Sponsor speech Supports
Adam Bandt
Bandt strongly supports the bill and says it is needed to close the climate loophole in federal environmental law by stopping new coal, oil and gas projects.
Read in Hansard ↗Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger)
Current status
This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Policy area
Climate, energy & environment
What does this bill do?
Big new projects that directly emit at least 25,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases a year would face a federal environmental check before they could go ahead.
Why was it introduced?
The bill was introduced because the EPBC ActAustralia's main federal environment law, which this bill would change so big emissions become a trigger for federal approval. left a clear gap: emissions-intensive projects were not treated as a matter of national environmental significance. It creates a climate triggerThe proposed rule that would make major greenhouse gas emissions a separate reason for federal environmental assessment. so major emitting projects face federal assessment, requires decisions to consider the national carbon budgetThe total amount of greenhouse gases Australia can still emit over a period while staying within its climate goals. and emissions targets, and blocks the highest-emitting proposals.
Broader context
Australia's national environment law did not treat greenhouse emissions as a trigger in their own right. r6895 proposed a climate triggerThe proposed rule that would make major greenhouse gas emissions a separate reason for federal environmental assessment. for major emitting projects, with lower-threshold federal assessment and a prohibition on very high-emitting projects. The supported r6895 record in this run shows House introduction and second reading on 05 Sep 2022, scrutiny committee consideration on 28 Sep 2022, and removal from the Notice Paper on 20 Mar 2023 without passing.
Key criticism
This run does not contain r6895-specific parliamentary speeches opposing the House bill. The supported speech record is limited to the House second reading speeches from Adam Bandt and Elizabeth Watson-Brown, both in support, and the bill later did not proceed.
Who supported it?
Adam Bandt MP introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Greens.
Introduced in House 05 Sept 2022
Failed in House 20 Mar 2023
Did not reach Senate —
Did not become law —
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
No final passage
The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.
Time before failure
196 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Big new projects that directly emit at least 25,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases a year would face a federal environmental check before they could go ahead.
-
Projects with direct emissions above 100,000 tonnes a year would be blocked, so very high-emitting new developments could not get federal approval.
-
Approval decisions would have to weigh whether a project fits within Australia’s remaining carbon budgetThe total amount of greenhouse gases Australia can still emit over a period while staying within its climate goals. and national emissions targets, not just its local environmental effects.
-
The Climate Change AuthorityThe independent body the bill would make responsible for setting and updating Australia's carbon budget to 2050. would have to set an Australia-wide carbon budgetThe total amount of greenhouse gases Australia can still emit over a period while staying within its climate goals. to 2050, giving the government a benchmark for judging major emitting projects.
Show source excerpts
-
Significant Impact on Emissions: For actions that would emit between 25,000 to 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent scope 1 emissions in any one year, including in pre-construction stage, the Minister must consider the project through Part 9 of the Act, as the Minister currently does with matters of national environmental significance;
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) explanatory memorandum -
Prohibited Impact on Emissions: For projects that would emit above 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent scope 1 emissions, these projects would be treated similarly to nuclear projects under the Act, where the Minister is forced to reject the project’s approval.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) explanatory memorandum -
In determining whether to approve a project, whether under Part 9 or by way of strategic assessment, the Minister must consider the impact of the proposed project on the carbon budget and whether the project proceeding would be consistent with achieving climate targets.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) explanatory memorandum -
This item requires the Climate Change Authority to create a total carbon budget that Australia can emit out to 2050 with reference to Australia’s obligations under the Climate Change Conventions and the temperature goals laid down in the Paris Agreement. This also has to be done with reference to the principles set down in the Climate Change Authority Act 2011.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
Australia's national environment law did not treat greenhouse emissions as a trigger in their own right. r6895 proposed a climate triggerThe proposed rule that would make major greenhouse gas emissions a separate reason for federal environmental assessment. for major emitting projects, with lower-threshold federal assessment and a prohibition on very high-emitting projects. The supported r6895 record in this run shows House introduction and second reading on 05 Sep 2022, scrutiny committee consideration on 28 Sep 2022, and removal from the Notice Paper on 20 Mar 2023 without passing.
- 2005
Earlier climate triggerThe proposed rule that would make major greenhouse gas emissions a separate reason for federal environmental assessment. proposal cited in the House
Adam Bandt's second reading speech pointed to Anthony Albanese's 2005 climate triggerThe proposed rule that would make major greenhouse gas emissions a separate reason for federal environmental assessment. proposal to show that the idea of adding climate to federal environmental approvals had been raised before r6895.
House Hansard ↗ - 2021
State of the Environment report cited as climate-harm context
The House second reading speeches cited the 2021 State of the Environment report as context for why climate change should be considered in environmental approvals.
House Hansard ↗ - 05 Sept 2022
House introduction and second reading moved
The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives and the second reading was moved on the same day.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 28 Sept 2022
Scrutiny of Bills committee considered the bill
The APH bill page notes consideration by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills in Scrutiny Digest 5 of 2022.
APH bill page notes ↗ - 20 Mar 2023
Bill removed from the Notice Paper
The bill was removed from the House Notice Paper under standing order 42 and did not proceed.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 05 Sept 2022
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 05 Sept 2022
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Scrutiny of Bills review 28 Sept 2022
The bill was listed for Senate scrutiny committee consideration after introduction.
Considered by scrutiny committee
APH bill page notesRemoved from the Notice Paper in accordance with (SO 42) 20 Mar 2023
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
This run does not contain r6895-specific parliamentary speeches opposing the House bill. The supported speech record is limited to the House second reading speeches from Adam Bandt and Elizabeth Watson-Brown, both in support, and the bill later did not proceed.
No r6895-specific critical debate was captured in the supported run materials.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Lead voice Supports
Elizabeth Watson-Brown
Watson-Brown strongly supports the bill and says it is needed to put a safe future ahead of coal and gas profits by stopping approval of harmful projects.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Greens
2 speakers · 2 support
Greens
2 speakers · 2 support
-
Adam Bandt ★ Bandt strongly supports the bill and says it is needed to close the climate loophole in federal environmental law by stopping new coal, oil and gas projects.
“The biggest contribution Australia can make to stop ecosystem collapse is to prevent the 114 new coal and gas projects in the pipeline from ever being built. And that is what this bill will do.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Elizabeth Watson-Brown ★ Watson-Brown strongly supports the bill and says it is needed to put a safe future ahead of coal and gas profits by stopping approval of harmful projects.
“This bill does something. With the two threshold triggers and the alternative approval prohibitions, it will finally put a safe future for all of us ahead of coal and gas profits.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Not Proceeding -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 05 Sept 2022
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 05 Sept 2022
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 20 Mar 2023
House · Removed from the Notice Paper in accordance with (SO 42)
Removed from the Notice Paper in accordance with (SO 42)
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
Considered by scrutiny committee
The bill was listed for Senate scrutiny committee consideration after introduction.
The APH bill page records that the bill was considered by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills in Scrutiny Digest 5 of 2022.
APH bill page notes