Rushed process
Kate Chaney and other crossbench speakers argued the government should wait for the Senate inquiry and allow more time to examine the reform package before passage.
This bill became law on Dec 1st, 2025.
Climate, energy & environment
The bill imposes four charges connected with the wider EPBC reform package: a restoration contribution chargeA charge that may be imposed when an EPBC approval condition requires payment for residual significant environmental impacts., a bioregional plan registration chargeA charge imposed when a priority action is registered under a bioregional plan, unless regulations exempt the person or class of persons., a national interest exemptionAn exemption under the reformed EPBC Act for an action treated as being in the national interest. This bill imposes a charge when such an exemption is granted. charge and a Part 13 exemptionAn exemption under Part 13 of the EPBC Act. This bill imposes a separate charge when that kind of exemption is granted. charge.
The bill was introduced as a companion to the wider Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025. The reform package created new restoration-contribution and bioregional planning mechanisms under the EPBC ActThe Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Australia's main national environment law. This bill adds separate charge-imposition machinery linked to reforms of that Act., but the explanatory memorandum says a separate Act was needed because section 55 of the Constitution requires taxation measures to be dealt with separately. This bill therefore supplies the legal machinery for imposing the restoration-related charges, while leaving the charge amounts to regulations.
This bill is one of seven bills in the 2025 national environment law reform package. Its role is narrower than the main reform bill: it creates the separate taxation authority for restoration-related charges that support the new EPBC offset and bioregional planning framework. Debate on the bill therefore tracked the larger fight over the package: supporters argued the package would modernise environmental approvals and fund better restoration, while critics questioned the speed of passage, the detail of the broader standards and the integrity of payment-based offsets.
Criticism focused less on the mechanics of this separate charge bill and more on the wider EPBC package it supported. Coalition and crossbench speakers objected to the speed of passage and the amount of material being handled before the Senate inquiry reported. Some critics argued the package would add uncertainty and red tape for industry, while crossbench and Greens speakers raised concerns about offset integrity, climate treatment and whether payment into a restoration fund could substitute too easily for direct protection or restoration.
Introduced in the House by Tony Burke for the Minister for the Environment and Water, Murray Watt introduced this bill. In the House final vote, support came from Labor, some crossbench members; opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Katter's Australian Party, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 01 Dec 2025
Final passage
Recorded final vote
3 counted final-passage votes were recorded.
Passage speed
32 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
The bill imposes four charges connected with the wider EPBC reform package: a restoration contribution chargeA charge that may be imposed when an EPBC approval condition requires payment for residual significant environmental impacts., a bioregional plan registration chargeA charge imposed when a priority action is registered under a bioregional plan, unless regulations exempt the person or class of persons., a national interest exemptionAn exemption under the reformed EPBC Act for an action treated as being in the national interest. This bill imposes a charge when such an exemption is granted. charge and a Part 13 exemptionAn exemption under Part 13 of the EPBC Act. This bill imposes a separate charge when that kind of exemption is granted. charge.
A restoration contribution chargeA charge that may be imposed when an EPBC approval condition requires payment for residual significant environmental impacts. can apply when an EPBC approval condition requires payment for the residual significant impacts of an approved action or class of actions.
A bioregional plan registration chargeA charge imposed when a priority action is registered under a bioregional plan, unless regulations exempt the person or class of persons. applies to registration of a priority actionAn action covered by a bioregional plan that can be registered under the reformed EPBC framework. under a bioregional plan, with regulations able to exempt people or classes of people from paying it.
National interest exemptionAn exemption under the reformed EPBC Act for an action treated as being in the national interest. This bill imposes a charge when such an exemption is granted. and Part 13 exemptionAn exemption under Part 13 of the EPBC Act. This bill imposes a separate charge when that kind of exemption is granted. charges are payable by the person to whom the relevant exemption applies, unless regulations create an exemption from payment.
The Act itself does not set charge amounts. Regulations will set a flat amount or calculation method, and those regulations must be independently reviewed after two years and then every five years.
