Will 2025 Elections Decide Fate of Australia’s Environmental Laws?

February 5, 2025

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s recent decision to shelve proposed reforms to Australia’s 25-year-old environment laws has put the environment front and center for the upcoming 2025 election. This decision breaks Labor’s 2022 election commitment to overhaul the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, despite significant calls for change from two major independent reviews. As a result, Australia’s natural environment continues to degrade, and new legislation is urgently needed to protect the country’s valuable natural assets.

The Controversy at Lee Point

Land Clearing and Environmental Protection

Land clearing is a common practice for agricultural expansion, urban development, and infrastructure projects. However, it often leads to significant environmental degradation, including loss of biodiversity, soil erosion, and disruption of natural habitats. To mitigate these adverse effects, it is crucial to implement sustainable land management practices. This includes maintaining buffer zones of native vegetation, using erosion control methods, and planning development to minimize habitat fragmentation. Environmental protection policies must strive to balance the needs of development with the preservation of ecosystems and the services they provide.

The land clearing controversy at the Lee Point housing development site near Darwin highlights the urgent need for environmental law reform in Australia. This incident is emblematic of broader issues related to land clearing and environmental protection in the country. Significant opposition has come from environmental groups and local communities, who argue that the current laws are inadequate to address these concerns. The project at Lee Point illustrates how outdated legislation fails to protect critical habitats and biodiversity, prompting calls for swift legislative action.

The Lee Point controversy isn’t an isolated incident but reflects larger challenges plaguing Australia’s environmental protection efforts. The ongoing disputes and legal battles underscore the systemic inadequacies that allow such environmentally damaging projects to proceed. The opposition to Lee Point’s development has brought to light the inefficacy of existing regulations, which fail to balance development needs with environmental preservation. This situation exemplifies the broader call for comprehensive reform to ensure that new laws adequately protect biodiversity and cultural values, preserving natural habitats.

Broader Implications

The broader implications of the Lee Point controversy reverberate across Australia’s environmental landscape. It illustrates the insufficient protection that current laws offer against the ongoing degradation of natural habitats, exemplifying the critical need for reform. In light of the Lee Point dispute, environmental advocates argue for more robust legislation that can effectively protect ecosystems from destructive practices. The controversy serves as a wake-up call for policymakers to address the systemic flaws that permit such projects to move forward with minimal environmental safeguards.

Furthermore, the Lee Point controversy highlights the intersection of environmental protection and cultural heritage, emphasizing the importance of preserving these values for future generations. The broader implications of these inadequate protections extend beyond biodiversity loss, impacting cultural heritage sites and local communities. To address these critical issues, comprehensive legislative reforms that prioritize environmental and cultural preservation over short-term economic gains are urgently needed. The upcoming 2025 election presents a critical juncture for Australian voters to demand stronger, more effective environmental laws.

The Current State of Australia’s Environment

Rapid Deterioration

Australia’s environment is experiencing a rapid and alarming deterioration, with escalating loss of biodiversity, degradation of ecosystems, and threats to cultural values. Recent studies and reports have highlighted the critical state of the environment, noting that urgent action is necessary to halt and reverse these trends. The continuous decline of Australia’s natural habitats and species is a clear indication of the inadequacy of current environmental laws. Without immediate and effective legislative reforms, the nation’s natural assets are at risk of irreversible damage.

The causes of this rapid environmental decline are multifaceted, involving both natural and human-induced factors. Climate change, habitat destruction, invasive species, and pollution all contribute to the severe strain on Australia’s ecosystems. The ramifications of this deterioration extend beyond environmental concerns, impacting public health, economic stability, and social well-being. As the environment continues to degrade, the urgency for comprehensive and effective environmental laws becomes more pronounced. To safeguard Australia’s future, it is imperative to address these pressing issues through robust governmental action.

Investment in Environmental Protection

Investing in environmental protection is crucial for ensuring the sustainability of our planet for future generations.

Investing in environmental protection is not solely about conservation; it is a strategic move towards ensuring a sustainable future for Australia. Establishing effective environmental laws offers far-reaching benefits that extend to the economy, public health, and social wellbeing. Protecting biodiversity and ecosystems is an investment in Australia’s future prosperity, as these natural assets provide essential services such as clean air and water, pollination, and climate regulation. The significance of strong environmental laws cannot be overstated, as they are critical for maintaining the delicate balance of natural processes that underpin human wellbeing.

Furthermore, effective environmental protection fosters economic resilience by securing the natural resources that form the backbone of various industries, including agriculture, tourism, and fisheries. By enacting robust environmental laws, Australia can prevent costly environmental disasters and promote sustainable development practices. The long-term benefits of investing in environmental protection include enhanced public health, greater social stability, and a more resilient economy. As the 2025 election approaches, it is crucial for policymakers to recognize the comprehensive value of environmental protection and to prioritize legislative reforms that secure these benefits for future generations.

