The Act commenced on 16 July 2000. However,
successive 10-year statutory reviews (the first in 2009 – the Hawke
Review and the second in 2020 – the Samuel Review) have found that the EPBC
Act is failing to achieve its objects, ‘does
not enable the Commonwealth to effectively protect environmental matters’,
and is not fit to address current or emerging environmental challenges. In
addition, numerous
other inquiries have found that the administration of the EPBC Act has
been inefficient and ineffective. The Act is perceived
as complex and costly by project proponents, and lacking transparency and
opportunities for meaningful input by community and environment-oriented
stakeholders.
The Morrison Government introduced 2 Bills seeking to streamline
the environmental approvals process, establish National Environmental Standards
consistent with the current operation of the Act and establish an Environmental
Assurance Commissioner (see below). However, the first Bill was seen as pre-empting
the findings and recommendations of the Samuel Review (Bills
digest, p. 3), while the second Bill was criticised as ‘cherry
picking’ select recommendations rather than providing a fulsome response (Bills
digest, p. 15).
The incoming Albanese Government promised to provide a full
response to the Samuel Review and establish an independent Environment Protection
Agency. Moreover, its December 2022 Nature positive
plan: better for the environment, better for business (Nature Positive
Plan (NPP)) was pitched by the Hon Tanya Plibersek, the Minister for the
Environment and Water, as ‘a
win-win: a win for the environment and a win for business’.
With a package of legislation, comprising 4 bills, now expected
to be introduced to the Parliament in early 2024, this paper summarises the 38 recommendations
of the second
independent review of the EPBC Act (the Samuel Review) and the government’s
response to date, as described in its Nature Positive
Plan. It also describes subsequent developments or further information
available regarding the implementation of the government’s response.
The EPBC Act establishes 9 matters of national
environmental significance (MNES; ‘protected matters’), largely drawn from
Australia’s international obligations under a range of environmental and
heritage treaties. The protected matters are:
The Act requires 10-yearly independent reviews of the
operation of the Act and the extent to which its objects have been achieved
(section 522A).
The first statutory review of the EPBC Act was commissioned
by the then Minister for the Environment, the Hon Peter Garrett AM, and commenced
on 31 October 2008 with the release of a Discussion
paper. The review was led by Dr Allan Hawke AO, with the
support of an expert panel comprising the Hon Paul Stein AM, Professor Mark
Burgman, Professor Tim Bonyhady AM, and Rosemary Warnock. The review
is commonly referred to as the Hawke Review.
The second statutory review of the EPBC Act was announced by
the then Minister for the Environment, the Hon Sussan Ley, and commenced
on 29 October 2019. The review was led by Professor Graeme
Samuel AC, with the support of an expert panel comprising Bruce Martin, Dr Wendy
Craik AM, Dr Erica Smyth AC, and Professor Andrew
Macintosh. The review is commonly referred to as the Samuel Review.
Professor Samuel cautioned the government against
cherry picking from the report’s highly‑interconnected recommendations (p. iii),
and considered anything less than fundamental reform of the Act unacceptable.
The Senate Environment and Communications Legislation
Committee held inquiries into both Bills. The Committee recommended that both
Bills be passed, the first with an
amendment to the Explanatory Memorandum clarifying that bilateral
agreements made with states and territories will be underpinned by
Commonwealth-led NES, and the second with amendments to require a review of
interim NES within 2 years of commencement and to provide for sunsetting of
interim NES. However, the Australian Labor Party and Australian Greens provided
dissenting reports to both inquiries, recommending that the Bills not be
passed, as did the Senate crossbench to the first Bill and Senator Rex Patrick
to the second Bill. The then government’s
response to the 2 inquiry reports states that moving to single-touch
environmental approvals and the development of NES were agreed to by
National Cabinet in December 2020.
Both Bills lapsed on the prorogation of the 46th Parliament.
On 19 July 2022, the new Minister for the
Environment and Water, the Hon Tanya Plibersek, released the 2021 State of the environment report
(2021 SoE Report) which documented the continuing
decline in Australia’s environment. In her speech, the minister
committed to providing a formal response to the Samuel Review by the end of
2022, with the aim of developing new environmental legislation for 2023 (p. 9).
The minister also committed to developing standalone cultural heritage
legislation, to be co-designed with the First Nations Heritage Protection
Alliance (FNHPA) (p. 12).
The Parliamentary Library’s Environment Budget Review papers
provide details of relevant funding committed in the October 2022–23
and May 2023–24
Budgets.
In the remainder of this paper, we provide a comparison of
the government’s response to the Samuel Review’s recommendations. This response
is:
There is currently some concern about the timing of passage
of legislative reforms to the EPBC Act, with the Coalition indicating they haven’t
been consulted and the Australian Greens not expecting the bills to reach
the Senate until
at least September 2024.
On 19 September 2023, it was reported that the minister had
said a draft version of the major legislation would
not be released before the end of 2023, and would be tabled in the
Parliament in February or March 2024. However, at Senate Estimates on 23
October 2023, departmental officials were
not able to confirm when an exposure draft of the legislation (comprising 4
separate bills) will be publicly released, or the timing of the introduction of
the bills to the Parliament (pp. 90, 94).
 
