While the Greens are busy chasing retweets about protecting the Tarkine, Labor is establishing the legal framework that will actually protect it. We are introducing new emissions disclosure requirements for major projects. We are ensuring restoration contributions go straight back into rehabilitating land and ecosystems. We are doing all this while keeping Australia's economy strong. Environmental groups want these reforms. Industry wants them. Australians want them. The only people standing in the way are the ones more interested in political stunts than actually achieving anything. Our unique environment is precious. It's what makes this country special. We owe it to future generations to protect it. I appeal to senators here who care about the future and our environment to remember how destructive blocking these reforms actually is and to join us in delivering the biggest step forward in environmental protection in a generation.

Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

First Peoples have sovereign rights and obligations to care for country, yet these continue to be violated by colonial governments, both Labor and coalition. When we care for country, country cares for us. That's what this colony still needs to learn. Country is in crisis. Our rivers are dying, totems are disappearing, our bushland is being destroyed and ecosystems are collapsing. Yet Labor keeps approving fossil fuel and mining projects. It is ecocide before our eyes.

Climate change is caused by humans. It's people like Minister Watt who are the problem when it comes to keeping our planet safe. Labor's new environment laws will decide what happens to country for generations, but right now Labor is promising faster approvals for big business while First Peoples are still being locked out of decision-making. First Peoples have not been properly consulted, and Labor does not have consent of the people to pass these laws. As Michael Ghillar Anderson said:

Protections for species and totems are giving way to mining and development, ignoring the need to protect First Nations culture and heritage, which includes medicines, bush tucker, fibres and timber.

We have to resist, or they will claim we acquiesced!

Protection of First Nations culture and heritage MUST be in the legislation.

Destroying Old Growth forest and habitat endangers our totems and spiritual beliefs.

If Labor actually cared about protecting country instead of being gammon, they would respect our right to free, prior and informed consent and close the loopholes that let big business destroy our lands, waters, climate and sacred sites. Anything less is just another colonial rubber stamp for destruction.

Ellie Whiteaker (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion. Australia does need environment laws that protect our environment, and that is exactly what this Labor government is seeking to provide. Senators in this chamber have an opportunity in the coming weeks to make the right decision when our new Environment Protection Reform Bill comes before us. I remind my colleagues around the chamber that Australians voted for real action on climate change. Australians voted for a future made in Australia. Australians voted for more affordable housing. All of these things rely on us passing the environment bill when it comes before this place.

Our environment laws are broken. We seek to make them stronger so we can protect and restore the environment. We seek to make them more efficient so businesses and communities can have more certainty and get decisions made faster. The Environment Protection Reform Bill will deliver modern, fit-for-purpose national environment laws that are well overdue and that will deliver big gains for the environment and, yes, for business too.

The bill is centred on three key pillars: stronger environmental protection and restoration, quicker and more robust project approvals and greater accountability and transparency in decision-making. The bill delivers on the recommendations of the Samuel review, which was tabled some five years ago. These reforms are well overdue, and it is time that we pass them. Labor has been working to deliver on the recommendations of the Samuel review. These reforms will allow the environment minister to make new environmental standards—standards that will protect the environment, set out clear rules and help decision-makers be fair and consistent.

We aim to protect and restore important environmental areas and species to truly make up for environmental damage and deliver a net gain for the environment. Our proposal, importantly, includes a new definition of an unacceptable impact. This will set clear and upfront criteria for impacts that cannot and will not be approved. It will increase transparency, consistency and certainty of decisions and provide a safeguard against impacts that cause the irreversible loss of Australia's biodiversity and heritage. Our proposed reforms clearly define what type of environmental harm must be avoided and cannot be offset. Projects will be required by law, importantly, not just to avoid and mitigate but to repair damage to protected matters where possible. Any residual impacts must be fully offset and achieve a net gain for the environment. This is a significant improvement on the existing policy of no net loss. Our reforms seek to increase the penalties for the most serious and significant breaches of the law, allowing courts to respond proportionately to the most egregious of breaches.

Our proposed reforms seek to establish our nation's first-ever independent National Environmental Protection Agency, a strong and independent regulator with a clear focus, ensuring better compliance with and stronger enforcement of these environmental laws. A national EPA is well overdue.

Very shortly, we will have an opportunity to vote for a bill that does more to protect our environment and to set a new standard, and I hope the Greens get on board instead of doing what they usually do and standing in the way of progress. I think Australians made it pretty clear at the election that they don't like it when the Greens stand in the way of good, progressive policy. I'm sure the Greens don't need reminding of what that meant for them, following the ballot box in May. Australians don't want the Greens to be blockers; they want us, as parliamentarians, as leaders, to be doers. We must take action to protect our environment and to keep our economy strong. Our bill gets the balance right, and I urge senators here in the coming weeks to make that decision.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The thing about the major parties racing to the bottom in politics is that it has consequences. In their quest for headlines and opinion polls, the stuff that actually matters just gets trashed. Right now, what's being demolished by Labor is our environment, our native forests and any chance we have of meaningful climate action. A safe climate is the very thing that Labor is planning to sell down the river.

Labor's so-called environmental laws are a farce. They are a fast-track approval factory for big mining corporations, fossil fuel giants and AUKUS. Yes, you heard me—AUKUS projects will get total environmental exemption from protections whenever a Labor or coalition minister snaps their fingers and says the magic words 'national interest'. That's when the next nuclear submarine base, US military base, toxic nuclear waste dump or critical minerals scraping of a farm gets waved through under national interest by the next Labor so-called environmental minister, with no environmental assessment, no community say and no accountability.

