Think Tank Warns Proposed Labor Environment Agency Could Impede Development by Creating ‘Activist Beast’ Risks
The IPA has issued a warning regarding the proposed agency, stating that it represents another government intervention that may hinder growth in Australia’s critical resources sector.
A Melbourne-based think tank has expressed concern about the Albanese government’s proposed national environment watchdog. This agency could impose fines of up to $780 million (US$499 million) on those violating federal environmental laws and could potentially become a biased activist entity.
Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek announced details about the independent Environment Protection Agency (EPA) on April 16, stating that it will be equipped with enhanced powers to ensure better protection of nature.
Environment Watchdog Given Expanded Power
As per the proposal, a statutory body will have the authority to issue Environment Protection Orders, commonly known as “stop-work” orders, to individuals breaching federal environmental laws.
The EPA will also be empowered to audit businesses to ensure compliance with environmental approval conditions.
This development is expected to have far-reaching effects, as approximately one in seven developments were found to potentially violate their offset conditions, according to Ms. Plibersek.
Offset conditions require businesses to balance the negative impact of their projects on the environment with equivalent “net positive” outcomes elsewhere.
Related Stories
If a business fails to comply, it must compensate the government for the environmental damage caused by the project.
The watchdog will also have the authority to enforce other federal laws relating to recycling, hazardous waste, wildlife trafficking, sea dumping, ozone protection, and air quality.
Moreover, the EPA chief will be appointed independently as a statutory position, akin to the Australian Federal Police Commissioner, to ensure that no government interference affects the agency’s vital enforcement work, the minister explained.
Bureaucrats Could Have Final Say On Critical Mineral Projects: IPA
However, Daniel Wild, deputy executive director at the Institute of Public Affairs, argued that this move represents another government intervention aimed at restricting growth in Australia’s critical resources sector at a critical time for productivity in the country.
According to Mr. Wild, the EPA could enable unelected activist bureaucrats to make decisions regarding critical resource projects, significantly reducing the role of elected governments.
Contrary to Labor’s promises during the election, the watchdog’s powers would not be limited to enforcing environmental laws but would extend to project approval decisions, Mr. Wild added.
Number Of Environmental Bureaucrats Skyrocket
This development follows a recent research by IPA, which suggested that the total number of federal bureaucrats dedicated to enforcing regulations was set to reach 100,000 by the end of 2024.
This growth was primarily driven by the Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water portfolio, which was expected to witness a 51 percent increase in total staff.
Mr. Wild highlighted that this growth rate was three times higher than any other portfolio during the same period in percentage terms.
The research also revealed that four of the five regulatory government agencies and departments with the largest staff increase were involved in environmental regulation and climate change matters.
Mr. Wild expressed concern that at a time when Australia needs productivity growth, the federal government has delegated crucial policy matters to urban elites and the political class.
However, Labor argued that the EPA would enhance environmental protections and restore public confidence in national environmental laws.
‘Anti-mining, Anti-development’
The establishment of the new EPA is part of the government’s Nature Positive Plan, a key initiative to reform Australia’s national environmental law—the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).
After an independent review led by Professor Graeme Samuel AC in 2021, which found the EPBC Act inadequate for current and future environmental challenges, the federal government undertook this initiative.
However, the government has indefinitely postponed the EPBC Act overhaul following concerns from businesses that the Nature Positive Plan could add another layer of green tape and jeopardize industries like property, mining, and agriculture.
The Coalition has opposed the bill as well, with Opposition Leader Peter Dutton warning that it could spell “the death of mining.”
He further commented, “[It is] anti-WA … anti-mining [and] anti-development.”
Meanwhile, Coalition’s environment spokesperson, Jonno Duniam, described the proposal as “a new bureaucracy with no new laws to administer.”