  
   | Samuel Review
   recommendations | Government response, Nature
   Positive Plan (NPP) | Additional information | 
 
 
  | 1. | Matters of national
  environmental significance (MNES) should be focused on Commonwealth
  responsibilities for the environment: (a) water MNES should be amended to
  apply only to cross‑border water resources; (b) regulatory arrangements
  for nuclear MNES should be aligned with those of Australian Radiation Protection
  and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) (p. 48). | The government will amend
  the water trigger to ensure appropriate management and protection of water
  resources from all forms of unconventional gas. The scope of the Independent
  Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining
  Development will be broadened to enable all states and territories to access
  independent expert advice. The government will
  harmonise regulatory requirements and codes with the ARPANSA’s standards (p. 15). | The proposed amendment to
  the water trigger (expansion to all forms of unconventional gas) is not
  consistent with Recommendation (Rec) 1. The expansion of the scope of the
  water trigger was, however, recommended by the Scientific inquiry into hydraulic fracturing in the
  Northern Territory (the Pepper
  Inquiry) (Rec 7.3, p. 118). On 15 May 2022,
  the minister confirmed that ‘the extension of the water trigger would be part of the package of environmental laws’
  put before the Parliament (p. 4). | 
 
  | 2. | National Environmental
  Standards (NES) recommended by this review should require development
  proposals to: (a) explicitly consider the likely effectiveness of avoidance
  or mitigation measures on nationally protected matters under specified
  climate change scenarios, and (b) transparently disclose the full emissions
  of the development (p. 48). | The government will
  require reporting of estimates of emissions expected to be generated as a
  result of the activity (Scope 1 emissions) and those from the indirect
  consumption of an energy commodity (Scope 2 emissions) and related management
  actions over the life of the project (p. 14). Project proponents will be
  required to disclose how their project aligns with Australia’s national and
  international obligations to reduce emissions (p. 2). The changing climate will
  be a mandatory consideration in environmental planning approaches (for
  example, regional and conservation planning) (p. 2). The NPP states that the Threatened
  Species Scientific Committee will provide advice in 2023 as to whether a
  Threat Abatement Plan for the key threatened process ‘Loss of climatic habitat caused by anthropogenic
  emissions of greenhouse gases’
  would be a feasible, effective and efficient way of addressing threats from
  climate change (p. 15). | On 8 December 2022, the minister
  said, ‘we support the Samuel’s recommendation that proponents of large projects be required to
  publish their lifetime, domestic carbon dioxide emissions. Proponents will
  also be required to disclose what they will do to manage or offset their
  emissions, in line with Australia’s climate targets’ (p. 11). However, this will not extend to scope 3 emissions which are indirect emissions generated in the wider
  economy (p. 3).  The minister said, ‘our goal is to integrate climate considerations into national environmental law, without
  duplicating existing policies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions – such as
  the safeguard mechanism’ (p. 11). In April 2023, as part of the government’s safeguard mechanism reforms, amendments
  to the Climate Change Act 2022 require the Minister for the Environment to notify
  the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, the Climate Change Secretary and
  the Climate Change Authority of the approval under the EPBC Act of an action,
  or expansion of an existing controlled action, which is or is likely to
  result in an increase in scope 1 emissions of an existing, or a new, designated
  large facility. This may trigger a reconsideration of whether the safeguard
  emissions and net safeguard emissions are declining consistently with the safeguard
  outcomes specified in section 3 of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007. | 
 
  | 3. | The EPBC Act should be
  immediately amended to enable the development and implementation of legally
  enforceable NES. Activities and decisions made by the minister, or those
  under an accredited arrangement, should be consistent with NES. The Act
  should provide a specific power for the minister to exercise discretion to
  make a decision that is inconsistent with MNES (p. 53). | The government will
  introduce legislation to establish standards in 2023 (p. 11); this will
  include a process for making, implementing, and reviewing standards
  (p. 37). The initial NES will be: 
  matters of national environmental
  significance
  
  First Nations engagement and
  participation in decision-making
  community engagement and
  consultation
  regional planning
  environmental offsets.
 Once the EPA and Data
  Division are established, subsequent NES will be: 
  data and information
  compliance and enforcement
  (p. 12).
 The legislation will
  specify that no standard can be amended to reduce environmental protection,
  only improve it (p. 11). The independent EPA
  will apply standards and ensure compliance with conditions of approval. The Data
  Division will provide assurance that the objects of national environment
  law and outcomes of the NES are being achieved (p. 37). | At Senate Estimates on 9
  March 2023, departmental officials indicated the NES would be legislative instruments made under an Act that gives the minister the power
  to make the standards; compliance with the standards will be monitored by the
  EPA (p. 25). At Senate Estimates on 23
  May 2023, departmental officials said development of NES ‘involves a significant consultation program and drafting program that we expect to happen over
  the course of the next two years as we move this year towards releasing the
  package for consultation’ (p. 60). A targeted working group (20 members)
  and a broader reference group (50 members) were formed in early 2023 to develop the standards. | 
 
  | 4. | Parts 3 to 10 of the EPBC
  Act should be completely overhauled to deliver more effective environmental
  protection and management, accelerate achievement of environmental outcomes
  and improve the efficiency of the application of NES to decision-making (p.
  54). | The government will ensure
  statutory decision‑making is in line with the NES (p. 37). | See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES.  In an interview on 15 May 2023, the minister indicated that a package of
  legislation would be released as exposure drafts in the second half of 2023,
  for introduction to the Parliament at the end of 2023 or the beginning of
  2024. At Senate Estimates on 23
  October 2023, departmental officials could not confirm when the package of bills would be introduced (pp. 90 & 94). According to departmental
  officials, there will be 4 bills: the first repealing and replacing the EPBC
  Act, a second establishing Environment Protection Australia, a third separating
  out the Commonwealth national parks provisions, and a fourth providing
  transitional and consequential provisions.[1] | 
 
