Shakeup for Australia's Environment Laws
6/23/99
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: Shakeup for Australia's Environment Laws
Source: Environmental News Service
Status: Copyright 1999, contact source for permission to reprint
Date: June 23, 1999
Byline: Andrew Darby
CANBERRA, Australia, June 23, 1999 (ENS) - A fundamental rewrite
of Australia's environment laws rushed through the Senate today has
deeply split leading green groups.
The shakeup is claimed by the Environment Minister, Senator Robert
Hill, to set up a new list of triggers for federal government action.
But opponents say Canberra's existing powers to curb state government
excesses have been reduced.
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Bill, first
unveiled a year ago, was claimed by Senator Hill to drag Australia's
environment laws out of the 1970s.
It was said to be the first attempt this century to actually define
national environment responsibilities, instead of relying on de facto
powers such as foreign investment controls.
But it comes against a history in Australia where the most significant
wins for the environment, such as the 1983 decision not to dam the
Franklin River in Tasmania, came with federal action against a state.
Several weeks ago, amid growing opposition, Senator Hill began secret
talks on the legislation with the Australian Democrats, a moderate
centre party with a balance of power in the Senate.
Unknown to some other green groups, the prestigious Worldwide Fund for
Nature and Humane Society International also took part in talks with
the government.
This week the Democrats Environment spokeswoman Senator Lyn Allison
announced they had achieved more than 400 amendments, turning what was
a bad bill into a great bill.
This claim comes less than a month after green groups leveled
criticism at the Democrats for agreeing to back a new government tax
package, which includes heavy rebates for diesel fuel.
The final Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Bill
will let states assess and designate projects for environmental
approval through bilateral agreements with Canberra. For its part, the
federal government will have the primary role in six areas of national
environmental significance, such as developments affecting world
heritage properties, whales, wetlands and nuclear activities.
But greenhouse gas emissions, land clearing, water use and forests are
exempt from the list of issues that would trigger national action.
A legal consultant to the Australian Conservation Foundation,
associate professor Rob Fowler, said the amendments simply added
another procedural hoop to an already complex process.
"It would still be possible as a matter of law for a state government
to approve a Franklin dam...without necessarily being in breach of an
accredited management plan, bilateral agreement, or the Act itself. In
such circumstances the Commonwealth would be powerless to intervene."
Amendments cementing the Commonwealth's powers over areas such as
Kakadu National Park and Uluru (Ayers Rock) were welcomed by the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission.
The Business Council of Australia said the amendments had completely
overturned the basis on which industry groups agreed to key provisions
of the bill.
Australian Conservation Foundation, Greenpeace and The Wilderness
Society pleaded without success for the Democrats to delay passage of
the legislation long enough for better public scrutiny. An insider
among the bill's opponents said these groups were unaware Worldwide
Fund for Nature and Humane Society International would come out in
favour of the law until they appeared at a media conference Tuesday.