The Samuel Review and Failed Legislative Reforms

Findings of the Samuel Review

An independent review of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, known as the Samuel Review, conducted in 2020 under the former Coalition government, presented a stark warning about the future of Australia’s environment. The review found that without urgent changes, many of Australia’s threatened species and ecosystems would face extinction. The Samuel Review called for significant reforms to the existing laws, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive overhaul to address systemic failures and to implement robust protections for the nation’s biodiversity.

The Samuel Review’s findings underscored the critical state of Australia’s environment and the pressing need for legislative action. The review highlighted numerous deficiencies within the existing EPBC Act, including inadequate provisions for species protection, poor enforcement mechanisms, and a lack of integration with broader environmental policies. The recommendations included establishing an independent regulatory body, enhancing habitat protections, and increasing transparency and public participation in environmental decision-making processes. The call for these reforms aimed to rectify long-standing issues and to ensure that Australia’s environmental laws are fit for purpose in addressing contemporary environmental challenges.

The “Nature Positive” Plan

In response to the Samuel Review’s recommendations, Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek pledged to implement a plan called “Nature Positive.” This plan sought to act on the review’s findings by introducing legislative reforms in three stages. However, only the first stage of this plan has been legislated so far, leaving critical aspects of the reform process unaddressed. The failure to advance the subsequent stages of the “Nature Positive” plan has stalled the much-needed legislative reforms, raising concerns about the government’s commitment to environmental protection.

The “Nature Positive” plan’s initial stage included measures to improve habitat protections and streamline environmental assessments. Despite the progress made in this first phase, the lack of advancement in stages two and three has left many of the Samuel Review’s urgent recommendations unmet. The subsequent stages, which include establishing a federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and implementing broader substantive reforms, remain in legislative limbo. This stagnation has delayed the comprehensive overhaul needed to address Australia’s environmental crisis, perpetuating the systemic issues highlighted by the Samuel Review.

Political Dynamics and the Abandonment of Reforms

In the complex landscape of contemporary politics, the abandonment of once-promised reforms has become a notable trend. This phenomenon is often driven by competing interests, shifting public opinions, and the intricate dance of political alliances and oppositions. The unpredictable nature of political dynamics means that even the most well-intentioned and carefully planned reforms can falter, leading to a sense of disillusionment among the electorate. This issue raises critical questions about the stability and reliability of policy commitments in modern governance.

Stage Two Reforms

In its deliberate approach to addressing the complexities of cryptocurrencies, the SEC opted for another delay in its verdict on the spot Ethereum ETF. The extension grants the SEC an opportunity not only to conduct an in-depth examination of Ethereum’s suitability for ETF status but also to source public insight, which could heavily sway the conclusion.

Stage two of the “Nature Positive” reforms, which includes the establishment of a federal Environmental Protection Australia (EPA), was initially scheduled for Senate discussion in late 2024. However, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese scuttled the deal at the last moment, further delaying the critical reform process. This sudden decision has significant political implications as the 2025 election approaches, with environmental protection emerging as a pivotal issue. The abandonment of stage two reforms has left environmental advocates and lawmakers questioning the government’s commitment to implementing necessary changes.

The establishment of a federal EPA was a cornerstone of the Samuel Review’s recommendations and a key component of the “Nature Positive” plan. This independent regulatory body was envisioned to enhance transparency, accountability, and enforcement of environmental laws. The abrupt shelving of stage two reforms undermines progress towards these goals, raising concerns about the political will to prioritize environmental protection. As the 2025 election nears, this decision may influence voter sentiment and shape the political discourse around environmental policy, highlighting the need for clear and decisive action.

Stage Three Reforms

Stage three of the “Nature Positive” plan, which covers the bulk of substantive reforms recommended by the Samuel Review, has yet to be publicly disclosed. The delay in advancing these critical reforms casts doubt on the Albanese government’s ability to fulfill its environmental commitments and deliver on its promises. Stage three includes comprehensive measures to strengthen habitat protections, improve environmental assessments, and enhance public participation in decision-making processes. The lack of transparency and progress on these reforms raises questions about the government’s dedication to addressing Australia’s environmental challenges.

The delays in stage three reforms highlight the complex political dynamics that influence environmental policy-making in Australia. The failure to disclose and advance these substantive changes reflects broader issues of political will, stakeholder engagement, and legislative prioritization. As the 2025 election approaches, the government’s handling of environmental reforms will likely be scrutinized by voters, environmental groups, and political opponents. The stalled progress on stage three underscores the urgent need for a clear and actionable plan to address the recommendations of the Samuel Review and to ensure robust environmental protections for Australia’s future.

