The Australian government has formally ruled out the inclusion of a “climate trigger” from its overhaul of the nation’s environmental legislation. Senator Murray Watt followed up this announcement to reaffirm the decision. This decision comes as a response to ongoing debates regarding the regulation of carbon emissions associated with coal and gas projects. The government is doing the exact opposite. Rather than simply blocking projects that fail to address their negative environmental impact, it will force large projects to publicly disclose their carbon emissions—for the first time ever.
Under the new legislation, federally-funded projects predicted to emit more than 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide annually must disclose the emissions they anticipate. They need to show how they plan to mitigate these emissions. The action plans need to focus on getting all of us — without exception — to net-zero emissions by 2050. This represents a substantial regulatory change in the control of emissions in Australia.
Government’s Position and New Requirements
Senator Watt went on to say that the amended statutes are meant to provide the same time environmental safeguards and assist commercial objectives. The government aims to balance these often competing priorities by imposing stringent reporting requirements on high-emission projects without establishing a punitive climate trigger.
“There will be different views about this, I am sure there will be many parts of this legislation that people support and there will be parts [they] disagree with as well, but what we have tried to do is deliver a balanced package that delivers real gains for the environment and real gains for business.” – Senator Watt
The new rules will carry steep fines for violations. People can be penalized up to $1.6 million for willful violations. At the same time, businesses could face penalties of US$825 million. Corporate organizational offenders would be subject to increased maximum fines of $16.5 million. Or, if this is higher than the maximum fine, three times the value of benefit obtained by breach.
These reforms will further improve public reporting on emissions. In addition, these new amendments will put the government in a better position to expeditiously redress egregious legal violations. This includes emergency powers to stop an Environment Protection Agency (EPA) from being able to stop business in order to protect environmental standards to carry out their mission.
“These new laws will not only allow an [Environment Protection Agency] to come down hard on these criminals, but also the power to immediately stop work to protect the environment.” – Senator Watt
Opposition and Criticism
The decision to remove the climate trigger has already drawn bipartisan ire. It is members of the Greens party—who pushed hardest for its inclusion in the legislation—who are most stridently warning about their concerns. They claim that withdrawing the implementation of this measure undermines environmental protections for the benefit of business interests.
Greens Environment spokesperson, Sen. Sarah Hanson-Young expressed her disgust at the suggested legislation. She thinks they don’t go far enough to address major environmental justice issues.
“While industry will no doubt say they haven’t got enough, their grubby fingerprints are all over it. These laws are written to help big business and the mining companies, at the expense of nature.” – Sarah Hanson-Young
Hanson-Young didn’t stop there, pointing out that the new laws do very little to protect forests or climate wellbeing.
“We need environment laws that protect our forests and the climate; these laws do neither, they are not worth the paper they’re printed on.” – Sarah Hanson-Young
The Coalition’s been keen to point out rudderless Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s previous commitments. These commitments go back to his days as shadow environment minister. Environmentalists highlight his past support for a climate trigger. That’s why his new position is so surprising — it represents at least a 180-degree turn from his previous position.
Future Legislative Actions
As the government prepares to introduce these reforms in the coming parliamentary sitting, concerns linger regarding their implications for environmental sustainability. Commenting on the bill, Shadow Environment Minister Angie Bell congratulated Government for getting some things right. She said that success is dependent on the details that are being worked into the legislation.
“The devil would be in the details of the bill.” – Angie Bell
Bell commended the Coalition for its large role in having these laws shaped. He maintained that the laws strike an appropriate balance between industry interests and environmental safeguards. She touted some major successes, such as the cutting down on duplicative climate reporting. She made sure the minister kept final decision-making authority, rather than ceding all power to the EPA.
“By removing duplication, limiting climate reporting that is already included in other legislation and pushing for a Commonwealth offset, the Coalition has held this government to account when negotiating the right balance for the industry and environment.” – Angie Bell
Senator Watt remains hopeful that support for the reforms will be bipartisan. He’s convinced those changes will go a long way toward providing greater transparency around greenhouse gas emissions for project proponents.
“This is an important step forward to provide the community with confidence that proponents are taking their greenhouse gas emissions seriously.” – Senator Watt
