More bureaucracy and investment risk
Critics argued the bill would add another regulatory layer, increase red tape and compliance costs, and make investors less confident about major projects, especially in regional Australia.
Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions)
Current status
This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Policy area
Climate, energy & environment
What does this bill do?
The bill would support the shift of many federal environment permitting, licensing, compliance and enforcement jobs to Environment Protection AustraliaThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law., which a companion bill would establish as Australia’s first independent national environment regulator.
Why was it introduced?
The 2021 State of the Environment ReportA national report the page uses to show that Australia's environment was already in poor shape and getting worse. found Australia’s environment was poor and deteriorating, and the Samuel ReviewThe 2020 independent review that said Australia's national environment law needed major reform and helped shape this bill. said national laws needed fundamental reform. This bill would make transitional and consequential changes to support the proposed Environment Protection AustraliaThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. and Environment Information Australia, expand audit and emergency order powers, and raise major penalties.
Broader context
Australia’s national environment laws were already under strain when the 2020 Samuel ReviewThe 2020 independent review that said Australia's national environment law needed major reform and helped shape this bill. called for fundamental reform, and the 2021 State of the Environment ReportA national report the page uses to show that Australia's environment was already in poor shape and getting worse. then found the environment was poor and deteriorating. In response, the government introduced this transitional bill in 2024 to support the proposed EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. and EIA companion bills, strengthen emergency and audit powers and lift major penalties, but although the House passed it, the bill was later discharged from the Senate Notice Paper in February 2025 and did not become law.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill would create a more powerful federal environment bureaucracy that could slow approvals, raise costs and deter investment, especially in regional industries. That case was pushed mainly by Coalition speakers, while the Greens opposed it from the opposite direction as too weak to stop habitat loss and climate harm, and one Coalition frontbencher said he would not block the second reading but wanted the broader reform package first.
Who supported it?
Hon Tanya Plibersek MP introduced this bill. It was supported by Labor, Centre Alliance, some crossbench members; opposed by Liberal Party, Nationals, Greens, Katter's Australian Party, some crossbench members; and did not pass.
Introduced in House 29 May 2024
Passed House 04 July 2024
Failed in Senate 05 Feb 2025
Did not become law —
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
Did not pass
6 recorded votes before the bill stopped proceeding
Time before failure
252 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
The bill would support the shift of many federal environment permitting, licensing, compliance and enforcement jobs to Environment Protection AustraliaThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law., which a companion bill would establish as Australia’s first independent national environment regulator.
-
The bill would let the environment minister issue urgent environment protection orders to stop or control activities that risk serious and immediate harm to protected places, species or other nationally protected mattersThe kinds of environment values the federal law is meant to protect, such as threatened species, wetlands, heritage and other listed matters..
-
The bill would sharply raise penalties for the worst breaches of national environment law, including penalties linked to a company’s benefit from the breach or up to 10 per cent of annual turnover.
-
The bill would broaden audit powers so regulators could order more compliance audits without advance notice and use an official register of independent auditorsAn official list of auditors the minister would maintain so compliance and environmental audits are done by outside auditors rather than the regulated party choosing them..
-
The bill would let project proponents refuse to pause some legal decision timeframes when regulators ask for more information, after being told why the extra information is needed.
Show source excerpts
-
As Australia’s first national independent environment protection agency, EPA would be established by the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024 to undertake regulatory and implementation functions under a range of environmental Commonwealth laws. These functions would include issuing permits and licences and undertaking compliance and enforcement activities.
Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) explanatory memorandum -
New powers to issue environment protection orders (EPOs) would allow the Minister to address, prevent, treat and mitigate imminent significant environmental risks and harm in urgent circumstances. The Minister would be able to issue a person or body corporate with an EPO to secure compliance with the EPBC Act, or to take necessary measures to investigate, prevent and control actions. For example, to secure compliance with a condition of a licence, permit, approval, or other permission.
Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) explanatory memorandum -
When a person breaches a provision that the civil penalty formula applies to, they might be required to pay the greater of 5,000 penalty units, or the value of the benefit derived and/or detriment avoided multiplied by three. When a body corporate breaches a provision the civil penalty formula applies to, they might be required to pay the greater of 50,000 penalty units, the value of the benefit derived/detriment avoided multiplied by three or 10 per cent of their annual turnover 12 months before the breach (up to a maximum of 2.5 million penalty units).
Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) explanatory memorandum -
Audit powers would also be expanded by introducing compliance audits. The Minister could require a compliance audit be completed for a range of activities purported to be done under the EPBC Act, without being required to give notice of the audit. This is intended to be a flexible tool that allows effective monitoring of compliance with the legislation. The Amendment Bill would also require the Minister to create a register of independent auditors, who would be appointed to carry out any audits under the legislation. This would replace section 459 of the EPBC Act, which allows the holder of the environmental authority to appoint an auditor and arrange for it to be carried out. This would provide a greater level of assurance through the use of independent auditors and create a pool of qualified auditors who can assist with both compliance and environmental audits under the legislation.
Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) explanatory memorandum -
The ‘stop clock’ amendments would give people proposing to undertake actions, or project proponents, the opportunity to advise the decision-maker that they do not want certain decision-making timeframes to be paused while additional information is sought. Where the regulator decides that more information is needed to make a controlled action, assessment approach, or approval decision, proponents would now be given notice about why additional information is needed and have up to five business days to decide whether decision-making timeframes should be paused while enabling that information to be sought. These changes would give proponents a greater understanding of why additional information is requested and a greater say in the statutory timeframe.
Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
Australia’s national environment laws were already under strain when the 2020 Samuel ReviewThe 2020 independent review that said Australia's national environment law needed major reform and helped shape this bill. called for fundamental reform, and the 2021 State of the Environment ReportA national report the page uses to show that Australia's environment was already in poor shape and getting worse. then found the environment was poor and deteriorating. In response, the government introduced this transitional bill in 2024 to support the proposed EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. and EIA companion bills, strengthen emergency and audit powers and lift major penalties, but although the House passed it, the bill was later discharged from the Senate Notice Paper in February 2025 and did not become law.
- 2020
Samuel ReviewThe 2020 independent review that said Australia's national environment law needed major reform and helped shape this bill. calls for fundamental reform of national environment law
The bill’s explanatory memorandum says the 2020 independent review of the EPBC ActThe main federal environment law this bill would amend, including the rules for approvals, permits, compliance and penalties. led by Graeme Samuel found the national framework needed major reform.
Australian Parliament House ↗ - 2021
State of the Environment ReportA national report the page uses to show that Australia's environment was already in poor shape and getting worse. finds Australia’s environment is poor and deteriorating
The explanatory memorandum says the 2021 report found worsening environmental condition under pressures including climate change, habitat loss, invasive species, pollution and resource extraction.
Australian Parliament House ↗ - 29 May 2024
Government introduces transitional bill for nature-positive agencies
The minister said the bill would amend nine environmental laws so regulatory and information functions could move to the proposed EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. and EIA framework set up by companion bills.
Hansard ↗ - 04 July 2024
House passes the bill
Third reading agreement completed the bill’s passage through the House of Representatives after debate and consideration in detail.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 12 Aug 2024
Bill is introduced in the Senate
The bill began its Senate stage when it was presented and a second reading was moved, but it did not progress to final passage there.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 05 Feb 2025
Bill is discharged from the Senate Notice Paper
This ended the bill’s parliamentary run without enactment, leaving the transitional support for the proposed agencies and enforcement changes unlegislated.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 29 May 2024
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 29 May 2024
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Second reading debate 06 June 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 26 June 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 27 June 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/09/2024) review 27 June 2024
Referred to Committee (27/06/2024): Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/09/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesSecond reading debate 02 July 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 03 July 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House second reading agreed 04 July 2024
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
Consideration in detail 04 July 2024
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
House third reading agreed 04 July 2024
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Introduced 12 Aug 2024
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 12 Aug 2024
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Discharged from Notice Paper 05 Feb 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The main criticism was that the bill would create a more powerful federal environment bureaucracy that could slow approvals, raise costs and deter investment, especially in regional industries. That case was pushed mainly by Coalition speakers, while the Greens opposed it from the opposite direction as too weak to stop habitat loss and climate harm, and one Coalition frontbencher said he would not block the second reading but wanted the broader reform package first.
Criticism was real but split in opposite directions rather than forming one shared case against the bill.
Too much power shifted to an unelected EPA
Some opponents said the bill took too much control away from elected ministers and handed it to an unelected regulator with broad compliance and enforcement powers, risking less accountable decision-making.
Not real environmental reform
The Greens argued the bill was largely administrative and would not actually stop species decline, habitat destruction or climate damage, so it risked becoming a reform label without stronger substantive protections.