The Restoration Charge Imposition Bill would impose the following charges... the restoration contribution charge; the bioregional plan registration charge; the national interest exemption charge; the Part 13 exemption charge.Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) explanatory memorandum
Charge (restoration contribution charge) is imposed on the grant of an approval... if a condition of the approval requires the payment of restoration contribution charge in relation to a residual significant impact.Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025
Charge (bioregional plan registration charge) is imposed on the registration of a priority action... Bioregional plan registration charge is not payable by a person, or a person included in a class of persons, prescribed by the regulations.Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025
National interest exemption charge imposed on the grant of a national interest exemption is payable by the person to whom the national interest exemption applies... Charge imposed... is not payable by a person... prescribed by the regulations.Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025
The Restoration Charge Imposition Bill would not set the amount... Instead, the regulations would set the amount... The first review must commence as soon as practicable 24 months after the commencement of the Act, with subsequent reviews commencing... 5 years after.Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) explanatory memorandum
Context
This bill is one of seven bills in the 2025 national environment law reform package. Its role is narrower than the main reform bill: it creates the separate taxation authority for restoration-related charges that support the new EPBC offset and bioregional planning framework. Debate on the bill therefore tracked the larger fight over the package: supporters argued the package would modernise environmental approvals and fund better restoration, while critics questioned the speed of passage, the detail of the broader standards and the integrity of payment-based offsets.
Samuel review frames the reform agenda
Senate debate described the package as implementing recommendations from Professor Graeme Samuel's review of the EPBC ActThe Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Australia's main national environment law. This bill adds separate charge-imposition machinery linked to reforms of that Act., including national environmental standards and changes to regional forest agreement treatment.
Senate Hansard ↗Restoration charge bill introduced
Tony Burke introduced the bill in the House, saying it would impose restoration, bioregional plan registration and exemption-related charges connected with the EPBC reform bill.
House second reading speech ↗Senate committee inquiry begins
The APH notes record referral of the bill package to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, with a report date of 2 April 2026. Critics later objected to the bills being passed before that report.
APH bill page notes ↗House rejects restoration-offset amendment
The House defeated Kate Chaney's amendment after the government argued the restoration contribution model needed flexibility to pool funds and deliver larger strategic restoration actions.
House Hansard division ↗Senate deals with the package together
The Senate considered the main reform bill and six related bills together, including this charge bill, and divided on second-reading statements, committee amendments and remaining stages.
Senate Hansard ↗Bill receives Royal AssentThe final formal approval that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act.
The bill became the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Act 2025, Act No. 67 of 2025.
Federal Register of Legislation metadata ↗First commencement provisions start
Sections 1 and 2 commenced the day after Royal AssentThe final formal approval that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act.; sections 3 to 18 commence by proclamation, or automatically 12 months after assentThe final formal approval that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act. if not proclaimed earlier.
Act commencement table ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill was referred to Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (02/04/2026).
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 90 to 44.
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
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
Recorded vote: 88 to 42.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 32 to 20.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final formal approval that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
Criticism focused less on the mechanics of this separate charge bill and more on the wider EPBC package it supported. Coalition and crossbench speakers objected to the speed of passage and the amount of material being handled before the Senate inquiry reported. Some critics argued the package would add uncertainty and red tape for industry, while crossbench and Greens speakers raised concerns about offset integrity, climate treatment and whether payment into a restoration fund could substitute too easily for direct protection or restoration.
Government speakers argued the charge and restoration contribution model would help deliver larger, strategic restoration actions and that charge details would be consulted on before imposition.
Rushed process
Kate Chaney and other crossbench speakers argued the government should wait for the Senate inquiry and allow more time to examine the reform package before passage.
Business and regional uncertainty
Coalition speakers argued the broader package could add complexity, slow approvals and damage resource, farming and forestry industries.
