Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025
Mr VIOLI (Casey—Opposition Chief Whip) (21:01): I commend the member for Grey on his contribution. He is a new member to this House but knows his community well and understands the impact that these bills being rushed through the House will have. That's why we in the coalition are proud to have so many great local advocates for their communities like the member for Grey.
I rise to speak on the government's proposed Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 and the six associated bills, which aim to reform the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, the EPBC Act. This is a critical moment for our nation, specifically for the magnificent communities I represent in Casey and for communities across the country.
We stand at a crossroads where we must ensure our national legislative framework supports and enhances the crucial environmental stewardship that defines my region and so many other regions, rather than stifling them with unworkable bureaucracy and red tape. This is a complicated piece of legislation. It is a piece of legislation that has already cost one minister in the Albanese Labor government their job; we've got the new minister looking to fix it for the Prime Minister.
It is a piece of legislation that has received criticism from those opposite; the member for Chifley is on record as criticising this legislation. You know it is a bad piece of legislation when a backbencher from the ALP government is criticising it. Senator Payman knows so well that it is not very career enhancing to criticise this Prime Minister; the member for Chifley and the member for Isaacs know that as well.
That shows how bad this legislation is. It's cost a minister their job and we've got government backbenchers speaking out against it. My community of Casey, the Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges know instinctively that the health of our environment is inextricably linked to the prosperity and longevity of our way of life.
We are incredibly fortunate to have a stunning local environment—and this is not by accident; it is due to the tireless work of many local Landcare and environmental volunteer groups who work diligently every day to restore and protect our land, forests and waterways. It is vital that we continue to preserve and protect our environment for future generations.
I want to spend a moment celebrating the truly remarkable efforts occurring right now in our community, proving that clear objectives, community partnership and hard work deliver tangible positive environmental outcomes. I recently had the great honour of congratulating the Nangana Landcare Network on winning silver at the Australian Geographic Society's award night.
This recognition was richly deserved. Our wonderful local environmental volunteers were recognised for their success in saving faunal emblems, including Leadbeater's possum and the helmeted honeyeater. These unique species can, thanks to the network's efforts, only be found in the wild in our community of Casey.
The Nangana Landcare Network is an umbrella organisation comprising six key Landcare groups—Monbulk Landcare, Johns Hill Landcare Group, Friends of Leadbeater's Possum, Friends of the Helmeted Honeyeater, Cardinia Hills Ragwort and Landcare Group and Macclesfield Landcare Group. I look forward to continuing to support the network and their community led approaches to strengthen our environment in Casey.
Our commitment to the environment begins with education and action in our schools. As the local federal MP, I'm delighted to join students in protecting and supporting our local environment. Belgrave Heights Christian School set themselves a huge goal this year—planting 1,400 trees in a single week.
Over the last 15 years, students at the school have planted more than 30,000 trees. Many of these trees have grown into tall trees, lining the creek and providing a vital habitat for native species. It is wonderful to see this care of our environment continuing.
The students and Farmer Jill at Wandin Yallock Primary School on Schools Tree Day planted native and indigenous plants in the school's nature play forest. The students there are very fortunate to have the opportunity to learn about sustainability, growing fresh produce, taking care of animals and looking after the school grounds in their farm class. These local achievements highlight our community's ability to balance ecological outcomes with practical long-term sustainability in the Yarra Valley and the Dandenong Ranges.
I stand here today to express my strong support for the joint endeavour between the Nangana Landcare Network and Agribusiness Yarra Valley to establish the Foundation for Nature Capital. This collaborative initiative seeks to bring together landholders, producers, traditional custodians and local communities to invest in and restore the natural capital of one of Australia's most ecologically and agriculturally significant regions—the Yarra Valley and the Dandenong Ranges.
The Yarra Valley and the Dandenong Ranges are confronting major challenges, including biodiversity loss, market pressures and the need for more sustainable land management. This foundation will provide a structure to attract investment, coordinate efforts across our landscape and unlock emerging opportunities such as government climate initiatives, biodiversity markets, environmental philanthropy and sustainable agriculture.
This joint initiative, grounded in both ecological knowledge and practical farming experience, aligns ecological restoration with economic resilience, ensuring long-term benefits for both biodiversity and our crucial farming sector. This is the model for national success—clear objectives, regional leadership and balancing conservation with productivity and economic growth.