Broader reforms and standards were missing
A narrower criticism was that setting up the EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. first, without the full package of national environmental standards and wider EPBC ActThe main federal environment law this bill would amend, including the rules for approvals, permits, compliance and penalties. overhaul, risked creating new powers before the overall rules were properly settled.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
How the bill itself passed
These were the main recorded votes on the bill.
Carried House cleared second reading
Passed 82 to 60. Support came from Labor and Centre Alliance. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
House cleared second reading
Party Aye / No
Labor 75 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 38
Nationals 0 / 15
Independent 6 / 3
Greens 0 / 3
Centre Alliance 1 / 0
Katter's Australian Party 0 / 1
Amendments at a glance
Recorded amendment and procedural votes grouped by chamber. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
House
Defeated Call for stronger nature protections
Defeated 9 to 93. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Call for stronger nature protections
The House rejected this Greens amendment, so the main second-reading debate stayed focused on the government's package rather than adopting a stronger environmental critique.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 48
Liberal Party 0 / 32
Nationals 0 / 10
Independent 6 / 1
Greens 3 / 0
Centre Alliance 0 / 1
Katter's Australian Party 0 / 1
Defeated Criticise weak nature laws
Defeated 54 to 87. Support came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Criticise weak nature laws
The House rejected the Coalition's criticism amendment, which left the government's second-reading motion to continue unchanged.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 75
Liberal Party 38 / 0
Nationals 15 / 0
Independent 1 / 7
Greens 0 / 3
Centre Alliance 0 / 1
Katter's Australian Party 0 / 1
Carried House accepted the bill in principle
Passed 79 to 58. Support came from Labor. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
House accepted the bill in principle
This second-reading vote let the bill continue, but final House passage came later that day at third reading.
Party Aye / No
Labor 72 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 36
Nationals 0 / 15
Independent 7 / 3
Greens 0 / 3
Katter's Australian Party 0 / 1
Defeated Tighten forestry and continuing-use rules
Defeated 11 to 34. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Tighten forestry and continuing-use rules
The House rejected the crossbench package, leaving the bill's transitional settings intact and deferring those forestry and land-use issues to later reform stages.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 31
Independent 8 / 1
Greens 3 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 1
Nationals 0 / 1
Senate
Defeated Reject nature-positive laws
Defeated 27 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and Australia's Voice. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Reject nature-positive laws
The Senate rejected the urgency motion, so the attempt to force debate against the nature-positive bills failed.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 18
Liberal Party 18 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Nationals 5 / 0
Independent 1 / 1
One Nation 2 / 0
Australia's Voice 0 / 1
UAP 1 / 0
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Tanya Plibersek
Plibersek supports the bill and says it is a balanced set of reforms that will quickly set up the new environmental institutions, reporting, and enforcement powers needed for the government's nature-positive agendaThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature..
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead opposing voice Opposes
Keith Pitt
Keith Pitt opposes the bill, saying it would add another layer of federal regulation and enforcement over businesses and farmers.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead supporting voice Supports
Sophie Scamps
Scamps supports the bill and backs creating the new Environment Protection Agency, but argues it is too weak without a strong independent board, a climate trigger and repeal of the Regional Forestry Agreement exemptions.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Mixed
Kylea Tink
Tink supports establishing the EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. in principle, but says the bill needs amendment because it leaves consultation, transparency and community access to information too weak and delegates too much to project proponents.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
18 speakers · 22 contributions · 18 support
Labor
18 speakers · 22 contributions · 18 support
-
Tim Ayres Ayres supports the bill, saying it establishes the first national independent environment protection agency and gives it the powers and independence needed to make environmental decisions faster, tougher and more transparent.
“This bill delivers that. It establishes EPA in legislation as an independent statutory agency, separate from the environment department and the government.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Justine Elliot Justine Elliot supports the bill and says it is a groundbreaking step that will help deliver the Labor government's Nature Positive planThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature. by creating the new environmental agencies and stronger laws.
“The fact is that these bills that we're looking at today, the three nature positive bills, represent a really groundbreaking step towards our commitment to preserving our incredible landscapes and what is, as we all know, our very unique biodiversity and our very rich ecosystems, which we are so fortunate to have in this country. But it takes time, commitment, investment and a long-term vision to make sure that this is all in place. That's why we have had so many ongoing stages when it comes to the reform. We need to make sure it's all in place. It really is a new era of environmental conservation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Shayne Neumann Neumann supports the bill, saying it is part of Labor’s Nature Positive PlanThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature. and will strengthen environmental protection while giving business clearer and faster approval pathways.
