Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Labor’s offshore gas bill labelled ‘a betrayal’ by First Nations activists

News Feed
Monday, March 25, 2024

The Albanese government is facing major blowback over changes to its offshore gas bill, which the crossbench and environment groups have labelled “window dressing” that fails to prevent new rules watering down First Nations consultation.Seeking to clear the decks before Easter, the government is expected to reveal tweaks to its proposed vehicle efficiency standards this week. And on Monday Labor introduced amendments to add safeguards to the offshore gas bill after widespread concerns, including from within it own ranks.But the government will probably need Coalition support to pass its offshore petroleum and greenhouse gas storage bill, as the Greens leader, Adam Bandt, told parliament Labor were “climate con artists” prepared to “work with the climate deniers in the Coalition to fast-track offshore gas”.The OPGGS bill states that approved offshore gas projects are taken to be compliant with environmental laws even if they wouldn’t otherwise be.The bill has been panned by environmental groups, who are concerned it is an override designed to shelter offshore gas from imminent higher environmental standards, and First Nations groups, who warn it will hand power to the resources minister to rewrite regulations on consultation.On Monday the resources minister, Madeleine King, introduced changes requiring the environment minister to agree that changes to consultation are consistent with ecological sustainability development principles.The amendments include a sunset clause so that the override of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is phased out after 12 months.Kirsty Howey, the executive director of Environment Centre NT, said the requirement for new regulations to be consistent with ESD principles was “practically meaningless”.Louise Morris, oil and gas campaign manager at the Australian Marine Conservation Society, said ESD “is a principle, not something that has any legally enforceable powers or structures”.Environment groups have seized on a provision that, even if the resources minister fails to consult the environment minister, the validity of new regulations “will not be affected”, according to the explanatory memorandum. Howey said this meant the new safeguard was “technically pointless [and] nothing more than window dressing”.The government rejects the claim, arguing that if the ministers are at odds projects will need approval both from National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority and under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.A group of First Nations advocates, including Raelene Cooper, Josie Alec and Bruce Pascoe, have written to the Albanese government warning that the bill is a “betrayal”.The group, who include First Nations leaders with responsibilities for sea country, will travel to Canberra on Tuesday to lobby against the bill, which they said was “intended to remove our consultation rights, rights to be heard over developments on our sea Country that affect our cultural heritage and songlines”.On Monday Bandt attempted to suspend standing orders in the House of Representatives, accusing Labor of being “more pro gas than Scott Morrison”.The Greens have offered the government support to pass vehicle efficiency standards, in return for Labor dropping the controversial provisions of the OPGGS bill.Guardian Australia understands the government has confidentially briefed stakeholders on vehicle emissions standards and is preparing to introduce minor amendments focused on light commercial vehicles and utes to bring them in line with US changes.skip past newsletter promotionOur Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionThe climate change minister, Chris Bowen, said: “Obviously the changes being made to the US standards announced this week are of interest to us, and are one of the things we’re considering as we finalise this policy.”Auto industry leaders, including a group who attended a government briefing on the new vehicle efficiency standard last week, have called for tweaks including adding more credits into the scheme, as there are in the US version. An industry source who spoke to Guardian Australia was optimistic the government would ease its proposed NVES in line with these concerns.“Supercredits” for the cleanest of vehicles, “off-cycle credits” for specific green technologies used in cars that are not measured in tailpipe emissions, and “air conditioning credits” for using greener refrigerants, only feature in the least ambitious NVES model being considered but not the government’s preferred “option B”.Earlier on Monday Bandt fired a warning shot on both gas and emissions standards, warning that “Labor has to choose its dancing partner on climate change”In question time King accused the Greens of wanting “to continue a lawyers’ picnic of approvals” going through courts, which she said delayed traditional owners having their say. King insists the bill itself does not change the process of assessments or water down environmental standards.The Labor Environment Action Network, which had lobbied against elements of the original bill, said the amendments were a “workable resolution of a situation that threatened a huge own goal”.The independent MPs Zali Steggall, Zoe Daniel, and Sophie Scamps all criticised the changes as inadequate to fix the original bill.The independent senator David Pocock said: “The Albanese government legislating a backdoor approvals process for offshore gas stinks.”Annika Reynolds, national climate adviser of the Australian Conservation Foundation, said the ACF was still “deeply concerned” that the amendments did not address its “fundamental concerns”.