The coalition entered into good-faith negotiations ahead of Labor's second attempt at EPBC Act reform, and we remain committed to achieving a balanced outcome for jobs, productivity, economic growth and the environment. We understand that environmental protection must not come at the cost of the economic activity that underpins our essential services. What has built the foundations of our great country, allowing us to support our education system, our hospitals and our roads, is the wealth created by critical industries.
Australia's mining companies alone paid approximately $59.4 billion in taxes and royalties in the 2023-24 financial year. It's why we must ensure that any environmental law reform supports rather than severely impacts these foundational industries. The reality is, despite the Treasurer claiming credit for those surpluses, it is those taxes and royalties that deliver the surpluses for this government.
It's in the budget papers there. We would not have the economic surpluses that we have seen in the last few years without those royalties and revenue upgrades, and, regrettably, the proposed legislation before the House—a package that runs to nearly 1,500 pages—is not the solution to this balance that we require. This government claims it wants to speed up approvals and get productivity moving in our country, yet stakeholders across the spectrum of industry and environment agree that, in its current form, this legislation is completely unworkable.
The Business Council of Australia—the government were happy to quote the Business Council of Australia today in question time—have been a key public commentator today. They've been crystal clear. They said: … without significant changes to this bill … we risk embedding a system that's even slower, more complex and lacking the clarity and certainty needed for investment.
Given we know this government is such a big fan of the BCA, I look forward to them taking this feedback on board. The deep concern is that these bills risk creating significant red tape that would steer investment away from Australia. Labor's reforms will make it much harder, more costly and take longer for proponents to have applications approved.
Some business and industry groups are even saying these proposed reforms are even worse than the existing laws, which are 26 years old. When existing legislation can take seven years for a project extension, we cannot accept reforms that are even worse than the status quo. If Labor are serious about delivering the Environmental Protection Agency, then what they have delivered currently needs serious work, because it is completely unworkable.
The independent review commissioned by the coalition government and undertaken by Professor Graeme Samuel recommended reforms, including streamlining pathways, but it did not recommend the EPA structure currently proposed. The proposed EPA structure takes on assessment, compliance and enforcement functions. This goes far beyond what Professor Samuel recommended, which was to limit EPA to compliance and enforcement, with the assessment function retained by the department.
In its current proposed design, the EPA would essentially act as student and teacher, marking its own homework. This is contrary to the recommendations of the independent review—an independent review that the Prime Minister likes to reference so often. Furthermore, the CEO of the EPA must be accountable to the minister.
The current reform is missing critical requirements for accountability. First, the minister must issue a statement of expectation—that statement must be binding—and the minister must have the ability to terminate the CEO for failure to perform to the standard of expectation. Without these guardrails, the proposed CEO would be a statutory appointment, dismissible only by the Governor-General, with no requirements for performance targets or binding expectations—like a lawyer, an accountant or a CEO having no KPIs.
This lack of accountability is particularly concerning given the extensive, broad, sweeping powers the EPA CEO would have to issue environmental protection orders and indefinite stop-work orders. These orders put a significant deal of power in the hands of the EPA. The circumstances in which these orders can be issued must be incredibly narrow, must apply narrowly and must be very time limited.
Furthermore, the proposed reforms lack essential natural justice by removing appeal rights for EPOs, and the threshold for issuing them is far too low. Fines for noncompliance are also excessively high—up to $825 million—and must be made proportionate, with a clear appeals mechanism available. Clarity and certainty are paramount if you want to encourage investment, yet this legislation is riddled with definitions that guarantee litigation and uncertainty.
The definition of 'net gain' absolutely needs greater clarity, with guardrails in place to ensure certainty for industry and the environment. At present, the concept is unwieldy and open to litigation risk, and the justification for such provisions is unclear. We will not support legislation that is worse than the status quo.
We will fight to amend Labor's laws, ensuring they provide a clear, workable framework for our farmers, local businesses and environmental volunteers to succeed without discouraging investment, just as my community of Casey works daily to ensure a positive, practical future for Leadbeater's possum and the helmeted honeyeater through the dedication of groups like the Nangana Landcare Network.
We must demand a national framework that is clear and accountable and supports rather than sabotages our economy. We must aim higher than this unworkable proposal. We must get this bill right for the sake of our environment and our country.
This government should not rush this through; it should at least wait for the Senate committee to come back in March next year. There is no rush. We must get this legislation right.