“We had a decade of waste under the previous coalition government. They left institutions to manage the state of despair and the repair that we need to undertake in relation to the environment. Through our Nature Positive Plan, we're doing more than ever to protect our natural world and fix up more of what's been damaged. We are supporting sensible development and good local jobs. We've already completed the first stage of the reform. We passed legislation to establish the world's first nature repair market and expanded the water trigger to apply to all unconventional gas projects. We are now moving quickly to deliver Environment Protection Australia and Environment Information Australia. It's something that we said we would do. It is the environment and business that will benefit from the second stage of our Nature Positive Plan. These changes will protect the environment and support sensible development. They will deliver stronger environmental powers, faster environmental approval, more environmental information and greater environmental transparency.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Matt Burnell 2 contributions Burnell supports the bill and says it will strengthen Australia’s environmental laws by requiring strategic assessments, landscape-scale conservation planning, climate adaptation, and stronger protections for threatened species.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Matt Burnell on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Burnell supports the bill, saying it creates a framework for a habitable and productive environment and is not about shutting down farming. He argues it will help farmers, agriculture and environmental protection work together so land stays productive and safe for the future.
“That's what the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024 and the related bills essentially go towards. It's about setting a framework where you can look to the future and know with a high level of certainty that we are going to have an environment that is habitable, that is productive for food production and where farmers are profitable.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Burnell supports the bill and says it will strengthen Australia’s environmental laws by requiring strategic assessments, landscape-scale conservation planning, climate adaptation, and stronger protections for threatened species. He argues these changes are needed to make the EPBC ActThe main federal environment law this bill would amend, including the rules for approvals, permits, compliance and penalties. fit for contemporary environmental challenges and to support sustainable development.
“The Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill further strengthens our legislative framework for environmental protection. This bill amends the EPBC Act to introduce new requirements for strategic environmental assessments and landscape scale conservation planning. These measures ensure environmental considerations are integrated into broader planning and development processes, promoting sustainable and resilient landscapes. The bill also enhances protections for threatened species and ecological communities, recognising the urgent need to safeguard our most vulnerable biodiversity. By strengthening the EPBC Act we can ensure our environmental laws are fit for purpose and capable of addressing contemporary challenges. The bill includes provisions for climate change adaptation, recognising the need to build resilience in our ecosystems and communities in the face of a changing climate.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Graham Perrett Perrett supports the bill as part of Labor's nature-positive reforms and says it will make environmental law less bureaucratic, give business more certainty and help repair and protect the environment.
“The nature protection suite of bills is the second stage of our plan, and I'm proud to be talking about them today. This second stage of reform focuses on stronger environmental powers, faster environmental approvals, more information about the environment, and greater transparency. The legislation is good for the environment, good for the people of Australia and good for business. We're fixing laws so that they are less bureaucratic and provide more certainty for business. However, the key focus remains on repairing our environment. It is important that we let businesses know what they can and can't do, because most businesses, if they get certainty about a decision early, can move on and do more positive things. But, as I said, the key focus remains on repairing the environment, protecting our unique flora and fauna and preventing extinctions.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Josh Wilson Wilson supports the bill as part of the Albanese Labor government's nature-positive reforms, saying Australia’s environment is in poor shape and urgent action is needed.
“The Australian environment has been hammered and it's on a trajectory of decline. The previous government couldn't give a stuff about that. They didn't do anything about it, despite all of the warnings and all of the expert reports. We're not going to take that approach. We've started the reform process. This bill continues with two significant instalments in looking after Australia's environment under the Albanese Labor government.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jerome Laxale Laxale supports the bill and says it is needed to create a strong, independent environment protection regulator and better environmental data systems.
“The Australian people expect and deserve a government that not only speaks about environmental protection but acts decisively to achieve it, based on the science. The path forward is clear. We must continue to implement and expand our reforms, ensuring that our laws and policies are robust, enforceable and effective. This includes the passage of this bill and the establishment of a national environment protection agency and Environment Information Australia, which will provide everything that the public, industry and the government need to comprehensively protect our environment. As long as I have the privilege to serve in this place, I'll work tirelessly to deliver the reforms we need to ensure we have laws that protect our environment for generations to come. I commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Daniel Mulino Mulino supports the bill and says it is the next step in the government's Nature Positive PlanThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature., creating a new national environment agency and improving transparency and data.
