Sky News interview with Minister for the Environment and Water Tanya Plibersek

SUBJECTS: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, NEW ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS, ENERGY PRICES.

KIERAN GILBERT, HOST: I was joined a short time ago by the Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek where I began by asking her whether she’s confident the new agency would be able to end the destruction of Australia’s native species and habitat. 

TANYA PLIBERSEK, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: Well, our EPA is designed to do two things – it will protect our environment and give faster, clearer decisions for business. What Professor Graeme Samuel pointed out in his landmark report a couple of years ago is that the environment law is not working for anyone. It’s certainly not protecting our environment; we’re the extinction capital of the world. But it’s also not working for business. Business are often complaining about slow processes, lots of red tape. 

So, our whole package of environmental law reforms, including our new independent environment protection agency, is designed to give that win-win outcome – better environmental protection and better, faster decisions for business. 

GILBERT: It has been welcomed by most environmental groups that read today. Although some are surprised that the states can still be the decision-makers under this plan with the EPA oversight. What would you say to their concerns about that? 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, of course, states can be accredited to do one-touch approvals under the system that we are proposing. But that will be up to the states to show that they can meet the high environmental standards that we’re setting. And the environment protection agency will be able to remove that accreditation if states demonstrate that they are not meeting those high standards. 

But look, I think all of these details will become apparent in coming weeks and months. The really important message for today is that what we had before isn’t working and our new approach puts nature-positive development at its centre. So, we still want to see development. We want to see homes built and transmission lines bringing cheaper, cleaner renewable energy to people’s homes and businesses and wind farms and all of those projects that business will propose in coming years. We want to see them approved faster because that means jobs. But we also want much stronger environmental protection. Australia’s environment has been declining for decades. The last State of the Environment report that was released just – showed just how bad that environmental decline has become. 

If we want to continue on the path, we’re going we’re going to see iconic species like koalas become extinct in decades to come. We absolutely can’t allow that to happen. So, our package today maps out the next steps that the government will take to ensure that we’ve got stronger environmental decision-making and stronger environmental protection as well as faster decisions for business. 

GILBERT: And do you believe – just to pick up on what you say, and in simple terms, will this package save the koala? 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, this will certainly turn around the path of destruction that we’re on. We’ve made a commitment as a government zero new extinctions. We’ve made a commitment to set aside 30 per cent of our land and 30 per cent of our oceans by 2030 so we can protect our precious plants and animals and places. And we’ve set aside close to a quarter of a billion dollars to protect our threatened species. So, our environmental laws are really important change. Setting up a new environmental protection agency is a really important change. But those other investments are really important as well. 

GILBERT: Professor Samuel – you referred to this a bit earlier – but his analysis said the laws were not fit for purpose, that at the did not have enough focus on the end goal or the outcomes. 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Yes. 

GILBERT: Do your proposals fix that at its core? 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Absolutely. One of the big changes in our package today is we’re announcing that we want nature-positive investment and development. Another big change is that we will be developing national environmental standards that any new large development will need to meet. So that’s really at the core of what Professor Samuel was talking about. He said that the old system is very process focused and it’s a lot of red tape, it’s a lot of box-ticking. Instead, he said what we should do is say what are we trying to achieve for the environment and then measure projects against that. 

So, we’ll be releasing draft legislation next year as long as – along side those draft environmental standards that Professor Samuel called for. And people will be able to have a really good look and a great opportunity to consult on those national environmental standards to make sure that we’re getting it right to protect the environment. 

GILBERT: You’re going to require business and developers to outline their emissions, what’s referred to as scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, and how they fit within Australia’s target for that 43 per cent reduction in emissions. What would you say to business groups who might be worried about the additional green tape? 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Well, I don’t think this is a problem for most businesses. They’re already working out – if you’ve got a really large project, you know you’re going to be covered by the safeguards mechanism, for example, you’re already working through how do I reduce my emissions, how do I offset emissions that I can’t reduce. And it’s really important to say that disclosure of scope 1 and 2 emissions that we’re talking about complements our other carbon pollution reduction measures. 

