In response to the Coalition's proposed changes to the government's Environment Protection Reform Bills, the Australian Conservation Foundation's CEO Kelly O'Shanassy said:
"The reform of the national environment law must deliver stronger protection of Australia's unique animals and plants - caving in to the no-net-zero Coalition will take nature protection backwards."
On EPA
"How low can the Liberals go? The bills already propose retaining the Minister as the decision maker on assessments and approvals, as is the case now.
"In practice more than 90% of these decisions are delegated to an unaccountable and underperforming department, a situation that has not protected nature and does not work for business.
"Delegating assessment and approval decisions to the EPA, as proposed in the government's bills, would be some improvement.
"Even better would be to set the EPA as an independent, expert arm's length decision maker."
On the definition of "unacceptable impact"
"Defining unacceptable impacts in a detailed and granular way is one of the key things Professor Graeme Samuel said was necessary to move from a highly discretionary and open-ended approach to one where outcomes are clear for all involved.
"As it stands, the definition only captures the worst of the worst proposals. Further weakening the definition, as proposed by the Coalition, removes even this minimum safeguard."
On the reporting of scope 1&2 emissions
"We know climate change is one of the biggest threats to nature in Australia. Just look at the impact on nature from the climate-fuelled Black Summer bushfires or this year's algal bloom on the South Australian coast.
"The government already proposes an extremely minimal, ineffective approach to addressing the threat climate harm presents to the species and ecosystems the law is supposed to protect.
"The government's proposal limits disclosure to scope 1 and 2 emissions. There's nothing on the emissions from burning fossil fuels overseas, even though they have as much impact on nature here as emissions from burning fossil fuels in Australia.
"The government has not proposed accounting climate harm in decisions, but even this is too much for the Coalition, which wants to impose tighter limitations on how this information is used.
"This would entrench climate change denial in our national nature protection law."
On penalties
"Proposed penalties are on par with other Commonwealth laws and are necessary to stop industries from making fines for environmental offences just an accepted cost of doing business."
On environment protection orders
"A strong cop on the beat is exactly what Professor Samuel recommended.
"Adequate powers, like new stop work orders to prevent activities like illegal deforestation, are critical to making sure the longstanding compliance problems with the national nature law are addressed.
"Nature protections - and especially enforcement functions - need to be administered by an independent arm's length regulator that is accountable for its performance."