“I am pleased to rise to speak in favour of this important bill that is the next stage of this government working towards the Nature Positive Plan. This involves two elements: firstly, the creation of Australia's first national independent environmental protection agency, the EPA, which will be a body with strong new powers and penalties to protect nature; secondly, it is a step forward when it comes to accountability and transparency with a new body called Environment Information Australia.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Carina Garland Garland supports the bill and says it will deliver the Albanese government's nature-positive reforms by creating a national EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law., improving environmental data and raising compliance standards.
“These bills provide more transparency in the critical information and data that underpins regulatory decision-making; this was a key recommendation of the Samuel review. This delivers on our promise at the last election to provide consistent and reliable information on the state of the environment across the country. We know the work we're doing to define 'nature positive' is world leading. 'Nature positive' means improving our ecosystems, including the species that rely on and form part of an ecosystem. Creating a nature-positive Australia means that across the country nature is repairing and regenerating rather than continuing to decline. Our environment in Australia is a national asset and a responsibility for governments to protect. These bills make it a requirement for the government to commit publicly to national environment goals.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tony Zappia Tony Zappia supports the bill, saying it responds to clear weaknesses in the current environment law by creating stronger protections, faster approvals and better transparency.
“We, as a parliament, have a responsibility to ensure that we preserve and protect the environment and, at the very least, stop it from degrading further. The measures proposed in this legislation, I believe, will go a long way towards doing that. Others will argue that perhaps they are imperfect, that they may cause other problems. The reality is that, as with every bit of legislation, there may be flaws, but this bit of legislation at least responds to identified problems of the current system as identified in the Samuel review and implements what I believe will be measures that will ensure that our environment is better protected into the future.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Alicia Payne 2 contributions Payne supports the bill and says it is a crucial part of Labor’s plan to protect nature by creating an independent EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law., improving environmental data and accountability, and defining 'nature positive' in law.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Alicia Payne on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Payne supports the bill and says it is a crucial part of Labor’s plan to protect nature by creating an independent EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law., improving environmental data and accountability, and defining 'nature positive' in law. She argues the reforms are needed because the current system is broken and enforcement is too weak.
“This is an incredibly significant bill and an incredibly ambitious plan that we have to protect our environment. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Alicia Payne supports the bill as part of Labor's nature-positive agendaThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature. and says it delivers on the government's election commitment to strong environmental law reform. She frames it as necessary to better protect the environment under the Samuel reviewThe 2020 independent review that said Australia's national environment law needed major reform and helped shape this bill. recommendations.
“The Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill is an important part of the Albanese Labor government's nature-positive plan, and, importantly, part of delivering on our election commitment to implement strong environmental law reforms in line with the Samuel review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Michelle Ananda-Rajah Michelle Ananda-Rajah strongly supports the bill, saying it is a crucial step in Labor's plan to create a Nature Positive Australia by strengthening environmental regulation, improving data transparency and making approvals more certain.
“I commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Susan Templeman 2 contributions Templeman supports the bill and says it is the second stage of Labor’s nature positive reformsThe staged set of changes the government says will rebuild the environment law system, with this bill described as one part of that program., creating the new Environment Protection AustraliaThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. agency and a smoother transition to stronger environmental regulation.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Susan Templeman on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Susan Templeman supports the nature positive package and says it is a significant step forward for environmental protection, though this extract discusses a different bill in the package rather than this bill specifically. On that basis, and consistent with her recorded aye vote, she appears to support the bill's passage.
“I chose to live in this World Heritage area more than 30 years ago, and now three generations of my extended family live in the Blue Mountains, so I care, and my community cares. I would not be backing this bill if I didn't believe that it is a significant step forward, a step in reversing the extinction and destruction of native species and protecting our environment better than it ever has been before. Finally we will have an independent national environment protection agency, which will have much stronger powers than anything the current department has.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Templeman supports the bill and says it is the second stage of Labor’s nature positive reformsThe staged set of changes the government says will rebuild the environment law system, with this bill described as one part of that program., creating the new Environment Protection AustraliaThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. agency and a smoother transition to stronger environmental regulation. She argues it is needed to enforce the laws properly, lift penalties and improve decision-making with better data.