Offset integrity
Crossbench critics questioned whether restoration contribution payments could let project proponents rely on payment-based offsets where direct, like-for-like restoration would be more appropriate.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
Passed 88 to 42. Support came from Labor. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 88 to 38. Support came from Labor, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 32 to 20. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 89 to 40. Support came from Labor and Centre Alliance. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Recorded amendment and procedural votes grouped by chamber. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
House
Defeated 7 to 65. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was a position-taking vote before the House accepted the main reform bill in principle.
Defeated 9 to 65. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Had it passed, this crossbench package would have narrowed parts of the main reform bill's exemption and offset machinery.
Defeated 8 to 59. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was a detailed-stage vote on whether to broaden the bill's protection concepts.
Defeated 9 to 59. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The amendments would have made the main reform bill stricter on several environmental safeguards.
Defeated 9 to 55. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This tested whether the Commonwealth bill should reach further into local environmental matters.
Defeated 9 to 62. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Had it passed, climate considerations would have had a larger direct role in EPBC decisions.
Defeated 9 to 60. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The vote kept the government's commencement and climate-disclosure approach.
Defeated 9 to 62. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The package would have added more consultation and land-use safeguards to the main reform bill.
Defeated 9 to 59. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was another detailed-stage vote on stronger climate and accountability safeguards.
Passed 88 to 45. Support came from Labor. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Greens, and Katter's Australian Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This allowed the main reform bill to proceed toward third reading.
Passed 90 to 43. 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.
This procedural vote brought the House debate on that stage to a close.
Defeated 10 to 76. Support came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was the key recorded House amendment vote directly on the restoration charge bill.
Senate
Defeated 13 to 35. Support came from Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, One Nation, and Nationals.
This was a position-taking vote on First Nations consultation before the Senate accepted the bills in principle.
Defeated 4 to 44. Support came from Australia's Voice and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Liberal Party, and One Nation.
This was a split vote on a second-reading statement about the process for the package.
Defeated 27 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens.
Had it passed, the paragraph would have added a committee-referral statement to the second-reading motion.
Defeated 3 to 39. Support came from One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Liberal Party, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents.
This was a position-taking vote on objections to the package, excluding the separate request to delay debate.
Defeated 26 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Had it passed, debate on the package would have been delayed.
Passed 35 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This accepted the package, including this bill, in principle.
Defeated 19 to 34. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents.
Had it passed, the main reform bill's impact tests would have been narrower.
Passed 34 to 19. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation.
This kept those parts of the main reform bill instead of adopting the opposition deletion.
Defeated 20 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Had it passed, the main reform bill would have removed several existing federal nuclear prohibitions.
Defeated 19 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents.
This vote kept the contested water-trigger accreditation provisions in the main reform bill.
Defeated 19 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents.
This vote rejected part of the Greens package to constrain streamlined assessment pathways.
Passed 33 to 19. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation.
These amendments strengthened the standards-consistency language in the main reform bill.
Defeated 4 to 35. Support came from Australia's Voice and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Liberal Party, and One Nation.
Had it passed, some administrative decisions likely to contribute to climate change would have needed to consider children's health and wellbeing.
Defeated 5 to 35. Support came from Australia's Voice, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and Liberal Party.
Had it passed, payment into the restoration fund would have been more tightly limited for some protected matters.
Defeated 19 to 34. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents.
Had it passed, large-scale wind and solar projects would have faced a new local-environment approval trigger.
Defeated 22 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Australia's Voice, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Had it passed, the new agency would have faced more frequent and more independent review requirements.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
All speeches by bloc
25 speakers · 25 unclear
17 speakers · 18 contributions · 17 unclear
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Leon Rebello on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗4 speakers · 4 unclear
6 speakers · 6 unclear
Record
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.
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.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 90 to 44.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 88 to 42.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
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.
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.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · 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.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 32 to 20.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final formal approval that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act., turning the bill into an Act.
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (02/04/2026)
Referred to committee
The bill was referred to Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (02/04/2026).
Referred to Committee (30 Oct 2025): Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (2 Apr 2026)
APH bill page notes