  | 5. | The EPBC Act should
  require decision-makers to respectfully consider Indigenous views and
  knowledge: (a) the Indigenous Advisory Committee (IAC) should be replaced
  with the Indigenous Engagement and Participation Committee, with a specific
  mandate of refining, implementing and monitoring the NES; (b) the NES for
  Indigenous engagement and participation in decision-making should be adopted;
  (c) the Act should be amended to require the minister to transparently
  demonstrate how Indigenous knowledge and science is considered (p. 66).   | The NES for First Nations engagement
  and participation in decision-making will be co-designed with the IAC as a
  priority. The government will engage
  with First Nations peoples as part of overall reforms to co-design standalone
  cultural heritage legislation and incorporate and protect First Nations data
  and knowledge (p. 38). The government will work
  to develop a strategic, effective, meaningful and culturally informed
  approach to inclusion of First Nations knowledge in listing assessments,
  conservation planning and threat abatement for species and ecological
  communities. It will also consider how species of cultural significance are
  considered in environmental and heritage protection processes (p. 14). | The IAC was
  established in 2000 under the EPBC Act. It is an advisory body and generally
  not a consultative mechanism, however that may be requested at times. On 29 November 2021, the Australian Government entered into a Partnership Agreement with the First
  Nations Heritage Protection Alliance
  (FNHPA) in relation to the modernisation of Indigenous cultural heritage
  protection. Announcing the agreement, the minister said, ‘[t]his partnership establishes
  a joint working group of government and alliance representatives ... [which]
  will consult widely with industry, with the community, with the states and
  the territories, and importantly, with Indigenous Australians to develop
  options on the reforms that are required’ (p. 2). Stage 1 consultations ran from March to June 2022 (see the Implementation plan, Stage 1 discussion paper). A Stage 1 directions report and Options paper informed Stage 2 consultations in late 2022 and early 2023. The Options paper outlines
  3 options: 
  overarching federal standalone
  legislation and repeal of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection
  Act 1984 (ATSIHP Act)
  federal accreditation of state
  and territory legislation where mandatory national standards are met, and
  repeal of the ATSIHP Act
  ‘model’ legislation, and
  exemption from the operation of the ATSIHP Act once enacted.
 On 24 November 2022, the minister and the FNHPA extended and expanded the Partnership Agreement ‘to work in a genuine co-design partnership ... to reform our cultural heritage laws’. The Partnership
  Agreement proposes finalising ‘a recommendation to the Minister for
  comprehensive stand-alone legislation to better manage and protect First
  Nations cultural heritage’ by 30 May 2023 and developing a plan to
  conduct further ‘consultation on policy and implementation detail from April
  to December 2023’ (p. 3). The agreement runs to
  30 June 2024. Relatedly, in
  February 2023, the DCCEEW released the Interim Engaging with First Nations People and
  Communities on Assessments and Approvals under the Environment Protection and
  Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
  to assist project proponents in understanding  statutory obligations and the department’s
  expectation of proponent’s engagement
  with First Nations people and communities under the EPBC Act. | 
 
  | 6. | The department should take
  immediate steps to invest in developing its cultural capability to build
  strong relationships with Indigenous Australians and enable inclusion of
  their knowledge (p. 66). | The department is taking
  immediate steps to develop the cultural capability of its staff (p. 38). | In May 2023, the department established a First Nations Branch to, among other things, support the cultural
  capability of staff (pp. 12 and 101). | 
 
  | 7. | The government should
  commission an immediate comprehensive review of national-level cultural
  heritage protections and draw upon best practice frameworks (p. 70). | The government will work
  with the FNHPA to co‑design standalone First Nations cultural heritage
  legislation (p. 38). | The government has
  expressed a commitment to introduce standalone cultural heritage legislation
  (see the minister’s National Press Club Address, p. 12; Senate Estimates, p. 47). See Rec 5. | 
 
  | 8. | Through the Director of
  National Parks, the government should immediately commit to working with
  Traditional Owners to co-design reforms for joint management (p. 72). | The government and the
  Director of National Parks will work with Traditional Owners to review the
  role, function and purpose of the Director of National Parks, including
  consideration of new legislative models that allow for more direct management
  of Commonwealth National Parks by Traditional Owners (p. 38). Reforms will include
  changes to the legislative approach to support the creation and management of
  other Commonwealth Reserves and potential updates to the legislative and
  regulatory framework creating zoning definitions for Australian Marine Parks
  (p. 33). | The Director of National Parks corporate plan 2022–23 includes ‘[i]mproving Joint Management partnerships
  with Traditional Owners in our jointly managed national parks’ as a cross
  cutting key activity (p. 32). The government has
  committed to doubling the number of Indigenous Rangers by the end of the decade to 3,800 (p. 12). | 
 
  | 9. | Immediate amendments
  should be made to the EPBC Act to align it with modern, best practice
  drafting guidance and to implement the NES, bilateral agreements and
  independent audit and oversight mechanisms (p. 80). | The government will
  improve the legislative framework to make the new Act easier to understand
  and work with, and enable the establishment of NES, the EPA and regional
  planning (p. 38). | Sec Rec 4 in regard to the
  timeframe for the introduction of new legislation. See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES. | 
 
  | 10. | The EPBC Act should be
  comprehensively reworked to fully implement the reforms recommended by the review
  and deliver an effective legislative framework, including a redraft and
  restructure of the Act to remove inconsistency with other Commonwealth
  legislation and improve operational efficiency. This may involve creating
  separate pieces of legislation for the key functional areas covered by the EPBC
  Act (p. 80). | The government will
  simplify, modernise, and streamline processes and clarify information
  requirements. It will also involve the removal of prescriptive processes and
  unused assessment pathways to reduce complexity and improve flexibility for
  proponents and regulators (p. 39). Environmental laws will be
  simplified and streamlined, including by: 
  simplifying and standardising
  public comment processes, including allowing modern methods for publishing
  information
  clarifying the information that
  must be considered in decision-making
  moving to outcomes-based
  requirements through NES
  moving process information into
  regulations or guidelines wherever possible to enable faster and more
  efficient maintenance of the regulatory system
  rationalising assessment
  pathways
  improving the operation and
  effectiveness of strategic assessments (pp. 23–24).
 | Sec Rec 4 in regard to the
  timeframe for the introduction of new legislation. See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES. The minister has said
  there would be ‘a quite fundamental rewriting of our environmental laws’ (p. 1). | 
 
