Anthony Albanese says the government is considering watering down a proposal for a new independent environment watchdog in a bid to get the legislation through parliament.
The Greens and crossbench senators have called on the government not to further weaken the “already weak proposal” for a new national environmental protection agency (EPA) by abandoning a plan to allow the regulator to handle development proposal decisions.
Such a move would mean the proposed agency would only handle law enforcement and compliance.
It follows the prime minister telling the West Australian that the government, as part of negotiations with the Coalition, was considering “whether the new EPA would be compliance only”.
“That enables the legislation to get through the parliament, but we’re talking with not just the Coalition but crossbenchers as well about that to see if we can get agreement,” he told the newspaper.
The government is facing a battle to pass its bill to establish an EPA and a second new agency that would manage environmental data, with both sides of the aisle seeking amendments.
The opposition, Greens and crossbenchers have also all raised concerns about Labor’s delay of a larger package of reforms to Australia’s failing system of environmental laws which it committed to.
Albanese confirmed in his interview with the West Australian that the government was unlikely to bring broader reforms to the parliament before the next election.
The Coalition has said the government’s current proposal to delegate decision-making to the new EPA is a sticking point that could see it voting against the legislation.
Guardian Australia understands the government is only considering a change to this aspect of its proposal and has not reached a deal with the opposition.
The Greens have said they want government action on native forest logging and a climate trigger, as well as broader amendments to improve the EPA model and its independence.
The Greens’ environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, warned that the government would be “caving” to WA’s mining lobby if it took this course and did “a deal with Peter Dutton”.
“Labor caving in on environment laws would be the final nail in the coffin for Labor’s environmental credibility before the next election,” she said.
“The science is clear: we need environment laws that actually protect the environment. That means ending native forest logging and stopping new fossil fuel project approvals, via a climate trigger.”
The independent senator David Pocock said reports the prime minister was considering watering down “an already weak proposal for a national environmental regulator again demonstrates this government’s complete lack of courage” and any weakening of the proposal would be a “betrayal of the people and places we love”.
“The government promised environmental law reform and Australians voted overwhelmingly at the last election for stronger action on climate and environmental protection,” he said.
“There is a path to get this legislation through the Senate in a better form that actually protects nature.”
The environment and water minister, Tanya Plibersek, reiterated that delivering improvements to national environmental laws would require “common sense, cooperation and compromise”.
“There is something in this for everyone – the whole idea is to have a system that is both better for nature and for business,” she said.
“As you’d expect, we’re talking to parties across the parliament to pass our laws, including the Coalition, the Greens and other crossbenchers – and as usual we’re happy to consider sensible amendments.”
Nicola Beynon, head of campaigns at Humane Society International Australia, said Australia’s native animals and plants were “in a David and Goliath battle with big business and vested interests”.
“The prime minister must stand by his government’s promise to protect them with stronger laws and an independent decision-making authority,” she said.
Opposition environment spokesperson Jonno Duniam said Albanese’s remarks were “nothing more than an attempt to get a political win” and distract from the controversy over a decision to block a waste dam on the site of a proposed goldmine in the central-west of NSW.
“The prime minister wanted to say something that he thought would appeal to WA voters, but his government’s hapless and hopeless record on environmental law and policy speaks for itself,” Duniam said.
