Sussan Ley, the Minister for the Environment, is fighting hard to survive a stormy political environment. She is passionate about pushing forward landmark environmental legislation, even in the face of a divided parliamentary climate. Initially, Ley’s new leadership is getting a real test. Indeed, her party room is currently fighting with each other over basic principles like adopting net zero emissions and modernizing environmental laws.
The refusal by both the Greens and the Coalition to support any of this has only complicated the picture further. They’ve been quite clear about their refusal to support Ley’s legislation as-is. Ley is making a big effort to escape from the legacy of her predecessor Peter Dutton and the baggage of the “Noalition.” Her commitment to being a force for positive change is currently being subjected to harsh challenges.
Internal Party Conflicts
Ley’s long awaited tenure has begun under the shadow of open conflict in her own party over significant environmental policy changes. The federal government is preparing to deliver reforms stemming from Professor Graeme Samuel’s independent review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Ley, who commissioned the review in 2020, is clearly intent on bulldozing these reforms through.
Her attempts are being undermined by continuing squabbles within the party ranks. The differences on even the most rudimentary and foundational questions about the direction of the country’s climate policy already present major obstacles to her agenda.
“People should be under no illusions that we will be passing these laws through the parliament. The only question is how quickly we do it and who we do it with.” – Watt
Ley’s battles to galvanize her party may threaten support for these essential reforms. The minister’s excitement about Samuel’s report was evident from the minute that she accepted it from her. Her appetite for change was palpable. As political tensions escalate, this enthusiasm might be put to the test.
Legislative Challenges Ahead
The Coalition’s current debates, particularly concerning Barnaby Joyce’s private member’s bill on net zero emissions, further complicate Ley’s legislative agenda. Her administration has already indicated a willingness to accept amendments. It has evidently already taken a decision against adopting the Greens’ proposal for a new “climate trigger.” This decision underscores the delicate balancing act Ley must perform within her party while addressing external pressures from opposition parties.
Ley’s ambition to present a constructive vision stands in bold relief to the political gamesmanship that usually dominates the legislative dance. As she gets to work on making impactful reform, her promise of open and productive governance will be needed.
“What I am prepared to say is I am bitterly disappointed; this is beyond posturing.” – Professor Graeme Samuel
Samuel’s remarks are indicative of the way he feels about the political tactics at play with environmental policy advancements. He underscored that Ley, when she first ordered the review, did not play political games. This couldn’t be more different than the reality today.
Broader Implications for Environmental Policy
Yet as the discussions play out, this moment of Ley’s leadership has bigger implications than just an immediate legislative obstacle. The potential for significant progress in environmental protection hangs in the balance as various factions vie for influence over policy direction.
Samuel sounded a note of sadness over the current political climate, which he said is working against the efforts to improve and defend Australia’s environment. He underscored the importance of collaboration over confrontation in moving environmental justice reforms forward.
“It’s bitterly disappointing because it says to me that there are potentially political games being played or posturing, which we should be putting aside. Minister Ley, when she asked me to do the review, she did not play the political game.” – Professor Graeme Samuel
The Greens will continue to fight for more robust environmental protections. They would like to take a more direct, restorative approach to long-standing degradation. They hope that through their advocacy, they can make significant progress in protecting our most endangered species and ecosystems.