  | 11. | The government should
  increase the transparency of the operation of the EPBC Act, including by
  improving the accessibility and availability of information, and amending the
  Act to require publication of all information relevant to, and the reasons
  for, decisions made under the Act (p. 89). | The government will
  provide greater transparency to the community and businesses about
  environmental decision-making, including the data and information considered
  when making decisions (p. 39).   | While the NPP refers to a Data
  Division, in the May 2023–24 Budget, the government provided $51.5 million over 4 years from
  2023–24 (and $4.5 million per year ongoing) to establish Environment
  Information Australia (EIA). EIA would ‘provide an authoritative source
  of high‑quality environmental information’ (p. 77). A DCCEEW factsheet states, ‘as the custodian for national environmental information,
  [EIA] will ensure consistent, reliable and broad access to environmental data
  across governments, project proponents and scientists’ (p. 2). | 
 
  | 12. | The EPBC Act should be
  amended to recast the statutory committees by creating 5 separate committees,
  with the Ecologically Sustainable Development Committee being an overarching
  committee whose function is to provide advice on the NES, planning and
  implementation and coordination across all the committees (p. 92). | The government will review
  the terms of reference of the 4 existing statutory committees to ensure
  alignment with the objectives of the new Act (p. 39). | The 4 existing statutory
  committees are: | 
 
  | 13. | The EPBC Act should retain
  the current extended standing provisions in section 487 (‘standing’ refers to
  the legal right of a person or organisation to seek judicial review of an
  administrative decision). The EPBC Act should be amended to provide for
  limited merits review for development approval decisions with restrictions
  (p. 95). | The government will not
  introduce a right to limited merits review of decisions. Legislating NES and
  establishing an EPA and the Data Division are better ways to improve, and
  provide public assurance, about the quality and consistency of decision‑making
  (p. 40). | The government does not
  agree with this recommendation. | 
 
  | 14. | The EPBC Act should be
  immediately amended to provide confidence to accredit state and territory
  arrangements to deliver single-touch environmental approvals in the short
  term; this should be underpinned by NES and subject to rigorous oversight by
  an independent Environment Assurance Commissioner (p. 103). | The government will
  improve accreditation arrangements, including through setting more robust
  requirements for decision-making. Accredited assessment will be subject to NES
  and the same strong assurance and oversight as other assessment processes
  under the EPA (p. 40). A decision to accredit a
  state or territory will be made by the minister (p. 3). | See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES. The minister confirmed in
  her July 2022 National Press Club Address that the government would establish a new EPA (p. 9). The government’s response
  will require revision or renegotiation of existing bilateral agreements between the states and territories. The NPP notes
  that ‘[a]s accreditation will take time, and not all jurisdictions will seek
  or satisfy the requirements for accreditation, the Commonwealth, through the
  EPA, will continue to play a role in environmental decision-making’ (p. 18). | 
 
  | 15. | The level of environmental
  protection afforded in Regional Forest Agreements (RFAs) should be increased.
  Government should ensure that RFAs are consistent with the NES. The EPBC Act
  should be amended to replace the RFA ‘exemption’ with a requirement for
  accreditation against NES (p. 108). | The government will work
  with stakeholders and relevant jurisdictions towards applying NES to RFAs to
  support their ongoing operation together with stronger environmental
  protection (p. 40). | See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES. The minister has said the
  ‘government will begin a process of applying our new National Environment Standards
  to Regional Forestry Agreements. We will consult with stakeholders on how
  this will be done’ (p. 12). According to departmental
  officials, the government envisages ‘that the application of environmental regulation at the federal level will be the responsibility of
  the EPA ... But any [further regulation] specific to the forestry sector
  would be the purview of the agriculture, fisheries and forestry portfolio’
  (p. 64). | 
 
  | 16. | The accreditation model
  should be applied to arrangements with other Commonwealth agencies, where
  they demonstrate consistency with the NES and subject themselves to
  transparent independent oversight. This includes arrangements for the minister
  to provide advice on certain actions (ss. 160–164), and approvals by the National
  Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environment Management Authority (NOPSEMA) and Australian
  Fisheries Management Agency (p. 109). | All accredited parties
  will be subject to the same requirements under NES. This will include state,
  territory and Commonwealth processes and management frameworks. The EPA will assure and
  provide independent oversight over decision-making under national
  environmental law and the NES (p. 41). | See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES. Accreditation arrangements
  include: 
  bilateral agreements with each state and territory
  RFAs with NSW,
  Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia
  strategic assessments under Part
  10 of the EPBC Act, including those allowing NOPSEMA to approve environment
  plans in relation to offshore oil and gas
  certain decisions of
  Commonwealth agencies where the minister’s advice must be obtained, including
  the provision of foreign aid, managing aircraft operations in airspace,
  adopting or implementing a major development plan for an airport, sea
  dumping, hazardous waste and sea installations.[2]
 | 
 
  | 17. | A NES should be developed
  for actions impacting on Commonwealth land and Commonwealth actions to
  provide a national benchmark for effective environmental protections. The
  Commonwealth should encourage other jurisdictions to adopt the standard (p.
  110).  | The government will set
  NES. An overarching standard for all MNES will be established ahead of a
  standard for actions on Commonwealth land (p. 41). | See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES.   | 
 
  | 18. | Commonwealth assessment
  pathways should be rationalised to enable a risk-based approach to
  assessments that is proportionate to the level of impact on matters protected
  by the EPBC Act (p. 113). | The government will
  rationalise assessment pathways and ensure that assessment is proportionate
  to the level of impact on MNES. Risks to MNES will also be addressed through
  regional plans (p. 41). | The assessment pathway
  refers to the assessment approach for a controlled action (see
  Division 3 of Part 9, EPBC Act). The minister (or their delegate) determines
  the assessment approach for each controlled action. According to departmental
  data provided to the Samuel Review,
  between 2014–15 and 2019–20, 56% of controlled actions were assessed based on
  ‘preliminary documentation, with further information’, 25% by a bilateral
  process and 13% by an accredited process (p. 112). | 
 