“As the second stage of our environmental law changes, this legislation is the tough cop on the beat that we promised. Environment Protection Australia, our EPA, is an important part of delivering the government's Nature Positive Plan. Passing this legislation will mean that we can get on with the nuts and bolts of setting up the new EPA before they're asked to administer the future new environmental laws. It allows a smoother transition of responsibilities from the department to the agency. We're establishing Australia's first national independent environment protection agency, with strong new powers and penalties to better protect nature.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Libby Coker Coker supports the bill and says it will help set up the new national EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law., smooth the transition of responsibilities, and strengthen environmental laws and penalties to better protect nature.
“Passing this legislation will mean that we get on with the job of setting up the national EPA. It will allow a smoother transition of responsibilities from the department to the agency and underpin the establishment and administration of new environmental laws and penalties.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Dan Repacholi Repacholi supports the bill and says it will make environmental laws work better by strengthening compliance, improving information, and speeding up better decisions.
“This is an ideal outcome and this bill will help to make sure that more ideal outcomes will continue to be delivered. This bill is common sense. It makes sure that the laws we make are being followed and that our goals are being met, and it helps us to have access to the best possible information to make this happen. It's about helping to make the right decisions faster, and it's all for a cause that I don't think anyone can disagree with, making sure we better look after the environment. I commend this legislation to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Stanley Anne Stanley supports the bill and says it delivers on the Albanese government's promise of a strong environmental regulator and better information for decisions.
“The Albanese government went to the 2022 election promising a strong EPA, and this is what these bills will deliver. They will ensure not only that there is a strong compliance body—and stronger penalties to ensure compliance—but that there is also reliable and robust information to inform environmental decisions. These bills represent the second stage of the Albanese government's ambitious environmental reforms, and I look forward to working with the minister to better protect what makes Australia so unique. I now commend the bills to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Peter Khalil Khalil supports the bill as part of Labor's Nature Positive PlanThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature., saying it gives the minister the powers needed to manage unintended issues in the transition to the new EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law..
“The Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024, which we are debating, delivers on this promise by establishing the EPA. The Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024 delivers on this promise by establishing Environment Information Australia, the EIA. And the Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024 provides the powers to the minister to address many of the unintended outcomes or unforeseen issues related to transitioning to the EPA.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tanya Plibersek ★ 2 contributions Plibersek supports the bill and says it is a balanced set of reforms that will quickly set up the new environmental institutions, reporting, and enforcement powers needed for the government's nature-positive agendaThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature..
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Tanya Plibersek on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Minister's second reading speech
Plibersek supports the bill and says it is a balanced set of reforms that will quickly set up the new environmental institutions, reporting, and enforcement powers needed for the government's nature-positive agendaThe government's reform package for rebuilding national environment law and creating a system that repairs rather than keeps degrading nature.. She commends it to the House and says the rest of the reforms will keep moving through parliament.
“This is a balanced set of reforms that moves quickly to set up crucial institutions and reporting and would get them in place as soon as we can so that we can continue to work on stage 3 of our nature-positive law reforms.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Plibersek समर्थन the bill as part of the government's nature positive reformsThe staged set of changes the government says will rebuild the environment law system, with this bill described as one part of that program., saying it will create new institutions with stronger compliance powers, better data, and more transparency to protect nature. She presents it as a practical step toward reversing environmental decline and turning the reform agenda into law.
“With these bills—the second stage of the nature positive reforms—we're moving quickly to establish the institutions that will be crucial to creating a nature positive Australia. Our bills would establish Environment Protection Australia, our EPA, and define statutory functions for the head of Environment Information Australia. We are creating Australia's first national, independent environment protection agency with strong new powers and penalties to better protect nature. EPA will deliver proportionate and effective risk based compliance and enforcement actions using high-quality data and information. It will provide assurance that environmental outcomes are being met. Promoting public trust in environmental decision-making through the publication of information and the transparency of decisions will be core to EPA's business.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Coalition
10 speakers · 9 oppose · 1 mixed
Coalition
10 speakers · 9 oppose · 1 mixed
-
Keith Pitt ★ Keith Pitt opposes the bill, saying it would add another layer of federal regulation and enforcement over businesses and farmers.
“I oppose the legislation. I oppose the green police. I think it's not in Australia's interest, and I am incredibly concerned about the ability of an agency like this to end up like the CFMEU, to end up with rights-of-entry provisions and to end up with actual powers and warrants and authority to go on to law-abiding businesses and shut them down.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Webster Anne Webster says the bill should not pass, arguing it adds more cost, bureaucracy and red tape and gives Labor another layer of centralised control over environmental approvals.