Leaders with responsibilities for sea country on way to Canberra to lobby against legislationFollow our Australia news live blog for latest updatesGet our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcastThe Albanese government is facing major blowback over changes to its offshore gas bill, which the crossbench and environment groups have labelled “window dressing” that fails to prevent new rules watering down First Nations consultation.Seeking to clear the decks before Easter, the government is expected to reveal tweaks to its proposed vehicle efficiency standards this week. And on Monday Labor introduced amendments to add safeguards to the offshore gas bill after widespread concerns, including from within it own ranks.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup Continue reading...

The Albanese government is facing major blowback over changes to its offshore gas bill, which the crossbench and environment groups have labelled “window dressing” that fails to prevent new rules watering down First Nations consultation.

Seeking to clear the decks before Easter, the government is expected to reveal tweaks to its proposed vehicle efficiency standards this week. And on Monday Labor introduced amendments to add safeguards to the offshore gas bill after widespread concerns, including from within it own ranks.

But the government will probably need Coalition support to pass its offshore petroleum and greenhouse gas storage bill, as the Greens leader, Adam Bandt, told parliament Labor were “climate con artists” prepared to “work with the climate deniers in the Coalition to fast-track offshore gas”.

The OPGGS bill states that approved offshore gas projects are taken to be compliant with environmental laws even if they wouldn’t otherwise be.

The bill has been panned by environmental groups, who are concerned it is an override designed to shelter offshore gas from imminent higher environmental standards, and First Nations groups, who warn it will hand power to the resources minister to rewrite regulations on consultation.

On Monday the resources minister, Madeleine King, introduced changes requiring the environment minister to agree that changes to consultation are consistent with ecological sustainability development principles.

The amendments include a sunset clause so that the override of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is phased out after 12 months.

Kirsty Howey, the executive director of Environment Centre NT, said the requirement for new regulations to be consistent with ESD principles was “practically meaningless”.

Louise Morris, oil and gas campaign manager at the Australian Marine Conservation Society, said ESD “is a principle, not something that has any legally enforceable powers or structures”.

Environment groups have seized on a provision that, even if the resources minister fails to consult the environment minister, the validity of new regulations “will not be affected”, according to the explanatory memorandum. Howey said this meant the new safeguard was “technically pointless [and] nothing more than window dressing”.

The government rejects the claim, arguing that if the ministers are at odds projects will need approval both from National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority and under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

A group of First Nations advocates, including Raelene Cooper, Josie Alec and Bruce Pascoe, have written to the Albanese government warning that the bill is a “betrayal”.

The group, who include First Nations leaders with responsibilities for sea country, will travel to Canberra on Tuesday to lobby against the bill, which they said was “intended to remove our consultation rights, rights to be heard over developments on our sea Country that affect our cultural heritage and songlines”.

On Monday Bandt attempted to suspend standing orders in the House of Representatives, accusing Labor of being “more pro gas than Scott Morrison”.

The Greens have offered the government support to pass vehicle efficiency standards, in return for Labor dropping the controversial provisions of the OPGGS bill.

Guardian Australia understands the government has confidentially briefed stakeholders on vehicle emissions standards and is preparing to introduce minor amendments focused on light commercial vehicles and utes to bring them in line with US changes.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

The climate change minister, Chris Bowen, said: “Obviously the changes being made to the US standards announced this week are of interest to us, and are one of the things we’re considering as we finalise this policy.”

