Can Murray Watt fix Australia’s broken nature laws? First stop, Western Australia
- Written by The Conversation
New federal Environment Minister Murray Watt is in Western Australia this week to reboot nature law reform. Reform stalled in the Senate last term, following stiff opposition from the state’s Labor government and mining sector.
Watt has a big task ahead of him. Labor came into power in 2022 promising large-scale law reform to reverse Australia’s alarming rate of biodiversity loss.
But former environment minister Tanya Plibersek’s tenure ended with Australia’s nature laws in even worse shape than when she started. A last-minute amendment intended to protect salmon farming in Tasmania now limits the government’s power to reconsider certain environment approvals, even when an activity is harming the environment.
But a new leader for the Greens and the Liberals in this term of parliament means Labor’s important push for reform may have better prospects.
What went wrong in Labor’s last term?
When Plibersek announced Labor’s “Nature Positive Plan” in 2022, she committed to a massive overhaul of Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act).
The ambitious plan involved creating an independent national environment protection agency to enforce national environmental standards. Setting such standards was recommended by the 2020 Samuel Review of the EPBC Act. If legislated, the standards would shift decision-making under the act from being a highly discretionary process to one focused on outcomes for the environment.
In December 2022, Labor was talking up its plan to fix Australia’s ‘broken’ environmental laws. (ABC News)An early draft of the new legislation was presented to key stakeholders at closed-door consultation sessions. They included environmental non-government organisations, research groups and peak bodies for the minerals and development sectors. The draft did a pretty good job of capturing the components of the Nature Positive Plan.
However, Plibersek’s proposal was unpopular with some, including WA Premier Roger Cook and the mining lobby. Freedom of Information laws revealed major players in the mining sector wrote to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese asking him to intervene.
In the face of these difficulties, Plibersek pivoted. In April 2024, she announced nature reforms would instead be delivered in three phases. The first was the Nature Repair Market, which had already been legislated. The second was three bills to be introduced to parliament. The third phase would happen at some point in the future.
The bills sought to create two new bodies, Environment Protection Australia and Environment Information Australia, to inform decision-making. A third bill contained some improved compliance and enforcement mechanisms. However, the centrepiece of the initial reforms – the new environmental standards themselves – were missing. This sparked criticism, as the EPA would simply be enforcing the same ineffective laws that currently exist, and would not have project approval powers until some later amendments were passed.
Presumably, Plibersek switched to a three-stage process hoping the stage-two bills would pass through parliament with a minimum of dissent. This would leave the more contentious standards as a problem to be dealt with further down the track.
However, even the watered-down proposal was unpopular. The bill stalled in the Senate, criticised as both too weak and too strong by opposite sides of the political spectrum. And once again, the mining lobby intervened. Albanese signalled a willingness to remove approval powers from the EPA, leaving decisions with the minister.
Plibersek eventually managed to secure support from the Greens to get the bills through the Senate, but Albanese killed the deal at the eleventh hour in November last year. At the time, Labor’s prospects for the federal election were looking shaky, and Albanese saw the decision as a way to shore up support in WA.
What are the chances of success now?
The failure of the Nature Positive Reforms in Labor’s first term came down to one crucial factor: politics. With a fresh election win, a decisive majority, and a new environment minister, will things be different?
In his first interviews after winning the election, Albanese said he wants a federal environmental protection agency that “supports industry, but also supports sustainability”. This suggests there may be a green light for Watt to at least push for this aspect of the reforms to be revived.
What about the more ambitious parts of the reform, including National Environmental Standards? This is something Watt could potentially push for.
In an interview on Monday, Watt said both options are on the table: widespread reform, or the pared-down version Plibersek took to parliament. Watt said he wants “to approach the reforms in the spirit of Graeme Samuel’s recommendations”, which suggests he’s open to new standards.
Indeed, when new Opposition Leader Sussan Ley was environment minister, she tried to push through legislation incorporating similar standards. Watt could use this to garner crossbench support.
Watt also has a new Greens leader with whom to negotiate. Senator Larissa Waters, a former environmental lawyer, understands the complexity of the EPBC Act better than most.
With the Greens holding the balance of power in the Senate, Waters might push for any proposed laws to be strengthened – perhaps by bringing back the standards.
Watt said he will reach out to Ley and the Greens to see if they’re “prepared to work with us to get these reforms passed”.
Watch this space
At this stage, Watt is resisting pressure to rule out giving a future EPA the power to approve major resources projects. Everything is still up for discussion.
Ahead of Tuesday’s meeting, Cook said he would push Watt to consult widely before making any decisions and avoid duplicating existing state laws.
Watt says his job now is to listen, before finding a way forward. But “the very biggest priority is to pass these reforms”, this term, whatever it takes.