“In conclusion, these bills only add more cost, bureaucracy and red tape, enabling a Labor government agenda that is anything but positive for nature. Labor are railroading regional communities for renewable projects that do more harm than good. Yet again, Labor robs regions to buy votes in the inner cities.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Nola Marino Marino opposes the bill, saying it strips decision-making from elected ministers and hands it to an unelected EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. that will impose more bureaucracy and costs on regional communities, business and farming.
“Critically, this EPA removes entirely our capacity to make decisions in the best interests of our communities and hands these decisions to Canberra based Labor mates and bureaucrats. It takes away rural and regional Australians' ability to offer changing opportunities for our young people and to meet and deliver the economic and social needs of industries and our local communities. I believe we will see the EPA waving through Labor's renewables-only agenda in spite of our communities. They will ignore and roll over our communities.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michael McCormack McCormack opposes the bill, saying it is another overreach that adds more bureaucracy and red tape.
“This nature positive environmental bill is just another overreach; it's just more bureaucracy. I mean, we know where it starts, but the question is: where does it end? That is the major problem, and yet we've got a Labor government that is not actually doing all that well in the polls or anywhere else at the moment. The people out there are palpable with white-hot anger about how they've governed this nation, and if they lose enough seats and end up having to power share with the Greens after the election then God help Australia.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Barnaby Joyce Barnaby Joyce opposes the bill, saying it is another step toward state control over private land and enterprise rather than genuine environmental protection.
“I don't support this, because I've been around here too long. I've seen this game too long. I'm telling you: when you fall down this trap, you become the endorser of socialism at the expense of private enterprise and freedom.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Rowan Ramsey Ramsey says the opposition will oppose the bill because it will gum up investment, damage confidence and push projects offshore.
“We, in opposition, are right to oppose it. We are right to campaign for Australia's future—to try and keep us in that top handful of countries with the highest living standards in the world and not to drive our productivity through the floor. It is why the opposition has taken the stance in the last week to say that we back nuclear energy in Australia, because we do not want to see the industries, the manufacturers, the people that actually provide the jobs in the economy in Australia, driven to the wall. We do not want to see them driven out of the country.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
David Gillespie Gillespie opposes the bill and says he cannot recommend it to the House because it hands too much environmental approval power to unelected bureaucrats and strips ministerial control.
“You can gather, Mr Speaker, that I don't approve of the bill, and I don't recommend it to the House. I think we should leave the approval at the one-stop shop. If you have one EPA in New South Wales, one in Victoria or one in Queensland, we believe in applying the same laws for everyone. You can't cherry-pick which industries get regulated to death and which ones get a leave pass. I'll leave it at that, but I definitely recommend caution. This is putting lots of rushed, angry types of powers into the hands of very powerful bureaucrats.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Andrew Willcox Andrew Willcox opposes the bill and says he will not support it because he считает it a heavy-handed green lawfare measure that would duplicate existing bodies and give a new agency too much power to shut down businesses.
“This isn't an environmental protection agency; this is an environmental union. This minister wants to give this organisation union power, and the scary thing is it is going to hurt everyone. Yes, it's going to hurt big business and, yes, it's going to hurt small business too. This environmental union will be able to walk into any business—restaurants, hairdressers, accountants, engineering shops and your local fish and chip shops—and force them to stop trading. If they want to shut you down, they will be able to do this. I will not be supporting this bill. As I've clearly demonstrated, this bill is not nature positive; on the contrary, this bill is nature negative.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Ted O'Brien O'Brien says the coalition will not block the bill's second reading, but argues it does not meaningfully improve Australia's environment laws and is the wrong approach because it expands the EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. beyond its promised role and comes without the broader reforms and standards he wants.
“"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Kevin Hogan Kevin Hogan opposes the bill, saying it will scare off investment, hurt regional communities and damage the economy by adding bureaucracy, red tape and sovereign risk.
“Very sadly, I stand here to speak against a bill that the Labor Party has introduced. This is a bad bill for our country. It's especially a bad bill for regional communities. It's a bad bill for the investment it will scare out of our communities. And, again, it doesn't surprise me, coming from a government that represents and is a government of city elites.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Greens
4 speakers · 4 oppose
Greens
4 speakers · 4 oppose
-
Adam Bandt Bandt opposes the bill, saying it will not protect koalas, stop native forest logging, or halt new coal and gas projects.