Auto industry leaders, including a group who attended a government briefing on the new vehicle efficiency standard last week, have called for tweaks including adding more credits into the scheme, as there are in the US version. An industry source who spoke to Guardian Australia was optimistic the government would ease its proposed NVES in line with these concerns.

“Supercredits” for the cleanest of vehicles, “off-cycle credits” for specific green technologies used in cars that are not measured in tailpipe emissions, and “air conditioning credits” for using greener refrigerants, only feature in the least ambitious NVES model being considered but not the government’s preferred “option B”.

Earlier on Monday Bandt fired a warning shot on both gas and emissions standards, warning that “Labor has to choose its dancing partner on climate change”

In question time King accused the Greens of wanting “to continue a lawyers’ picnic of approvals” going through courts, which she said delayed traditional owners having their say. King insists the bill itself does not change the process of assessments or water down environmental standards.

The Labor Environment Action Network, which had lobbied against elements of the original bill, said the amendments were a “workable resolution of a situation that threatened a huge own goal”.

The independent MPs Zali Steggall, Zoe Daniel, and Sophie Scamps all criticised the changes as inadequate to fix the original bill.

The independent senator David Pocock said: “The Albanese government legislating a backdoor approvals process for offshore gas stinks.”

Annika Reynolds, national climate adviser of the Australian Conservation Foundation, said the ACF was still “deeply concerned” that the amendments did not address its “fundamental concerns”.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Trump administration puts Fema workers back on administrative leave

Fourteen workers who signed a petition that warned cuts put the US at risk were initially suspended in AugustThe Trump administration is reversing the reinstatement of workers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) who were placed on administrative leave after writing an open letter of dissent.Fema in August suspended 14 workers who signed a petition warning that cuts to the agency were putting the nation at risk of repeating the mistakes made during the botched response to 2005’s Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Continue reading...

The Trump administration is reversing the reinstatement of workers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) who were placed on administrative leave after writing an open letter of dissent.Fema in August suspended 14 workers who signed a petition warning that cuts to the agency were putting the nation at risk of repeating the mistakes made during the botched response to 2005’s Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.Last Wednesday, those 14 workers received notices that they were being reinstated at the beginning of this week. But within hours, Trump officials moved to re-suspend the staffers, after CNN broke the news of their return to work.“When they went in at 8.30 in the morning, the employees’ email accounts were restored and they were given new entry cards,” said David Seide, a lawyer at the non-profit group Government Accountability Project, which helped the Fema employees file complaints challenging their suspensions. “But around midday … they stopped working and then after that, they began to receive notices saying: ‘You’re back on administrative leave again.’”Jeremy Edwards, former deputy of public affairs at Fema who signed the August petition, said the reversal “represents the type of dysfunction and inefficiency that has plagued Fema under this administration”.“Not only have these staffers not been provided any legal justification for being placed on administrative leave, they are being paid their full-time, taxpayer-funded salaries to sit at home and do nothing, when all they want to do is their jobs,” Edwards said.The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees Fema, confirmed the reversal. “CNN reporting revealed that 14 Fema employees previously placed on leave for misconduct were wrongly and without authorization reinstated by bureaucrats acting outside of their authority,” a department spokesperson said.“Once alerted, the unauthorized reinstatement was swiftly corrected by senior leadership. The 14 employees who signed the Katrina declaration have been returned to administrative leave,” the spokesperson continued. “This Administration will not tolerate rogue conduct, unauthorized actions or entrenched bureaucrats resisting change. Federal employees are expected to follow lawful direction, uphold agency standards and serve the American people.”Seide called the reversal “unbelievable” and “appalling”.“I’ve never seen this happen in government operations like this, ever, and I’ve been around 40 years,” Seide said.He said the employees’ suspension was illegal, violating protections for government employees and particularly for whistleblowers.“You can’t retaliate people just because they signed a petition,” he said.Fema’s decision to reinstate the employees seemed to reinforce that argument. “Although the [Report of Investigation] substantiated the employee’s involvement with the so-called Katrina Declaration, FEMA’s legal counsel has advised that the employee’s actions are protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act (5 USC 2302(b)(8)) and the First Amendment of the US Constitution,” said a Fema email to the 14 staffers.“Political appointees reversed that,” said Seide.Called the Katrina declaration, the August petition from workers criticized the Trump administration’s sweeping overhaul of Fema and stated a desire to shift the responsibility for disaster response and preparedness to states. Sent days before the 20th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, it was signed by more than 180 current and former Fema employees, some of whom remained anonymous.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOne day after the missive was sent, the 14 employees who used their names were informed that they were being placed on indefinite leave, Seide said. One of those 14 workers was then fired in mid-November, but she successfully challenged her termination, he said.Fema staffers coordinated the petition with Stand Up for Science, a non-profit protesting the Trump administration’s attacks on federally funded science research. The group also helped organize a separate June letter from Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) workers, which accused the Trump administration of violating the agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment. After receiving that petition, the EPA placed 139 employees on leave, then terminated seven of them.Before it was walked back, Seide’s group celebrated Fema’s decision to reinstate the 14 employees placed on leave, saying it could help build the case for EPA workers to similarly be reinstated.“It would have seemed that reasonable judgments were made and should be followed,” said Seide. “But now I think the message is just the opposite.”The Trump administration has terminated, suspended and pushed out thousands of federal employees since re-entering the White House in January. Fema has been the subject of particularly scrutiny, with the president even floating plans to scrap the agency altogether.A review council set up by Trump is soon expected to issue recommended changes to the agency.

