Labor’s attempts to woo Greens and Coalition on nature laws revealed amid criticism of ‘coin toss’
The fate of Labor’s nature laws hangs in the balance after new concessions to the Coalition and the Greens failed to immediately convince either party to support them.But Labor is continuing talks with both sides and could be prepared to give more ground, as it desperately tries to land a deal to overhaul the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act before parliament rises for the year on Thursday night.The intensifying negotiations comes as the government’s own advisory body on threatened species - the threatened species scientific committee (TSSC) - warned the legislation had not got the balance right to meet the goal of no new extinctions.In a submission to a Senate inquiry examining the bills, the committee warned the bills appeared to increase the minister’s discretion to decide when environmental protections would be upheld and this “could undermine” efforts to protect wildlife and avoid extinctions.The environment minister, Murray Watt, presented separate amendments to the Coalition and the Greens on Tuesday morning as he continues to pursue potential deals with both.The Climate Council chief executive, Amanda McKenzie, criticised the government for treating the long-awaited reforms “like a coin toss”.“Do they really care about protecting Australians and our environment from climate change, or is it all just politics?” she said.Under his offer to the Greens, Watt has offered several changes to address the party’s concern that coal and gas projects could be fast-tracked under the revamped EPBC Act.In one concession, the government is prepared to limit a new “streamline assessment” process to restrict fossil fuel projects.Labor is also prepared to reverse a controversial decision to hand the so-called “water trigger” back to the states, and ensure the commonwealth minister retains the ability to approve projects even under agreements that devolve decision-making powers to the states.As revealed on Saturday, coal and gas projects would also be excluded from a special “national interest” exemption if the Greens agree to support the legislation.After discussing the concessions at a party-room meeting on Tuesday morning, Guardian Australia understands the Greens are still not satisfied with the laws.The list of written amendments did not include the government’s offer to subject native forest logging to national environmental standards within three years, as negotiations continue on that provision.The Greens environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, on Wednesday said the three-year timeframe was “three years too long”.Watt presented a separate set of concessions to the Coalition on Tuesday morning, which included imposing a 14-day time limit on “stop-work orders” and clarification that the maximum fines for breaches of nature laws – which are set at $1.6m for individuals and $825m for businesses – would only apply in the “most serious and egregious cases”.The latest offer did not include changes to “unacceptable impact” – a new definition that would, if met, result in an application being immediately refused.Clarifying that definition has been a key demand for the Coalition and industry groups, who claim it would set too low a bar to kibosh a project.Legal and scientific experts have the opposite view, fearing the provision won’t properly protect the most at-risk species and ecosystems.Liberal sources confirmed the shadow environment minister, Angie Bell, told the Coalition’s joint party-room meeting on Tuesday morning that failing to revise the definition was a “deal-breaker” for the opposition.Guardian Australia understands Watt remains open to reworking the “unacceptable impact” definition as well as the proposed new “net gain” test, which is supposed to force developers to make up for damage and deliver an overall benefit for the environment.The opposition leader, Sussan Ley, said the concessions offered on Tuesday morning were “totally insufficient”.Ley said the fact that Watt was simultaneously negotiating with the Coalition and the Greens showed that his main motivation was a “political fix”.“Right now, we have an environment minister with two sets of amendments, one in each hand. They’re radically different, these amendments,” she said.“He’s saying to the Coalition, make a deal with me. He’s saying to the Greens, make a deal with me. What does that tell you? What that tells you is this is a minister in search of a political fix, not in search of the legislative reform we need to bring investment, to back-in communities and jobs and to build the energy future that this country deserves.”
Labor is continuing talks with both sides and could be prepared to give more groundFollow our Australia news live blog for latest updatesGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastThe fate of Labor’s nature laws hangs in the balance after new concessions to the Coalition and the Greens failed to immediately convince either party to support them.But Labor is continuing talks with both sides and could be prepared to give more ground, as it desperately tries to land a deal to overhaul the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act before parliament rises for the year on Thursday night. Continue reading...
The fate of Labor’s nature laws hangs in the balance after new concessions to the Coalition and the Greens failed to immediately convince either party to support them.
But Labor is continuing talks with both sides and could be prepared to give more ground, as it desperately tries to land a deal to overhaul the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act before parliament rises for the year on Thursday night.
The intensifying negotiations comes as the government’s own advisory body on threatened species - the threatened species scientific committee (TSSC) - warned the legislation had not got the balance right to meet the goal of no new extinctions.
In a submission to a Senate inquiry examining the bills, the committee warned the bills appeared to increase the minister’s discretion to decide when environmental protections would be upheld and this “could undermine” efforts to protect wildlife and avoid extinctions.
The environment minister, Murray Watt, presented separate amendments to the Coalition and the Greens on Tuesday morning as he continues to pursue potential deals with both.
The Climate Council chief executive, Amanda McKenzie, criticised the government for treating the long-awaited reforms “like a coin toss”.
“Do they really care about protecting Australians and our environment from climate change, or is it all just politics?” she said.
Under his offer to the Greens, Watt has offered several changes to address the party’s concern that coal and gas projects could be fast-tracked under the revamped EPBC Act.
In one concession, the government is prepared to limit a new “streamline assessment” process to restrict fossil fuel projects.
Labor is also prepared to reverse a controversial decision to hand the so-called “water trigger” back to the states, and ensure the commonwealth minister retains the ability to approve projects even under agreements that devolve decision-making powers to the states.
As revealed on Saturday, coal and gas projects would also be excluded from a special “national interest” exemption if the Greens agree to support the legislation.
After discussing the concessions at a party-room meeting on Tuesday morning, Guardian Australia understands the Greens are still not satisfied with the laws.
The list of written amendments did not include the government’s offer to subject native forest logging to national environmental standards within three years, as negotiations continue on that provision.
The Greens environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, on Wednesday said the three-year timeframe was “three years too long”.
Watt presented a separate set of concessions to the Coalition on Tuesday morning, which included imposing a 14-day time limit on “stop-work orders” and clarification that the maximum fines for breaches of nature laws – which are set at $1.6m for individuals and $825m for businesses – would only apply in the “most serious and egregious cases”.
The latest offer did not include changes to “unacceptable impact” – a new definition that would, if met, result in an application being immediately refused.
Clarifying that definition has been a key demand for the Coalition and industry groups, who claim it would set too low a bar to kibosh a project.
Legal and scientific experts have the opposite view, fearing the provision won’t properly protect the most at-risk species and ecosystems.
Liberal sources confirmed the shadow environment minister, Angie Bell, told the Coalition’s joint party-room meeting on Tuesday morning that failing to revise the definition was a “deal-breaker” for the opposition.
Guardian Australia understands Watt remains open to reworking the “unacceptable impact” definition as well as the proposed new “net gain” test, which is supposed to force developers to make up for damage and deliver an overall benefit for the environment.
The opposition leader, Sussan Ley, said the concessions offered on Tuesday morning were “totally insufficient”.
Ley said the fact that Watt was simultaneously negotiating with the Coalition and the Greens showed that his main motivation was a “political fix”.
“Right now, we have an environment minister with two sets of amendments, one in each hand. They’re radically different, these amendments,” she said.
“He’s saying to the Coalition, make a deal with me. He’s saying to the Greens, make a deal with me. What does that tell you? What that tells you is this is a minister in search of a political fix, not in search of the legislative reform we need to bring investment, to back-in communities and jobs and to build the energy future that this country deserves.”