So, Chris Bowen, the Climate Change Minister, is consulting very widely with business at the moment about that safeguard mechanism. I’m really proud of the fact that one of the first things we did as a new government was set higher ambition for carbon pollution reduction. And, of course, the large emitters are going to have to explain how they’re going to be part of that. That will be one of the requirements expected of them under the safeguards mechanism for those really large emitters. This works hand in hand with that. It doesn’t duplicate – it doesn’t duplicate – what Chris Bowen is doing with the safeguards measures. 

GILBERT: The crossbench, the Greens, David Pocock, they want a climate trigger inserted into the environment laws. Are you open to that? 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: No, we’re not considering that. We think it’s very important that those domestic emissions are disclosed because Australian businesses operating in Australia have to be part of our path to net zero emissions. What we’re not going to do is have a safeguard mechanism on the one hand and a separate set of environmental laws covering the same material on the other hand. 

We think it’s really important that Australia charts a course to net zero emissions by 2050. We’re very clear about how we’re doing that. We’ve got the safeguards mechanism. We’re working on a range of other areas as well like our enormous investment in upgrading our electricity transmission network so that more renewables can get into the grid so we can get to that 82 per cent renewable energy target. So, we’re outlining how we reduce emissions in transport, making electric vehicles cheaper and easier to buy, for example. So, we do have a lot going on in the area of emissions reduction. What we’re not going to do with our new environmental laws is duplicate or second-guess those measures. 

GILBERT: The Shadow Minister, Senator Duniam, says that not once did the Minister promise in today’s announcement that it would be cheaper to get environmental approvals. He says that the overall impact of the additional costs via, as he describes it, the unaccountable EPA is going to have a chilling effect on economic growth. What’s your response to that? 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Yeah, well, it’s just nonsense, isn’t it? I mean, faster decisions mean cheaper decisions. What we’re doing is saying to people upfront if you’re thinking about developing in this area that’s really precious and pristine environment, forget it, it’s not going to happen. If you’re doing a development that broadly complies with the rules and you’re already in an area where there’s lots of development, go for it. If you’re somewhere in the middle, we need to talk to you about the proposal, the proposed development and how you’re going to meet your environmental requirements. 

Now, that sends a really strong, clear signal for business. It’s what business has been crying out for. Business have been the first to say that the current system is not working. We’ve got broad support from the business community for Professor Samuel’s report and the recommendations that we’re pursuing. I was very happy to have the Business Council along today to say that they’re proudly supportive of the direction that we’re heading in. You know, no doubt the opposition will find reasons to explain. You know, that’s their bread and butter. But what we’ve got here is an incredible amount of agreement on what the problem is – we’re not protecting the environment and decision-making is too slow and complicated. We’ve got also a surprising amount of agreement on what the potential solutions might be. 

GILBERT: Minister, just finally, the Greens also want a ban on all fossil fuel projects. Does the current energy shock make you less likely to back such a proposal? And further to that, are you optimistic a deal can be done with the states at that National Cabinet tomorrow to put some downward pressure on power prices? 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Look, I’m very hopeful that the Commonwealth can find an agreement with the states and territories because, of course, it’s in the interests of all Australians – domestic power users and businesses – to see lower power prices. And I know the states are just as alive to that as we are at the commonwealth level. 

And, secondly, on the issue that you raised of the Greens saying no new coal and gas and, you know, what does the energy shock mean for that, I’d say this: the energy price shock that we’ve seen because of 10 years of inaction on energy policy from the previous government, because we’ve seen, you know, 4 gigawatts of dispatchable power leave the grid and only 1 gig of dispatchable power return to the grid because we’ve seen 22 separate energy policies and none of them really landed, and top of that we’ve got power price increases driven by the conflict – because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and all of that taken together shows that the more energy self-reliant Australia can be, the better. 

Now, if we are achieving 82 per cent renewable energy in our grid, as we’ve proposed by 2030, we actually reduce our vulnerability to the sort of international shocks that we’re seeing at the moment. That’s a great investment in making sure that we’ve got energy for households and businesses that’s not just cleaner, it’s also cheaper. 

GILBERT: Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek, appreciate your time, as always. Thanks. 

MINISTER PLIBERSEK: Thanks, Kieran. And Happy Christmas to you and your viewers.