  | 19. | The implementation of Commonwealth
  assessments should be supported by providing clear guidance, modern systems,
  and appropriate cost recovery (p. 113). | The government will
  improve the regulatory requirements for proponents and foster faster and
  better decision-making (p. 41). The simplifying and
  streaming will include: 
  simplifying and standardising
  public comment processes, including allowing modern methods for publishing
  information
  clarifying the information that
  must be considered in decision-making
  moving to outcomes-based
  requirements through NES
  moving process information into
  regulations or guidelines wherever possible (p. 23).
 The NPP states that new
  environmental laws will enable recognition of ‘jurisdictional assessments and
  the listing of threatened species and ecological communities’ (p. 24).
  The NPP also states the following will be considered: 
  aligning listing processes with
  international best practice
  considering the Common
  Assessment Method in the development of NES
  enabling the TSSC to advise the minister
  on whether assessments prepared by other jurisdictions comply with the Common
  Assessment Method (p. 24).
 The NPP states that the
  government will ‘implement activity-based costing and update cost recovery
  arrangements for environmental assessment and approvals’ (p. 24). | In December 2022, the DCCEEW
  began a consultation process for ‘Cost recovery under the EPBC Act’. The Consultation paper states ‘the current cost recovery model only
  recovers approximately 10 percent of the Department’s costs related to the
  administration of the EPBC Act’ (p. 8).  The Consultation paper
  suggests that a new fee structure, including a potential levy, would be in
  place in the 2023–24 financial year (p. 7). At the time of writing, submissions
  to the Consultation paper are not available on the DCCEEW’s
  Consultation hub. | 
 
  | 20. | The EPBC Act should be
  amended to ensure wildlife permitting requirements align with Australia’s
  international obligations under the Convention on the Conservation of
  Migratory Species and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
  Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (p. 116). | The government will
  streamline and improve wildlife trade permit requirements to retain
  consistency with international obligations, including welfare standards for
  live specimens (p. 42). The NPP notes there are
  inadequate definitions of ‘zoos’ and ‘research institutions’ (p. 24). | While the Samuel Review
  was in train, the then Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment
  commissioned KPMG to undertake an Independent review into the regulation of the export
  of native and exotic birds. The
  Secretary of the Department accepted the recommendations of the review. This
  was followed by an Independent assessment into options for a national
  registration scheme for native and exotic live birds in Australia (ThinkPlace, 2021). | 
 
  | 21. | Part 13A Division 2 and 5
  of the EPBC Act, the EPBC Regulations and associated definitions should be
  amended to streamline and reduce the regulatory burden on wildlife trade
  permitting processes and to enable proportionate compliance and enforcement
  responses (p. 116). | The government will reduce
  unnecessary prescription and administrative processes for wildlife trade
  permitting, ensuring ongoing protection of species is maintained and permit
  requirements remain consistent with international obligations (p. 42). |   | 
 
  | 22. | Reduce instances under the
  EPBC Act and EPBC Regulations where wildlife trade permitting may be subject
  to abuse by applicants (p. 116). | The government will
  improve the effectiveness of wildlife trade regulation by improving
  compliance and enforcement and reducing the potential for wildlife permits to
  be misused. A fit and proper person test will also be applied (p. 42). |   | 
 
  | 23. | By statutory appointment,
  immediately establish the position of Environment Assurance Commissioner with
  responsibility to oversee audit of decision-making by the Commonwealth under
  the EPBC Act and of accredited parties under an accredited arrangement. The
  Commissioner should also provide an annual report to Parliament on the
  performance of the Commonwealth and accredited parties against NES (p. 125). | These functions will be
  performed by the EPA, which will make decisions in accordance with NES and
  assure accredited parties and instruments apply the standards. The Data Division will
  develop and implement a monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework to
  provide assurance that the system, including the EPA, is achieving the
  objectives of the new Act and outcomes of NES (p. 42). The NPP states the EPA
  will: 
  undertake regulatory and
  implementation functions under the EPBC Act and other relevant Commonwealth
  laws including laws relating to sea dumping, ozone protection and synthetic
  greenhouse gas management, hazardous waste, product emissions standards,
  recycling and waste reduction, and underwater cultural heritage
  undertake assessments and make
  decisions about development proposals, including approval conditions
  issue permits and licences
  undertake compliance and
  enforcement activities
  establish and publish its
  compliance and enforcement policy
  provide assurance, and advise
  the minister, on whether accredited parties and instruments apply the standards
  (for example, NES)
  be established as a statutory
  Commonwealth entity with its own budget (including funding from cost
  recovery)
  led by a Chief Executive
  Officer, appointed for a fixed term and removable only in specified
  circumstances
  report publicly on its
  performance
  publish annual reports, which
  the minister will be required to table in Parliament (pp. 28–29).
 The EPA will not, however,
  have a statutorily appointed board (p. 29). The NPP also indicates the
  minister will retain a ‘call-in’ power and ‘will have the power to approve
  proposed developments that have an unavoidable negative impact on MNES but only
  where this is clearly in the national interest’ (p. 29).  | The NPP and early ministerial
  statements refer to an Environment Protection Agency. In the May 2023–24 Budget, the entity is designated Environment Protection
  Australia (p. 77). The minister has said, ‘[t]he EPA will be governed by its mission to ensure a nature positive
  Australia, while also factoring in social and economic considerations’
  (p. 10).  The minister has
  repeatedly referred to the EPA as a ‘strong [or tough] cop on the beat’; for example, ‘the EPA will be a tough cop on the beat. It will transform our system of environmental
  approvals. It will be transparent and independent. It will make environmental
  assessments, decide project approvals and the conditions attached to them,
  and it will make sure that those conditions are being followed on the ground’
  (p. 1). The minister has said, ‘the minister will be able to override an EPA
  decision, but there’s some
  important safeguards here as well. The EPA original advice will have to
  published. The minister’s decision to override in the national interest will
  have to be transparent and published as well’ (p. 2). The May 2023–24 Budget provided $121.0 million over 4 years from 2023–24 to establish
  the EPA (p. 77). At Senate Estimates, departmental officials alluded to
  a machinery of government process (p. 73).  The DCCEEW has said ‘[t]he staffing profile of EPA will comprise existing [DCCEEW] staff undertaking
  regulatory functions ... In addition to existing departmental staff
  transferring to EPA, new staff will undertake critical enabling and corporate
  functions to support the new entity’. | 
 
