Critical negotiations underway for Australia's environmental future
Australia's landmark environmental reforms face an uncertain future as Environment Minister Murray Watt engages in intensive negotiations with both the Coalition and Greens parties. With parliament scheduled to rise for the year on Thursday night, the Labor government is making desperate attempts to secure support for its overhaul of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.
Dual negotiation strategy raises concerns
On Tuesday morning, Minister Watt presented separate sets of amendments to the Coalition and Greens, seeking to address their conflicting concerns about the proposed legislation. This dual approach has drawn criticism from opposition figures and environmental groups alike.
The Climate Council chief executive, Amanda McKenzie, expressed dismay at the government's approach, describing the treatment of these long-awaited reforms as "like a coin toss". She questioned whether the government prioritised environmental protection or political manoeuvring.
Key concessions to the Greens
In his efforts to secure Greens support, Watt has offered several significant concessions addressing concerns about fossil fuel project fast-tracking. The government has agreed to restrict the new "streamline assessment" process to limit fossil fuel projects and will exclude coal and gas developments from special "national interest" exemptions.
Additionally, Labor has reversed its controversial decision to hand the "water trigger" back to state governments, ensuring the Commonwealth minister retains approval powers even under devolution agreements.
However, the Greens remain unsatisfied, with environment spokesperson Sarah Hanson-Young criticising the three-year timeframe for subjecting native forest logging to national environmental standards as "three years too long".
Coalition demands and industry concerns
The opposition has received its own set of concessions, including a 14-day time limit on stop-work orders and clarification that maximum fines - $1.6 million for individuals and $825 million for businesses - would apply only in the most serious cases.
Notably absent from the Coalition offer were changes to the "unacceptable impact" definition, which opposition environment spokesperson Angie Bell described as a "deal-breaker" for the Coalition. Industry groups argue this provision sets too low a threshold for project rejection, while legal and scientific experts fear it won't adequately protect threatened species.
Scientific committee raises alarm
Adding pressure to the negotiations, the government's own Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) warned that the legislation fails to achieve the right balance for meeting the goal of no new extinctions. In a submission to the Senate inquiry, the committee expressed concern that increased ministerial discretion "could undermine" wildlife protection efforts.
Opposition Leader Sussan Ley criticised Watt's simultaneous negotiations with both sides, accusing him of seeking a "political fix" rather than genuine legislative reform. She highlighted the radically different amendments being offered to each party as evidence of this approach.
Race against parliamentary clock
With the parliamentary year ending on Thursday, Minister Watt remains open to further concessions, including potential reworking of both the "unacceptable impact" definition and the proposed "net gain" test requiring developers to deliver environmental benefits.
The outcome of these last-minute negotiations will determine whether Australia's most significant environmental law reforms in decades will proceed or face further delay, leaving the fate of the nation's biodiversity protection hanging in the balance.
