Mixed reviews of Albanese’s environmental overhaul, as Roger Cook declares it could have been ‘a lot worse’

Western Australia’s $150 billion resources industry is bracing for a new fight over the fine print, and warning that Labor’s new environment deal with the Greens could drive energy prices higher. Gas has been locked out of the new regime for environmental approvals meant to fast-track stalled projects, but Roger Cook rejected Opposition claims it amounts to a “betrayal” of WA. Key industry groups, meanwhile, saw the deal as a way forward, but warned the details would be crucial and that national standards and regulations and bilateral relations with the States still needed to be worked out. Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt told Mr Cook about the deal only hours after the Premier publicly urged Liberal MPs to back an alternative option. Mr Cook on Thursday called it a “missed opportunity”. He said the outcome could have been better for industry, but “it could have been a lot worse”, insisting the result was better than the original Nature Positive bill that he helped scuttle in February. “It could have been better from an industry point of view, but it could have been a lot worse, and there’s no doubt that the legacy package has improved as a result of the deep engagement from Western Australian industry,” he said. “It’s a significant improvement on the current EPBC Act. It’s a significant improvement on the laws that were being considered previously. So this is a good outcome.” The Premier is now first in line for a bi-lateral agreement authorising WA to conduct assessments on behalf of the Commonwealth. “I’ve got no reason to believe why it can’t be achieved within a matter of months,” he said. But Mr Cook wasn’t sure an agreement could be locked in before the regulations underpinning the new national laws are ironed out. “The accurate answer to that question is, I don’t know,” he said. “But what Minister Watt has indicated to us is that he’s keen to do a bilateral agreement with WA as a matter of priority, we’re the first cab off the rank.” Under their deal with Labor, the Greens have ensured new fossil fuel projects will be carved out of a national interest exemption. This will allow critical projects to by-pass environmental standards for approval within 30 days. WA wants to ensure new gas projects are covered by a bilateral agreement, which would will streamline State and Federal approval processes to avoid duplication. “I don’t see any reason why (gas) can’t be treated in the same way that it is under our current State environmental assessment and State environmental approval processes,” the Premier said. “Gas and other resources continue to be the backbone of our economy. So, obviously, any environmental regime that we are part of will ensure that we can continue to make sure that we bring these projects on stream.” Australian Energy Producers chief executive Samantha McCulloch called it a “squandered” opportunity. “Carving gas out of streamlined reforms is simply not in the national interest. The deal will entrench slow approvals which will drive up energy costs,” she said. The Albanese Government has promised a 14-day limit on stop-work orders. It will also clarify the “unacceptable impacts” test and the definition for a clause requiring “net gain” for the environment, but the detail remains unclear. Minerals Council of Australia chief executive declared it an “inferior and disappointing” outcome, warning the amended legislation will increase red tape and open new avenues for legal challenge. But local industry groups were more cautious. Chamber of Minerals and Energy WA policy director Anita Logiudice said yet-to-be worked out details were critical. “While the EPBC amendments provide the framework, their real impact hinges on national standards and regulations that are yet to be written, and on bilateral accreditation,” she said. “The State and Federal governments must now put their shoulders to the wheel to fast-track negotiations.” The Association of Mining and Exploration Companies said the deal fell short of its full potential, but was still a big step forward. “The minerals industry will be a primary beneficiary of these changes, which could see projects reduce the time taken to get approvals by more than 12 months,” AMEC chief executive Warren Pearce said. Environmentalists had wanted it to go much further. “We still have an EPBC Act which remains highly skewed towards industry,” Conservation Council WA Executive Director Matt Roberts said. Senior WA Liberal Michaelia Cash called the Labor-Greens deal a “devastating betrayal”, compounded by Mr Cook. “(He) has meekly fallen in behind his Canberra colleagues instead of standing up for WA,” she said. The Premier dismissed the suggestion that he should have intervened earlier in negotiations. “We had discussions around some key issues,” he said. “There was the issue of oil and gas being available to those more prospective or shorter pathways, so that didn’t come to bear. “We wanted to see better definitions around unacceptable risk to the environment, I think they achieved that.” Only partially, according to industry leaders. “For net gain there will be some clarity in the regulations,” Chamber of Commerce and Industry WA chief economist Aaron Morey said. “For unacceptable impacts we’re still going to be dealing with 37 different definitions, there have been some changes made. . . Our hope is that we won’t be creating a legal minefield with multiple definitions, but it’s going to take time to absorb all of those changes.” The Premier laid the blame squarely at the Opposition. “Quite frankly, I think this is the story of the day that the Liberal Party are a dysfunctional rabble. “They’ve been marginalised, basically led by the nose by Pauline Hanson and Barnaby Joyce, and quite frankly, they’ve let WA industry and the WA community down by not being better engaged.” Asked who they blame, one senior mining executive swiftly answered: both. “Albanese should have been patient . . . Coalition should have been more engaged. Takes two to tango,” they said. They called it deflating and remarked that “we were so close”.