  | 24. | The EPBC Act should be
  amended to replace bilateral agreement processes with robust and efficient
  accreditation processes, based on NES. This should include the opportunity
  for the Australian Parliament to disallow a proposed accreditation, the
  unfettered right for the minister to make a decision, and scheduled formal
  review (p. 125). | The government will
  improve accreditation arrangements and ensure robust oversight of
  decision-making by accredited parties. Accredited arrangements will be
  subject to NES, strong assurance, and independent oversight. The
  accreditation framework will reflect the proposals set out in the
  recommendation (p. 43). | See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES. Sec Recs 14 and 16 in
  regard to accreditation arrangements. On 9 June 2023, Commonwealth, state and territory environment ministers ‘agreed to identify where, with better harmonisation of environmental assessments, there
  is opportunity for reduced timeframes, stronger protections and to make
  better and faster decisions’ (p. 2). | 
 
  | 25. | The EPBC Act should be
  amended to support more effective planning that accounts for cumulative
  impacts and past and future key threats and build environmental resilience.
  This includes development of strategic national plans, regional recovery
  plans, ecologically sustainable development plans, and strategic assessments
  (p. 137). | The government’s approach
  emphasises this recommendation and focuses on regional planning. Conservation
  plans will also be delivered via a regional framework with Areas of High
  Environmental Value, reducing the cumulative impacts on threatened species
  and ecological communities. The first NES will include
  a Regional Planning Standard to support the development of regional plans (p. 43). According to the NPP, ‘the
  government aims to complete the first round of regional planning by 2028’
  (p. 20). The NPP indicates that
  regional plans will occur alongside strategic plans (p. 24). The NPP
  states the government will improve the operation and effectiveness of
  strategic assessment (p. 24).   | The minister has said, ‘[a] new system of regional planning will allow Australia to fast-track sensible
  projects in robust places, while stopping damaging projects in fragile
  places’ (p. 6). The minister went on to describe regional plans using
  a three-level ‘traffic light’ system
  (p. 7). This will provide for areas of high environmental value (red)
  where development will largely be prohibited, areas of moderate environmental
  value (orange) where development will be allowed subject to an approval
  process and any agreed rules, and development priority areas (green) where
  development will be allowed without a separate Commonwealth environmental
  approval (NPP, pp. 19–20).  At Senate Estimates on 9 March 2023, departmental officials expressed a view
  that regional plans would support faster outcomes because they ‘would be able
  to provide greater information to potential proponents earlier in their
  process about what was important' (pp. 25–26). On 22 December 2022, the minister jointly announced with the Queensland Minister for the Environment
  and the Great Barrier Reef that a regional plan would be developed for
  southeast Queensland. Additional regional plans will be developed for rare
  earth minerals and renewable energy. However, regions of interest are yet to be determined (p. 1). On 22 December 2022, the minister jointly announced with the NSW Minister for Lands and Homes that the
  NSW Government was working with the Australian Government to develop initial
  regional plans in the Northern Rivers, Central Coast, Hunter-Central Coastal
  Renewable Energy Zone and NSW component of the Loxton‑Parilla Sands
  Basin. | 
 
  | 26. | The Commonwealth should
  establish a dedicated program to develop and implement strategic national
  plans and regional plans with a focus on key Commonwealth priorities (p. 137). | The government will remove
  overly prescriptive processes and duplication to streamline and strengthen
  conservation planning. Regional plans will
  identify areas necessary for the protection, conservation and repair of
  environment and heritage values. The plan will also guide ecologically
  sustainable development, harmonise requirements between Commonwealth and
  state or territory regulators and reduce development approval times
  (p. 44). | See Rec 25 in regard to
  regional plans. Launching the NPP, the minister
  said, ‘[r]egional plans will also help us address the problem of cumulative impacts, because
  we won’t be dealing with each project in isolation – we’ll be considering how
  they connect and overlap’, (p. 7). The minister said, ‘regional plans
  are something the federal government will need to work on with the states and
  territories, and with local government as well’ (p. 7). | 
 
  | 27. | The Commonwealth should
  reform the application of environmental offsets under the EPBC Act to address
  decline and achieve restoration (p. 141). | A NES for Environmental
  Offsets will work alongside the MNES Standard to significantly improve
  environmental outcomes from offset arrangements (p. 44). | In announcing the NPP, the minister said new offsets will be embedded in legislation and
  set out a hierarchy of action: ‘First: to avoid harm to the environment. Second:
  to reduce or mitigate environmental damage. Third: to identify offsets within
  the region that deliver a net gain for the imperilled plants or animals
  affected by the project. And as a last resort: to make a conservation payment
  to enable a better environmental outcome – one that leaves nature better off
  overall’ (p. 9). The potential use of
  proposed biodiversity certificates for offsetting purposes has been one of
  the most controversial aspects of the government’s proposed nature repair
  market (see: Bills digest (pp. 24–26); Senate Inquiry, pp. 60–61)). Departmental officials
  have said ‘[c]ertificates under the [proposed] nature repair market won’t be able to be
  used as offsets unless and until there is the offset standard that is being
  created. That offset standard is a net gain standard’ (p. 51). On 29 June 2023, the minister announced an audit of ‘over 1,000 offset sites approved under [the
  EPBC Act] to make sure developers are meeting their obligations’. Remarkably,
  the minister said, ‘[u]ntil recently there has been no reporting to track
  whether developers are actually delivering on their responsibilities’. At a Senate inquiry, departmental officials said the audit was being undertaken by the
  department’s compliance and enforcement branch (p. 54). No terms of
  reference or timeline are available. | 
 
