The Albanese Government’s new environmental laws have managed to bring unlikely allies together with the Coalition, Greens and Independents all united in their broad opposition for the reforms.
Thu 6 Nov 2025 12.00 AEDT
Photo: Mike Bowers
“Australia’s nature laws are broken,” said Independent MP Monique Ryan, “Unfortunately, so is the Bill designed to fix them.”
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s negotiating powers are being tested this week as he seeks support for Labor’s new Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) – “a 25-year update on the 2000-era legislation”.
“We’ve got one shot at this,” Environment Minister Murray Watt told the National Press Club last week. “We’ve got a once-in-a-generation chance to deliver reforms that see our environment and business gain, just like Professor Samuel recommended five years ago today.”
However, the legislation has been cut down by Independent MPs with Sophie Scamps pointing out “blanket exemptions for native forest logging and land clearing” will likely continue apace because the exemptions are retained”.
“Australia now sits alongside Brazil and Bolivia as a global deforestation hotspot – the only developed nation to be on that list,” she said.
“Let’s not forget that right now Australia is still subsidising native forest logging in ecosystems that house some of our most endangered species,” pointed out Dr Richard Denniss, co-chief executive at the Australia Institute.
Teal independent Monique Ryan said it was just one of many “massive loopholes” in the Bill that, “render it unacceptable in its current form”.
A key concern is how much power Environment Minister Murray Watt will be given to “make national environmental standards” and grant exceptions.
Dr Scamps said the reforms were “riddled with ministerial discretion” and that there’s “no guarantee our nature will be better protected”.
She fears some protections may even be weakened; a concern shared by the Member Kooyong.
“Granting the Minister permission to destroy nature for any reason they determine to be in the national interest is giving them too much discretion to expedite fossil fuel projects or mining developments – irrespective of their environmental harm,” said Ms Ryan.
Both the Opposition and the Greens have ruled out supporting the legislation in its current form with Coalition leader Sussan Ley calling it an “environment approvals disaster”.
Major mining companies are urging the Coalition to reach an agreement with Labor before the end of the year.
Member for Warringah, Zali Steggall, has warned there’s a lack of climate safeguards in the proposed amendments.
“If we want credible environment laws, companies should have to disclose climate risks associated with their business activities, just as they do under existing financial regulation,” she said.
“The laws must also be strengthened to recognise the cumulative impact of multiple projects.”
“The old laws aren’t working for nature or the economy,” said Wentworth MP, Allegra Spender. “More significant changes are needed to ensure the protections are robust”.
The Labor Government axed a proposed “climate trigger” that could block projects if they would worsen carbon emissions, with Dr Denniss pointing to when Anthony Albanese was Shadow Climate Minister in 2005 and “adamant that our environmental laws needed a “climate trigger” to stop new fossil-fuel projects”.
“Does anyone think climate change is less dangerous now?” asked Dr Denniss.
“Climate change is one of the top three causes of our extinction crisis,” said Nicolette Boele, Independent MP for Bradfield.
“And yet, climate is not addressed under the Government’s proposed amendments to our nature protection laws.”
Member for Curtin, Kate Chaney also raised concerns about a “flawed offset scheme” and said, “Previous offset funds have allowed projects to ‘pay to destroy’ without delivering any meaningful restoration of the environment.”
“Without limits on when the offsets fund can be used and accurate pricing, developers will take the easy option – handing over cash to ditch their responsibility to the environment and future generations.”
Murray Watt came under heavy fire last month for approving a 45-year expansion of Woodside’s North West Shelf gas export terminal, just days before the government announced Australia’s 2035 climate change target.
Dr Richard Denniss believes the Albanese Government is risking a backlash from its own base.
“Let’s not forget that Tanya Plibersek and Sarah Hanson-Young had a deal to create an EPA last year, only for the Prime Minister to stomp on it after pressure from the mining industry.”
“It was no accident that Labor postponed the North West Shelf decision until after the election, but even hiding the truth didn’t save everyone.”
“In the once safe seat of Fremantle, Josh Wilson’s margin plummeted from 17% to 0.7% and likewise in the once ultra safe seat of Bean in the ACT, David Smith’s collapsed from 13% to 0.3%.”
He warned policy rifts could force loyal supporters turn away from Labor.
“Like Tanya Plibersek – and the Labor backbenchers now on razor-thin margins – the Prime Minister knows voters didn’t want the North West Shelf approved and that they do want, and expect, stronger environmental laws, not faster gas approvals.
“He’s betting that by 2028, people will forget the North West Shelf and EPBC backflips, but it would be a brave backbencher willing to make that same bet.”
There is a bad habit in Australian politics: profits are privatised, risks are socialised, and taxpayers are left holding the bill. Tasmania's native forest logging sector has been a repeat offender and appears to refuse to change course.
Last week’s Budget gives some insight into how the federal government intends to regulate logging of native forests going forward, setting aside millions in public funds to “progress a landscape-scale approval pathway for jurisdictions with RFAs”. This signals the government is planning for native forest logging to continue.