Wood-burning stoves to face partial ban in Labour’s updated environment plan

Exclusive: Pollution targets set out alongside nature recovery projects to allay concerns over housebuildingWood-burning stoves are likely to face tighter restrictions in England under new pollution targets set as part of an updated environmental plan released by ministers on Monday.Speaking to the Guardian before the publication of the updated environmental improvement plan (EIP), the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds, said it would boost nature recovery in a number of areas, replacing an EIP under the last government she said was “not credible”. Continue reading...

Wood-burning stoves are likely to face tighter restrictions in England under new pollution targets set as part of an updated environmental plan released by ministers on Monday.Speaking to the Guardian before the publication of the updated environmental improvement plan (EIP), the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds, said it would boost nature recovery in a number of areas, replacing an EIP under the last government she said was “not credible”.Reynolds said efforts to restore nature would now take place on “a strategic level” rather than a previously piecemeal approach, arguing this meant the government’s push to build housing and infrastructure could still come with a net gain in habitats.One element of the new EIP will see the targets for concentrations of PM2.5 particulate pollutants tightened to match current EU targets, something that was not part of the previous plan, published in 2023 under the Conservatives.According to sources in Reynolds’ department, this will involve a consultation on possible measures to reduce PM2.5 pollution, including those from wood-burning stoves and fireplaces.This could involve pollution limits being tightened in smoke control areas, which already limit what fuels can be burned: for example, setting out that wood can be burned only in approved types of stoves or burners, not in fireplaces.It could mean an effective ban on older appliances and that, in some places, it will not be possible to use a wood-burning stove at all.The current annual PM2.5 limit is 25ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic metre), with an aim to meet 10ug/m3 by 2040. The EU’s standards are stricter, with a new directive passed last year asking member states to meet 10ug/m3 by 2030.The World Health Organization recommends an annual limit of 5ug/m3. It is understood the EIP will bring the UK’s standards in line with the EU, with an aim to eventually meet WHO targets.Exposure to PM2.5s, which bury deep into the lungs, is linked to numerous health conditions including asthma, lung disease, heart disease, cancer and strokes. Domestic combustion accounted for 20% of PM2.5 emissions in 2023 and has been found to produce more pollution than traffic.Elsewhere in the EIP, Reynolds will set out that £500m of existing departmental money is to be allocated to landscape recovery projects, larger-scale attempts to restore landscapes and ecosystems, often working with farmers and other landowners.This will include a specific target to restore or create 250,000 hectares (618,000 acres) of wildlife-rich habitats by 2030.The EIP is required under the Environment Act, with the intention that it should put into action a more general commitment to improve the environment within a generation.For the first time, as part of the new EIP, the government will publish detailed Environment Act target delivery plans, which set out how actions will contribute to its aims and help to measure progress.Such moves, Reynolds argued, should mitigate fears about nature depletion owing to housebuilding and other projects, after fears were raised the government’s planning and infrastructure bill could reduce protections and see green spaces lost.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“What we’re talking about is restoring nature, not house by house, but at a more strategic level. We can be both pro-development and pro-home-ownership and pro-nature,” she said.“The last EIP, under the previous Tory administration, wasn’t credible. I’m confident that our EIP is credible, because it’s got these delivery plans built in. You can’t just set the targets. You’ve got to explain how you’re going to achieve those targets. And that’s exactly what we’ve done.”The new EIP is also expected to include a commitment from the previous plan for every household to be within a 15-minute walk of green space or a waterway.Other measures to be announced on Monday include a new plan for “forever chemicals”, to reduce the amount of PFAS in the environment, and a crackdown on illegal waste dumping.Ruth Chambers, from the Green Alliance thinktank, said the new EIP was “an important milestone and an opportunity to harness the government’s collective clout to deliver better for nature”.She said: “It must now be converted swiftly into the sustained action needed to restore nature, clean up our rivers and air, create a circular economy and help people reconnect with the natural world.”