  | 28. | The government should
  formally investigate and consider pathways to foster private sector
  participation in environmental restoration (p. 128). | The government will
  establish a nature repair market. The nature repair market will encourage
  private investment in environmental restoration and management. The
  government will investigate barriers and incentives for the protection and
  restoration of biodiversity on private land (p. 44). | On the release of the 2021
  SoE Report, the minister said, ‘[w]e need to work with industry and philanthropic
  partners … I want to look at ways
  to make these investments easier…’ (p. 11). On 26 August 2022, the minister jointly announced with the Prime Minister that the government would
  create a biodiversity certificate scheme, allowing Australia to develop a ‘Green Wall Street’. The department consulted on a fact sheet before releasing an exposure draft of the Nature Repair Market Bill on 23 December 2022. On 29 March 2023, the minister
  introduced the Nature Repair Market Bill 2023 to the House of Representatives. See the Bills digest for more information. The Bill passed the House with amendments on 21 June 2023. The Bill was referred to
  the Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications for inquiry and report by 1 August 2023. However, following a public hearing on 30 June 2023, during which aspects of the proposed
  market were heavily criticised, the reporting date was extended to 1 November 2023.
  On 23 October 2023, the reporting date was extended to
  18 April 2024. In Senate Estimates,
  departmental officials reported strong interest from the private sector in a
  market, ‘but, without rules, a high-integrity system, a public registry system
  and a transparent process, there's unwillingness to invest at this stage
  until those arrangements are in place’ (p. 23). | 
 
  | 29. | Reforms should be
  implemented to ensure compliance and enforcement functions by the
  Commonwealth, or an accredited party, are strong and consistent (p. 153). | The EPA will be
  responsible for undertaking regulatory functions and implementing new
  environmental laws. To facilitate the accreditation
  of other parties, a Standard for Compliance and Enforcement will be developed
  once the EPA is established. Accredited parties will be
  subject to their compliance with all standards, and full disclosure of
  environmental performance data. All accredited arrangements will be subject
  to strong assurance, and independent oversight (p. 45). | See Rec 3 in regard to
  establishing NES. See Rec 23 regarding
  establishment of the EPA. Launching the NPP, the minister
  has said NES ‘will be legally enforceable, creating positive requirements for decision making.
  They will describe the outcomes we want – and our new Environment Protection Agency
  will make sure those outcomes are being delivered on the ground’ (p. 5). At a Senate Estimates
  hearing on 23 May 2023, departmental officials said, ‘[t]he point of the EPA is that it will undertake the Commonwealth's
  environmental regulatory responsibilities’ (p. 73). This will extend to
  the department’s regulatory functions as specified in other Commonwealth
  Acts. Officials said, ‘the department is undertaking preliminary work around bringing together the functions that will
  ultimately transfer into an EPA once it is created as an independent entity’
  (p. 73). | 
 
  | 30. | The Commonwealth should
  immediately increase the independence of and enhance Commonwealth compliance
  and enforcement. There should also be an increase in the transparency and
  accountability of activities, including a clear public register of
  activities, offsets and staff conflicts of interest (p. 153). | The government will
  establish the EPA as a strong independent environmental regulator with a
  mission to improve trust and transparency in the operation of national
  environmental laws. A National Environmental
  Offsets System will be released by the end of 2022, to track and report on the
  use and delivery of environmental offsets. The government will
  provide full transparency to the community and businesses on environmental
  decision-making (p. 45). | See Rec 23 in regard to
  establishing the EPA. In launching the NPP, the minister
  said, ‘[p]eople don’t trust the system because it’s weak, but also because it’s opaque.
  It’s not clear whether environmental conditions placed on projects are being
  enforced on the ground. The EPA will address this trust deficit’ (p. 10). In late 2022, an Offsets Register was added to the EPBC Act Public Portal. The Register purports to list all approved
  projects since the commencement of the EPBC Act that have offset conditions.
  At the time of writing, offset conditions could be viewed; however, offset
  sites and offset documents were often not available due to the review announced by the minister on 29 June 2023. | 
 
  | 31. | The Commonwealth should
  initiate immediate improvements to the environmental information system by:
  (a) adopting a NES for data and information; (b) appointing an interim supply
  chain Custodian; (c) designating a set of national environment information
  assets; (d) expanding the existing work with jurisdictions on digital
  transformation of environmental assessments; (e) commencing an overhaul of
  the department’s information management systems (p. 174). | The government agrees with
  the report’s recommendations and is committed to quality, accessible and
  transparent data. The government will ensure decisions are based on the best
  available data, information, and advice, and increasing the transparency of decisions. A Standard for Data and
  Information will be developed once the Data Division is established. The government will
  establish a Data Division, so an interim data supply chain custodian is not
  required. New information systems
  are being built to better coordinate Commonwealth, state and territory
  decision-making and allow proponents to submit and track their applications
  online (p. 46). | In launching the NPP, the minister
  said she would create a ‘new data division in our department, which will be responsible for integrating new and
  existing information, making it accessible and searchable, while reporting
  the progress we’re making against our environmental goals’ (p. 10). The NPP states ‘a Chief
  Environmental Data Officer [CEDO] will be appointed to lead the Data
  Division, with clear responsibilities and powers provided for in legislation’
  (p. 29). The CEDO will be responsible for developing and implementing a
  National Environmental Data Strategy (p. 29). On 2 June 2023, when
  launching a ‘global search for the head of Environment
  Information Australia’, the
  minister said EIA would be ‘an agency that will survey, monitor and publicise
  local information on threatened species, vulnerable ecosystems, and the state
  of our environment’ (pp. 1–2). In a speech to the Global Biodiversity
  Information Facility on 18 October 2023, the minister said EIA would do three
  things: ‘deliver better information to everyone involved in the environmental approvals
  system', provide data to ‘support our implementation of regional planning and
  conservation’, and ‘offer regular reporting on our national goals and the
  state of our environment’ (p. 4). As at 3 October 2023,
  EIA is shown as a Division of DCCEEW. | 
 