Speculation on the Next Election

As political analysts and the general public engage in discussions about potential candidates and outcomes, speculation on the next election has already begun to intensify. Many are considering the implications of recent policy decisions, economic conditions, and international relations on voter sentiment. This early buzz highlights the importance of strategic planning and public engagement for those planning to enter the race.

Potential Hung Parliament

With the federal election approaching, speculation regarding the outcome and its implications for environmental reforms is intensifying. A Roy Morgan poll suggests a potential hung parliament, meaning that whichever party comes to power will likely rely on crossbench support to form a government. This political scenario adds complexity to the progress of environmental reforms, as the need for negotiation and compromise could stall or dilute legislative efforts. The uncertainty surrounding the election outcome has significant implications for the future of Australia’s environmental policies and the ability to implement substantive reforms.

A hung parliament would require the major parties to engage in negotiations with independents and minor parties to secure the necessary support for forming a government. This scenario could lead to a more fragmented and cautious approach to policy-making, potentially hindering the advancement of comprehensive environmental reforms. The need for crossbench support may also influence the priorities and strategies of the major parties, as they seek to build alliances and secure votes. The outcome of the election will undoubtedly shape the trajectory of environmental policy in Australia, determining the feasibility and scope of future legislative reforms.

Party Stances and Negotiations

The stances of major political parties on environmental reforms and their willingness to negotiate with crossbenchers will significantly impact the likelihood of reform implementation. Prime Minister Albanese has ruled out forming a coalition with the Greens or crossbenchers, opting to pursue a majority government. In contrast, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has expressed openness to negotiating with independents, suggesting a more flexible approach. This difference in strategy could influence the ability to pass critical environmental reforms, depending on the election’s outcome and the composition of the parliament.

Albanese’s reluctance to form a coalition with the Greens or crossbenchers may limit Labor’s ability to secure the necessary support for advancing environmental reforms. This stance could result in a more challenging path to enact legislative changes, particularly if Labor fails to achieve a clear majority. On the other hand, Dutton’s willingness to negotiate with independents may facilitate the passage of certain reforms, albeit with potential compromises. The election outcome will play a crucial role in shaping the political dynamics and strategies for achieving substantive environmental protection measures, with both party stances and negotiation tactics influencing the legislative landscape.

Potential Actions by Future Governments

Labor Majority

If the Labor Party secures a majority in the upcoming election, they will likely revisit the failed deal on stage two of the “Nature Positive” plan, possibly enduring some political pain to secure its passage. A returned Labor majority would face the challenge of balancing its environmental commitments with other political and economic priorities. The party’s commitment to environmental protection will be tested as it seeks to advance the stalled reforms, addressing the recommendations of the Samuel Review and implementing effective legislative changes to protect Australia’s natural assets.

Achieving progress on stage two reforms will require Labor to navigate complex political dynamics and address opposition from various stakeholders. The establishment of a federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) remains a crucial goal, necessitating strong leadership and a strategic approach to secure legislative approval. A Labor majority government would need to prioritize environmental protection and demonstrate a clear plan for advancing the “Nature Positive” reforms, maintaining public trust and support. The success of these efforts will hinge on the party’s ability to manage political challenges and deliver tangible outcomes for Australia’s environment.

Minority Labor Government

A minority Labor government, dependent on crossbench support, would face stronger demands from environmentally progressive independents and minor parties. This scenario could lead to more robust environmental protections, as crossbenchers push for stronger measures in exchange for their support. The need for negotiation and compromise may result in more comprehensive and ambitious environmental reforms, reflecting the priorities of a diverse range of stakeholders. A minority Labor government would be tested on its ability to navigate these dynamics and deliver on its environmental commitments.

The influence of the crossbench in a minority government could drive significant legislative changes, as the need for support necessitates addressing key environmental concerns. Crossbenchers are likely to advocate for stronger habitat protections, improved enforcement mechanisms, and increased transparency in environmental decision-making processes. This pressure could result in more effective and far-reaching reforms, aligning with the recommendations of the Samuel Review. However, the complex political landscape may also pose challenges in achieving consensus and advancing legislation, requiring strategic negotiation and collaboration.

Coalition Government

A coalition government led by Peter Dutton would focus more on reducing bureaucratic hurdles for developers and repealing bans on nuclear power stations. This approach, however, may struggle to gain crossbench support in the Senate, complicating the passage of any significant environmental reforms. Dutton’s stance prioritizes economic development and regulatory efficiency, potentially at the expense of robust environmental protections. The coalition’s approach to environmental policy would likely emphasize streamlining processes and encouraging industrial growth, raising concerns among environmental advocates.