Simpler regulations spearhead UK taskforce plan to get new nuclear reactors built

Panel’s final report outlines planning and environmental changes to get plants built faster and cheaperA government taskforce has finalised its plans to speed up and lower the cost of rolling out a new generation of nuclear reactors by streamlining UK regulation.The nuclear regulatory taskforce was set up by the prime minister, Keir Starmer, in February after the government promised to rip up “archaic rules” and slash regulations to “get Britain building”. Continue reading...

A government taskforce has finalised its plans to speed up and lower the cost of rolling out a new generation of nuclear reactors by streamlining UK regulation.The nuclear regulatory taskforce was set up by the prime minister, Keir Starmer, in February after the government promised to rip up “archaic rules” and slash regulations to “get Britain building”.It published its interim report in August, which led a coalition of 25 civil society groups to warn of the dangers of cutting nuclear safety regulations. It said the proposals lacked “credibility and rigour”.The taskforce was led by John Fingleton, the former head of the Office of Fair Trading. He said of the final report: “Our solutions are radical, but necessary. By simplifying regulation, we can maintain or enhance safety standards while finally delivering nuclear capacity safely, quickly, and affordably.”The recommendations include restructuring the nuclear industry’s regulatory bodies to create a single commission for nuclear regulation, and changing environmental and planning regimes “to enhance nature and deliver projects quicker”.Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, said the new rules would form a crucial part of delivering the changes needed to drive new nuclear “in a safe, affordable way”.The report was welcomed by Tom Greatrex, the chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association. He said the report represented an “unprecedented opportunity to make nuclear regulation more coherent, transparent and efficient” that could make projects “faster and less expensive to deliver”.“Too often, costly and bureaucratic processes have stood in the way of our energy security, the fight against the climate crisis, and protecting the natural environment, to which nuclear is essential,” he added.Sam Richards, the chief executive of pro-nuclear campaign group Britain Remade, said it could mark “a watershed moment for cutting the cost of new nuclear in Britain”.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Business TodayGet set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morningPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“The findings of the taskforce lay bare the litany of regulations that make Britain the most expensive place in the world to build nuclear power stations,” Richards said.“At a time when Britain’s electricity bills are among the world’s highest, our regulatory system forced EDF to spend nearly £280,000 per fish protected. This is indefensible. These types of modifications have added years in construction and billions in costs; costs that ultimately get passed on to consumers in higher bills.”Fingleton added: “This is a once in a generation opportunity. The problems are systemic, rooted in unnecessary complexity, and a mindset that favours process over outcome.”