  | 32. | The Commonwealth should
  build, maintain, and improve an efficient environmental information supply
  chain to improve the effectiveness of the EPBC Act (p. 174). | The government will
  establish a Data Division within DCCEEW to oversee and coordinate
  improvements to Australia’s environmental data and information, and act as
  the custodian of the national environmental supply chain (p. 46). | See Rec 31 in regard to
  establishing a Data Division. | 
 
  | 33. | The Commonwealth should
  establish a NES for environmental monitoring and evaluation of outcomes and
  assign the Ecologically Sustainable Development Committee responsibility for
  the oversight and management of monitoring, evaluating and reporting on the outcomes
  of the EPBC Act (p. 181). | The Data Division will
  develop and implement a monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework to
  provide assurance that the objects of the new Act and outcomes of NES are
  being achieved (p. 47). | Sec Rec 12 in regard to
  reforming statutory committees. See Rec 31 in regard to
  establishing a Data Division.   | 
 
  | 34. | The EPBC Act should be
  amended to require formal monitoring, evaluation and reporting on the
  effectiveness of the Act in achieving its outcomes. In addition, an annual
  statement should be provided evaluating environmental performance under the
  Act, how the outcomes for MNES are tracking, and making recommendations for
  adjustment (p. 181). | The government will
  establish standards and ensure that decision-making processes under national
  environmental law are effective and transparent. The Data Division will
  provide publicly available monitoring and reporting on environmental outcomes
  (p. 47). | See Rec 31 in regard to
  establishing a Data Division. The NPP states ‘[t]he Data
  Division will develop and implement a monitoring, evaluation and reporting
  framework to provide assurance that the system as a whole, including the EPA,
  is working to deliver environmental and heritage outcomes and achieving the
  objectives of national environmental law’ (p. 30). | 
 
  | 35. | Commonwealth should
  deliver a published response to the 2021 SoE Report (p. 190). | The government published
  the 2021 SoE Report on 19 July 2022. This response addresses findings from
  the SoE report and the review. Implementation of the government’s actions
  will be reported regularly for transparency and accountability (p. 47). | The response to the Samuel
  Review is considered to be the government’s response to the 2021 SoE
  Report. | 
 
  | 36. | The EPBC Act should
  be amended to provide a legislative basis for the Commonwealth’s national
  leadership and reporting role, including to set out the purpose of SoE
  reporting, to require a government response to future SoE in the form of a
  strategic national plan for the environment and annual implementation
  reports, and a set of national environmental-economic accounts to be tabled
  annually alongside traditional budget reporting (p. 190). | The government will
  legislate to clarify the purpose of SoE reporting, including requiring trend
  analysis against national goals and a long‑term set of environmental
  indicators. This will include a requirement for a government response to
  future SoE reports to be tabled in Parliament within a specified timeframe. The government will
  develop a core set of national environmental economic accounts to be tabled
  annually in Parliament alongside the system of national (economic) accounts
  (p. 48). | See Recs 31 and 34 in
  regard to establishing a Data Division and its functions. The minister has said, ‘by agreement with the Treasurer, the historic wellbeing budget will also include
  environmental indicators’ (p. 9). The Treasurer launched the
  ‘Measuring What Matters national wellbeing framework’
  in July 2023. The framework includes 8 indicators under the
  ‘Sustainable’ theme, which describes ‘a society that sustainably uses natural and financial resources, protects and
  repairs the environment and builds resilience to combat challenges’. The indicators are: air quality, biological diversity, climate resilience, economic
  resilience, emissions reduction, fiscal sustainability, protected areas and
  resource use and waste generation. | 
 
  | 37. | The Commonwealth should
  build reforms by pursuing harmonisation with states and territories to
  streamline national and international reporting by delivering: (a) a national
  environmental monitoring and evaluation framework; and (b) a nationally
  agreed system of environmental‑economic accounts to support streamlined
  environmental reporting (p. 190). | The government will
  improve reporting and consider the best way to support further harmonisation
  with states and territories through relevant intergovernmental forums
  (p. 48). | See Rec 36 in regard to environmental
  economic accounts. On 21 October 2022, Commonwealth, state and territory environment ministers agreed to ‘work together to improve the quality, accessibility and interoperability of
  environmental data to aid decision-making’ (p. 2). On 9 June 2023, Commonwealth, state and territory environment ministers ‘agreed to work together to identify and remove barriers to enable sharing of
  information between jurisdictions’ (p. 1). | 
 
  | 38. | The Commonwealth should
  instigate a refresh of intergovernmental cooperation and coordination to
  facilitate collaboration with the states and territories (p. 195). | The government will seek
  to formalise support for the implementation of national environmental law
  reform through relevant intergovernmental forums. The government has
  reinstated the environment ministers’ meeting to promote collaboration with
  states and territories. Ministers have committed to work together on NES,
  regional planning locations and environmental data. Regional planning will be
  undertaken with states, territories and local government (p. 49). | Meetings of Commonwealth, state and territory environment
  ministers have been held in October 2022
  and June 2023. |