The potential reduction of bureaucratic hurdles for developers under a Coalition government could lead to increased development projects with limited environmental oversight. This approach may conflict with the priorities of environmentally progressive crossbenchers, resulting in legislative gridlock. The focus on repealing bans on nuclear power stations highlights the Coalition’s interest in expanding energy options, but this contentious issue may face significant opposition. Achieving meaningful environmental reforms under a Coalition government would require navigating these complex dynamics and addressing stakeholder concerns, balancing economic development with environmental protection.

Public Opinion on Environmental Protection

Recent surveys indicate a growing concern among the public regarding environmental protection. More individuals are advocating for stronger regulations and proactive measures to address climate change and pollution issues. Environmental awareness has seen a significant rise, influencing policy discussions and prompting calls for action at both local and global levels.

Greens’ Commitment

The Greens have committed to making environmental protection a central issue in the upcoming election, urging voters to consider nature when casting their votes. Their strong stance on environmental issues could significantly influence the election outcome and the future of environmental laws in Australia. The Greens’ platform emphasizes the urgent need for comprehensive reforms to address biodiversity loss, climate change, and ecosystem degradation. Their commitment to environmental protection reflects broader public concern and advocacy for stronger legislative measures.

The Greens’ advocacy for environmental issues is supported by robust public awareness and engagement, highlighting the importance of these concerns in the political landscape. Their efforts to raise the profile of environmental protection in the election discourse aim to secure broader support for substantive legislative changes. By emphasizing the critical state of Australia’s environment, the Greens seek to galvanize voter action and influence policymaking. The election presents an opportunity for environmental advocates to push for more effective laws and to ensure that environmental protection remains a priority for the incoming government.

Survey Results

Survey results from the Biodiversity Council demonstrate strong public support for strengthening national environmental laws, with 75% of Australians in favor and only 4% opposed. This overwhelming public consensus underscores the importance of environmental protection as a key issue for voters. However, converting this broad support into actual votes amid a cost-of-living crisis presents a significant challenge. The current economic pressures may influence voter priorities, complicating efforts to make environmental protection a decisive factor in the election outcome.

To translate public support into electoral success, environmental advocates must effectively communicate the long-term benefits of robust environmental laws. Highlighting the interconnectedness of environmental health, economic stability, and social well-being can help voters recognize the importance of prioritizing environmental issues. Mobilizing public support requires addressing immediate economic concerns while emphasizing the broader advantages of environmental protection. The upcoming election will test the ability of environmental advocates to navigate this complex landscape and to secure meaningful legislative reforms that reflect the public’s strong support for environmental protection.

Urgency of Environmental Reform

The urgency of environmental reform in Australia cannot be overstated, as the ongoing failure to implement effective protections continues to have severe consequences. Australia’s natural assets, including its unique biodiversity and ecosystems, are facing unprecedented threats that require immediate and decisive action. Without comprehensive legislative reforms, the degradation of the environment will continue to escalate, impacting not only the natural world but also the nation’s economic and social well-being. The Samuel Review provides a clear blueprint for addressing these challenges, emphasizing the need for robust and enforceable environmental laws.

The systematic failure to protect Australia’s environment has far-reaching implications, affecting public health, economic stability, and cultural heritage. The urgency of reform is highlighted by the growing societal costs of inaction, which manifest in declining biodiversity, increased pollution, and more frequent environmental disasters. Addressing these issues requires a coordinated effort from all levels of government, industry, and the community. The upcoming 2025 election presents a critical opportunity for voters to demand stronger environmental protections and to hold policymakers accountable for delivering substantive reforms.

Call to Action

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s recent move to halt proposed reforms to Australia’s 25-year-old environmental laws has thrust environmental issues into the spotlight for the upcoming 2025 election. This decision goes against Labor’s 2022 election promise to revamp the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, despite strong calls for change from two major independent reviews. Consequently, Australia’s natural environment continues to face degradation, underscoring the urgent need for new legislation to safeguard the nation’s valuable natural resources.

The EPBC Act, which has long been criticized for its inefficacy, was due for a comprehensive overhaul to address its shortcomings and enhance environmental protections. However, the decision to defer these critical reforms has sparked concerns among environmentalists, policymakers, and the public about the government’s commitment to preserving Australia’s unique ecosystems. Without prompt legislative action, the country’s natural landscapes and biodiversity remain at risk, highlighting the importance of addressing these issues in the near future to ensure sustainable environmental management.

Subscribe to our weekly news digest.

Join now and become a part of our fast-growing community.

Invalid Email Address
Thanks for Subscribing!
We'll be sending you our best soon!
Something went wrong, please try again later