I don't think it will be a great comfort to the communities having a nuclear waste dumped in their backyard that the Prime Minister got a selfie with Donald Trump. It won't slow the extinction of the greater glider in my beautiful home state or the regent honeyeater to know that Minister Watt decided that the project killing them is in the national interest. A bump in the opinion polls for the Albanese Labor government won't be any comfort to young people who are confronting an increasingly hostile climate for the rest of their lives.

The Greens are done playing nice with this nonsense. We will not rubberstamp laws that sacrifice our environment for corporate profits and US military production. We will not. There is a progressive majority in this parliament—or a potential progressive majority in this parliament—that could pass laws to protect the environment and the future. If only Labor realised that it could. It could if it chose to find a little bit of ambition and a little bit of spine.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We know that environmental laws are broken. Over the last 25 years, we've seen more than seven million hectares of threatened species habitat bulldozed or destroyed—an area larger than Tasmania. Nearly 750 fossil fuel projects have been approved. There was only one knocked back: a coal mine put forward by Clive Palmer. Hundreds of species have been pushed to the brink of extinction, and, in fact, we've seen a number of species go extinct.

I'm concerned when it comes to this debate around nature, the decline of nature, that our framing of it is not up to the task. Steve Irwin, a great Australian, reminded us that we don't own planet Earth; we belong to it, and we must share it with our wildlife. Almost 100 years before, one of my heroes, Aldo Leopold, said:

Conservation is getting nowhere because it is incompatible with our Abrahamic concept of land. We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect.

I think we have to reframe how we discuss environmental issues. This is in our self-interest to have strong environmental laws that actually protect the environment that we are totally reliant on. We are part of nature, and if nature goes down, we're going down with her. The government has introduced half-baked, loophole-ridden laws. They need to be tightened up. We need laws that are actually going to protect the incredible places and species that make this continent so unique.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Greens have abandoned nature, bulldozing forests, blasting mountain ridges, disrupting whale migration, clubbing koalas so that subsidised parasitic billionaires can cover our country in solar panels, wind turbines and transmission lines. Senator McKim says of Tasmania's Robbins Island industrial project:

Its habitats, landscapes and sea scapes should be protected under international conventions—not exploited for profit by a multinational corporation.

Senator Whish-Wilson says:

… it would be a cruel irony if Australia's renewable energy projects come at the expense of our threatened and iconic species.

They've done plenty to oppose this project, only for Greens leader Senator Waters to say on national TV:

I don't very know much about that …

Despite endangered species, the project was approved because of claimed climate change.

Labor, the Greens, the Liberals, the Nationals and the teals are killing the environment and endangered species, supposedly to save the planet. Only One Nation is united and consistent on protecting our beautiful natural environment against multinationals ripping billions off Australians.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The only corporations I never hear One Nation talking about are big fossil fuel companies. It's funny, because Senator Roberts used to manage a coalmine. It has nothing to do with the fact that he loves fossil fuels and is completely—

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Very proud of it.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

exactly—captured by the fossil fuel industry in here. So, make no mistake, when you hear any One Nation contribution, that they are climate deniers—100 per cent flat-earthers, climate deniers and conspiracy theorists. But, sadly, in an age of disinformation and misinformation, which Senator Roberts spends a lot of time contributing to, people do get sucked into this stuff.

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Please direct your comments through the chair, Senator.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was making a comment to the roof, Acting Deputy President, but I'm happy to make it to you.

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The standing orders require you to do it to the chair, but, either way, continue.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was looking for some divine intervention. When I think about Senator Roberts, I think that's about the only thing that's ever going to work to change his mind on climate change—some kind of divine intervention.

Anyway, back to the environment laws, Australians are going to have a simple decision to make. There's progress underway, apparently, according to Minister Watt in Senate question time today, in relation to these environment laws themselves. But the Greens have been very clear. We will support, and we encourage the government to bring forward, environment laws that will protect nature and laws that will give an environmental protection authority independence in their decisions over nature. We've seen EPAs in Western Australia and in my home state of Tasmania get overruled constantly by ministers. Unfortunately, the laws as they are written right now allow that to happen.

We've seen very little information on environmental standards. And of course, as my colleagues made it very clear in Senate question time today, native forest logging is not being dealt with in these laws. If you want to follow the Samuel review, then listen to what he had to say about excluding native forest logging from the environment laws and banning it all together. That's what we want to see.

We also want to see the impacts of climate considered in environmental decisions. You can't have environmental laws, be an environment minister or claim you're an environmental party unless you assess the impacts of climate change. Whether it's on our oceans, on our forests, on our communities or on our weather—extreme weather events—climate change is impacting everything.

We are right now, at this point in history, in a biodiversity crisis. We're seeing the physical world break down before our very eyes. We're seeing the climate break down before our very eyes. People are waking up to this, and they expect us to do something. At this point in history, there is no way the Greens will support environment laws that give the government a chance to give themselves a pat on the back and go to the next election saying they've fixed the environment when they clearly haven't. We won't be a part of that.

So the simple question that I have for Australians and the decision they have to make is: who do you trust to deliver strong environment laws that protect nature ahead of the interests of big corporations that are doing the damage in the first place? It's not a party that, as the very last thing it did in the last term of parliament, weakened the environment laws for the salmon industry, while the very first thing it did in this term of government was approve the biggest fossil fuel project in our nation's history—the North West Shelf extension. Australians trust the Greens. We've been a movement for over 50 years, protecting the environment. They're not going to trust the Labor Party who deliver these laws. I say to the Labor Party: come and work with the Greens; let's get laws that protect nature first.