Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The first question is that the Australian Greens amendment on sheet 3561 be agreed to.

Australian G reens ' circulated amendment—

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes that sovereignty was never ceded, and that free, prior and informed consent should be codified in our nation's laws; and

(b) calls on the Government to develop and release for public comment a National Environmental Standard on First Nations Consultation and Engagement that incorporates principles of free, prior and informed consent".

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will now deal with the amendment circulated by Senator David Pocock. As this amendment was not circulated within the required timeframe, it can only be considered by leave.

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

by leave—I move:

The amendment was un available at the time of publishing .

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We ask that paragraph (c) be put separately.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment on sheet 3563, as moved by Senator David Pocock, excluding paragraph (c), be agreed to.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will now put the question for paragraph (c) of the amendment on sheet 3563 as moved by Senator David Pocock. Senator Watt?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think there have been some discussions with Senator Pocock about this paragraph of the amendment. This paragraph of the amendment seeks to refer the bills to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee. Those bills have already been referred to the Senate environment and communications committee and, unless someone knows something different, that inquiry will continue. I don't think there is actually a need for this. I don't know whether Senator Pocock wants to pursue it.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't have any speakers. Senator Hanson-Young?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—The bills have not been reported, and won't be reported. The inquiry will continue. It's important that the inquiry continues, because we have a number of regulations that have already been released, the standards both on matters of environmental significance and, of course, on the offsets, and there will be further to come. I think it is important that this parliament scrutinise those standards, and so we want the inquiry to continue, which is why it will.

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

I seek leave to make a two-minute statement.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One minute.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One minute is granted.

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

Perfect. Thank you. This just exposes what a farce this process is today. There's the speakers list. We've got 20 senators who aren't getting a say on our biggest changes to environmental laws in decades. We've got senators who haven't even been able to get amendments drafted to this. I've put in 22 amendments for drafting; I've had six back, despite chasing up the government since Friday about resourcing for drafters. This just doesn't seem to cut it.

This is important. We should get it right, and yet here we are ramming it through in the space of hours rather than actually providing some debate, allowing senators who you may or may not agree with to have their say on environmental law reform and then having a committee stage where you can actually ask some clarifying questions to find out what the details are. We're still scrambling to understand what these changes actually mean. Some of them are incredibly welcome, but, as Senator Cash often reminds us, the devil is in the detail. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is the amendment as moved by Senator David Pocock on sheet 3563 part C be agreed to.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will now deal with the amendment circulated by Pauline Hanson's One Nation. As this amendment was not circulated within the required timeframe, it can only be considered by leave.

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

by leave—I move:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes that:

(i) the bills legislate National Environment Standards for Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) that are not defined,

(ii) these standards will be drafted after the passing of the bills,

(iii) the Senate is being asked to pass the bills without knowing what these standards are,

(iv) these standards must be provided with the bill so that the Senate knows what it is voting on,

(v) the federal government will also be able to steam roll state government processes, which is an affront to the Federation and a misuse of external powers,

(vi) under these bills areas of environmental importance are not protected as the developer can bring the development into 'net positive gain' by paying compensation for residual significant impacts into consolidated revenue (offsets) and the Australian environment is going to be for sale, and

(vii) the bill does not allow for the constriction of nuclear fuel fabrication plants, nuclear power plants, an enrichment plant or a processing facility which should be a matter for a separate bill, and

(b) calls on the Government to adjourn further debate on the bill until the first sitting day of March 2026".

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was wondering if we could put paragraph (b) separately.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question now is that the amendment on sheet 3562 as moved by Senator Roberts, with the exception of part (b), be agreed to.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that part (b) on sheet 3562, the amendment as moved by Senator Roberts, be agreed to.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question now is that these bills be read a second time.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(In division) Order! No-one should be moving. That includes advisers at the back of the room.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Advisers are actually entitled to take their seats. I'm sick of you picking on our advisers. You never pick on Labor advisers.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator McKim! Senator, you also were late sitting down; I called you about three times. Come to order. The count is going on.