Labor pledges to pass long-awaited nature laws this week as Greens demand more concessions

The government has offered to make changes to the bill to both the Greens and the Liberals hoping to reach a deal on legislation that can pass the SenateGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastYears of debate about environmental law reform have come down to a tense standoff in the final sitting week of federal parliament for the year, with Labor claiming it can do a deal that will pass the Senate by Thursday.The government is still pushing to pass its major changes, despite not yet having reached an agreement with either the Greens or the Coalition. Continue reading...

Years of debate about environmental law reform have come down to a tense standoff in the final sitting week of federal parliament for the year, with Labor claiming it can do a deal that will pass the Senate by Thursday.The government is still pushing to pass its major changes, despite not yet having reached an agreement with either the Greens or the Coalition.The Greens appear to be inching closer to a deal on updating the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, with the Coalition still refusing to back the changes. But the Minerals Council has joined other peak business groups in urging the Liberals and Nationals to back the changes, with environment minister, Murray Watt, pledging to make a deal with whoever will come to the table first.Sign up: AU Breaking News email“We will pass these reforms this week with whichever of the Coalition and the Greens is willing to work with us to deliver that balanced package,” Watt said on Sunday.Greens and Labor sources said they expected the two parties could come to an agreement later in the week, ahead of parliament rising on Thursday afternoon, but the Greens environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, wanted more limits on fossil fuel developments before signing up.“We also want to make sure we’re not seeing coal and gas fossil fuel projects accelerated,” she told the ABC’s Insiders.“I think it’s crazy in 2025, you’re talking about a new set of environment laws and it doesn’t even consider the climate pollution that a coal or gas mine makes?”Despite the 1,500 pages of environmental law reform still being examined by a Senate committee, due to report in March 2026, the government says it wants to ram the bill through parliament by year’s end because it would improve approvals and build times for major parts of its agenda including housing construction, critical minerals sites and green energy projects.But the Greens and Coalition say they are not convinced of the bill’s urgency. Despite not ruling out a deal later in the week, Greens sources said they didn’t see the need for rushing, noting the ongoing Senate inquiry, and their concerns that the bill could help fast-track approval of coal and gas projects.Labor, in turn, is pressuring the Greens. Watt held a press conference on Sunday in the Brisbane electorate of Ryan, the last Greens-held seat in the country after the party lost three seats at the May election.“We saw at the last federal election that the Greens party paid a very big political price for being seen by the Australian people to be blocking progress on important things like housing and environmental law reform,” Watt said.“There’s a real opportunity for the Greens this week to demonstrate that they have heard the message from the Australian people, that they’re not going to keep blocking progress, that they’re not going to make the perfect the enemy of the good.”The Liberal party’s finance spokesperson, James Paterson, said on Sunday: “where it stands today, we certainly couldn’t support the proposed legislation.”He claimed the laws were “deficient” and that the opposition would stick to its earlier demands, daring the government to “do a deal with the Greens and they will wear the consequences of that.”skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionWatt has offered concessions to both Greens and Coalition demands.To the Coalition, Watt has conceded amendments to tighten rules around the National Environmental Protection Agency’s powers, while for the Greens, Labor has offered limits on the “national interest” test being used to approve fossil fuel projects.On Sunday, Watt extended another olive branch to the Greens, offering to force native forestry projects to comply with national environmental standards within three years. But Hanson-Young wanted more for their support, saying a three-year phase-in was not fast enough.“It’s 2025 and it’s time we ended native forest logging,” she said.Corporate groups like the Business Council of Australia have urged the Coalition to back the EPBC changes. The Minerals Council CEO, Tania Constable, added her voice on Sunday, calling for a “sensible compromise by both sides”.“This will allow our industry to deliver investment, jobs and regional benefits faster,” she said.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.