Australian Greens' Additional Comments

1.1During negotiations to pass this suite of bills, while Labor wanted to continue playing to industry with carve outs and loopholes, the Greens secured critical wins to ensure that these reforms were better than the status quo and actually worked to protect nature. These amendments ensure environment laws will better protect native forests, close loopholes for land clearing and stop coal and gas being fast-tracked.

1.2However, there is still much more work to do to protect nature, and the Greens urge the Government to stand up to industry and progress strong national environmental standards that prioritise nature protection and restoration.

1.3Strong national environmental standards are crucial to halting the rapid decline of Australia’s wildlife and ecosystems. The reality is that when it comes to the detail of these standards, as with the bills, there remain differing views from environmental experts and industry. Given that the whole point of environmental protection reform is to protect nature from destructive industries, it is unlikely these differences will be resolved.

1.4Instead, it is time for the Government to be clear about which side they are on—they cannot and will not make everyone happy. Attempting to do so will only lead to standards that neither protect nature nor provide any clarity to industry, as was reflected in evidence related to the draft standards. Nature cannot wait any longer.

1.5Environmental and legal experts were clear that as they stand, these standards lack the specificity and clarity to actually increase environmental protection on the ground. Rather than focusing on process, the standards must include clear, legally enforceable outcomes so that we can measure the impact of the standards on protection and restoration of nature. This was a clear recommendation from the Samuel Review, which also provided important guidance on the inclusion and consideration of cumulative impacts as part of the Matters of National Environmental Significance under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity ConservationAct 1999 (MNES) standard. To ensure clarity for all interested parties, the use of discretionary language and undefined terms that muddy the waters of decision-making must be removed.

1.6The purpose of the national environmental standards is that they are applied to all relevant environmental decisions under the Act, however the Greens have concerns that the Government is still seeking to water down requirements for certain industries.

1.7Since its introduction, the water trigger has been a key protection against the devastating impacts of fossil fuel extraction on water resources. State and territory governments have shown time and time again that they will sacrifice rural communities and country to attract coal and gas investment, making the water trigger an important roadblock. The Government wanted to delegate its responsibility to protect precious water resources to state and territories, but the Greens amendments have kept the water trigger in federal hands.

1.8However, the draft standard for MNES tries to significantly narrow the scope of the trigger by restricting its application to water resources deemed “necessary to support sites of regional and national ecological significance” (terms that are not defined) and “critical” human water needs.The Government cannot undermine the water trigger by stealth. The MNES standard must be amended so that the water trigger will apply to any coal or gas project that will significantly impact water resources, including the ecosystem services they provide.

1.9We note that there are significant state decisions pending on key fracking projects in Western Australia (WA) and the Northern Territory (NT), and we urge the Environment Minister to use his powers to safeguard critical water resources for the future of our communities and ecosystems. Advice from the Independent Expert Scientific Committee (IESC)[1] in relation to the Valhalla fracking proposal in the Kimberley was clear that drilling risks significant impacts on water that have not been properly considered by the proponent, including likely contamination of local aquifers with wastewater and chemicals. This is only an appraisal project at this stage, and the impacts of a larger-scale project would be much more severe. The advice is clear, and we call upon the Minister to listen to the scientists and reject this proposal. Similarly, in the NT, studies are still being finalised on the Hot Springs Valley in close proximity to Santos’ Tanumbirini fracking proposal. The extent and scale of fracking impacts on the hot springs and MNES are still unknown and requires federal assessment. We urge the Minister to call in this project as a matter of urgency.

1.10If the aim of nature protection bills is indeed protecting nature, it is critical that the standards work to prevent decisions that will harm nature. The regulations must specify from the outset that all standards apply to relevant decisions under the Act. The Greens urge that all the standards be progressed as a matter of urgency, in order to be finalised and applied as intended before decisions are taken in regards to streamlined assessment pathways, national interest proposals, bilateral agreements, strategic assessments or regional planning instruments.

1.11There are a number of examples which highlight the importance of the above, for example the Government’s recent decision to grant Alcoa a national interest exemption to continue mining bauxite in WA’s precious jarrah forests while a strategic assessment is undertaken. The Greens are extremely concerned about the dangerous precedent this decision sets for the use of the national interest exemption, particularly considering the US company’s long history of breaking Australia’s environmental law without consequence. As such, we echo the recommendations of the majority report calling for clear principles and guidance to guide the national interest exemption and approval pathway, and highlight the importance of ensuring that strong national environmental standards are applied to decision-making on Alcoa’s strategic assessment in a way that prioritises nature protection.

1.12Further examples include the use of the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environment Management Authority (NOPSEMA) assessment pathway and streamlined assessment pathway. Environment groups are concerned that, without clear guidelines, the new streamlined assessment pathway could be used to allow high-impact projects to proceed without comprehensive environmental assessment or public consultation. The regulations should provide clear guidance on when this pathway can be used - where the impacts are clear and manageable, and where there is unlikely to be significant public opposition. Further, in regards to NOPSEMA, community backlash in regards to the importance of cultural heritage in offshore projects demonstrates the urgency that the First Nations Engagement and Consultation is in place alongside the other standards prior to this pathway being activated.

1.13The Greens are of the view that the Government cannot honestly “balance” the needs of destructive polluting industries, and protecting the environment. We urge them to use this reform opportunity to choose nature as the priority by implementing strong standards that ensure real protection of the environment for generations to come.

1.14Of course, the future of Australia’s ecosystems cannot be hinged solely on this legislation—a lot more work needs to be done. Habitat loss, climate change and invasive species continue to threaten the survival of Australia’s wildlife and ecosystems. As a global hotspot for deforestation and ranked second in the world for biodiversity loss[2], it is undeniable that Australia’s nature is in severe decline.

1.15The Government needs to invest in nature to safeguard the future of Australia. Nature is worth more than $500 billion to the economy[3], yet protecting it makes up a tiny percentage of government spending. The future security of Australia’s economy and Australians’ health and wellbeing relies on the stability and survival of our ecosystems and climate, and as such we urge the Government to make decisions that reflect this importance by significantly scaling up funding for nature protection.

Recommendations

(1)Amend draft MNES and offsets standards to include clear, legally enforceable measurable outcomes that ensure real protection of important habitat and threatened species.

(2)Ensure EPR regulations specify from the outset that all National Environment Standards apply to relevant decisions under the Act.

(3)Finalise all National Environmental Standards before decisions are made in relation to streamlined assessment pathways, national interest proposals, bilateral agreements, strategic assessments or regional planning instruments.

(4)Ensure the water trigger is not narrowed through the application of the standards.

(5)Significantly scale up Government funding for environmental protection and restoration programs, to reflect the urgency of addressing the impacts that continued environmental decline will have on the health of Australia’s economy, communities and security.

(6)Create a climate standard that requires consideration of climate change impacts on nature for all relevant decisions under the Act.

Senator Sarah Hanson-Young

Deputy Chair

Footnotes

[1]https://www.iesc.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-12/iesc-advice-valhalla-gas-exploration-appraisal-project.pdf

[2]https://www.greenpeace.org.au/our-work/forests/australian-deforestation/#:~:text=Australia%20is%20a%20global%20deforestation,for%20the%20past%20five%20years

[3]http://theguardian.com/pew-30by30/2025/sep/03/nature-is-worth-more-than-500bn-to-the-australian-economy-each-year-why-arent-we-doing-more-to-protect-it