“This bill, the government's plan, won't save koalas. It won't stop native forest logging, and it won't stop the expansion of the coal and gas industry. In fact, the extinction crisis and global warming will continue to get worse. This is a broken promise that sells out our environment and the millions of Australians who want climate action. Instead, Labor has caved in to the coal and gas industry, who want faster and easier approvals for their polluting and damaging new coal and gas mines.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Max Chandler-Mather Chandler-Mather opposes the bill, saying it will allow new coal and gas projects, destroy local environments, and serve fossil fuel billionaires rather than ordinary Australians.
“Let's be clear about this bill. This bill will allow for the approval of new coal and gas projects and destroying local environments. The decision today by the environment minister—151 new gas wells—will bulldoze huge swathes of koala habitat before we get to the fact that gas has an impact.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Stephen Bates Bates says the Greens oppose this bill because it delays the real environment law overhaul Australia needs and leaves the proposed agency without the power to stop habitat destruction, native forest logging or fossil fuel expansion.
“The Greens do not support the indefinite delay of critical environmental and cultural heritage law reforms. The government's diminished environment policy won't save our wildlife, won't stop native forest logging and won't stop the expansion of the fossil fuel industry.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Elizabeth Watson-Brown Watson-Brown says the Greens will oppose the bill in the House because they see it as an environmental protection smokescreen that does nothing to stop species loss, habitat destruction or climate damage.
“So here we have a bill that is an environmental protection smokescreen. Again, this is Labor putting up legislation to give the impression of doing something—smoke, mirrors, a vibe. Tragically, though, it does nothing to avert the cascading crises of species extinction, habitat destruction and climate catastrophe exacerbated by Labor's inaction. For these reasons the Greens will oppose this bill in the House. We will reserve our position in the Senate and await the findings of the Senate inquiries into this bill.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
3 speakers · 1 support · 2 mixed
Minor parties and independents
3 speakers · 1 support · 2 mixed
-
Kylea Tink ★ Tink supports establishing the EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law. in principle, but says the bill needs amendment because it leaves consultation, transparency and community access to information too weak and delegates too much to project proponents.
“Leaving consultation to matters of policy and giving proponents the power to control if, how and when that consultation happens is not in the spirit of the recommendations, observations or calls to date. The regulator should have the responsibility to ensure access to information and meaningful consultation, and the time to ensure that responsibility is now when the legislation is before us to establish the EPA. That's why we'll be proposing amendments to bring this level of responsibility, integrity and accountability into the EPA through this bill before us. Ultimately, the fix is not hard. It simply requires the bill to be strengthened to ensure the EPA is responsible for community access to information about proposed developments and that the community has an adequate opportunity and timeframe to express their views. As it currently stands, this is not the case. That responsibility is delegated to project proponents. I've got to say, that's a bit like putting the cat in charge of the milk.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Monique Ryan Ryan says she wants the bill to pass, but only with crossbench amendments that strengthen the EPAThe new national regulator the bill would help create, with powers to issue permits, run audits, and enforce federal environment law., add clearer governance, and make the reforms more effective.
“My electorate of Kooyong wants this government to act on climate and environment more quickly, more decisively and more effectively. I ask the government to accept the proposed amendments from the crossbench. They will significantly improve this legislation. Australians have lost faith in our environmental and climate protections. We need the government to act now to restore that faith.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sophie Scamps ★ Scamps supports the bill and backs creating the new Environment Protection Agency, but argues it is too weak without a strong independent board, a climate trigger and repeal of the Regional Forestry Agreement exemptions.
“Australia absolutely needs a national Environment Protection Agency—there is no doubt about it—and I thank and commend the government for their work to establish this body. But it could be so much better and stronger. If ever there were a time for strong and visionary leadership, it is now, and so I urge the minister and the government to act decisively to enact a strong and independent board to oversee the duties of the EPA.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Not Proceeding -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 29 May 2024
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.
- 29 May 2024
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.
- 06 June 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 26 June 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 27 June 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 02 July 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 03 July 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 04 July 2024
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
- 04 July 2024
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
- 04 July 2024
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 12 Aug 2024
Senate · 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.
- 12 Aug 2024
Senate · 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.
- 05 Feb 2025
Senate · Discharged from Notice Paper
Discharged from Notice Paper
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/09/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (27 June 2024): Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (9 Sept 2024)
APH bill page notes