EPBC legislation: WA miners fear 37 definitions of ‘unacceptable impacts’ will delay major projects

Western Australia’s miners fear that the 37 different definitions of “unacceptable impacts” included in new environmental laws will stall crucial projects in the State on critical minerals, housing and renewables. But government sources revealed State bureaucrats could get the power to give Federal approvals in the overhaul of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act — a move that would supercharge the fast-tracking of major projects. Environment Minister Murray Watt will put the package of seven bills, running to more than 1400 pages, to Parliament on Thursday and wants them passed by the end of the year. Business groups and the Coalition are concerned an overly broad definition of “unacceptable impacts” could be used as a threshold issue that could quickly reject projects. The Environment Protection Reform Bill contains 37 definitions, varying according to specific circumstances including whether a project is in a world heritage site, affects a threatened species, or might “seriously impair the environment”. These unacceptable impacts won’t be allowed to be compensated for via offsets, meaning proponents have to say how they’ll avoid them before their project can be approved. Chamber of Minerals and Energy WA policy director Anita Logiudice said there should be a single definition. “The inclusion of multiple definitions of unacceptable impact introduces complexity and ambiguity that threatens to stall resources projects throughout WA,” she said. The intention wasn’t to change the outcomes of projects being approved, approved with conditions, or rejected, but to make sure proponents, regulators and the public shared a clear and consistent understanding of the criteria applied. “The current drafting does not provide that clarity,” Ms Logiudice said. Labor sources said there were amendments in the works that would tackle concerns around this definition, along with possible changes to the EPA’s power to issue stop work orders. Senator Watt will tell the National Press Club on Thursday that it’s “now or never” for tackling the environmental laws. “With the hyperpartisan atmosphere of an election campaign behind us, now is the best opportunity to pass a balanced set of laws, in the spirit of the Samuel review, that are firmly in the national interest,” he will say – after taking a swipe at both he Opposition and the Greens for being obstructionist. He’s continuing to talk to both the Coalition and the Greens and would move quickly once a deal was struck for support from one or the other, regardless of the timing of any Senate inquiry, a senior government source said. But the minister has indicated a preference for dealing with the Coalition, as have business groups. “I think the secret to really enduring long-term reform is to try to bring different parties together and come up with outcomes where everyone gets a win, rather than one side taking everything only to be overturned the next time there’s a change of government,” Senator Watt told an Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry event. Business Council of Australia chief executive Bran Black echoed this plea to the “parties of government” to strike a deal, rather than letting the Greens into the tent. “We want to see reform that lasts. If we see reform that is unbalanced because it’s too far in favour of business or too far in favour of environmental positions that has all sorts of consequences that we wish to avoid,” he said. But the Climate Council warned that dealing with the Coalition would be a “dangerous step backwards”. “Partnering with a party still struggling with climate denial would be a dangerous bet with Australia’s future,” chief executive Amanda McKenzie said. The new laws would make it easier for the Commonwealth to strike long-lasting deals with State governments so they assess projects in line with national environmental standards, removing duplicative processes. Premier Roger Cook and Senator Watt have already started talks to strike a bilateral arrangement for WA. Ms Logiudice said CME WA wanted to see a six-month deadline put on striking a deal to accredit the WA Government to do both assessments and approvals. But Greenpeace Australia Pacific chief executive David Ritter said he would be nervous about anything that allowed the States to water down national protections.