Interview with Sally Sara, ABC RN Breakfast

SALLY SARA, HOST: Well, to Federal politics now, and the Government is trying to win support from either the Coalition or the Greens for its proposed overhaul of Australia's environmental laws as Parliament returns for the final sitting week of 2025. The proposed reforms update the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act five years after a review found the laws were not fit for purpose. Murray Watt is the Federal Minister for Environment and Water and joins me in our Parliament House studio. Minister, welcome back.

MURRAY WATT, MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER: G'day Sally, good to be with you.

SALLY SARA: How close are you to making a deal with either Coalition or Greens here?

MURRAY WATT: I think we're very close, Sally. I had some further meetings and discussions with both the Coalition and the Greens over the weekend, and that has definitely narrowed the issues on both sides for debate this week. I'm in under no doubt that we will pass these laws this week. It's really a matter of whether it's with the Coalition or the Greens. And the decision they've got to make this week is do they want to be part of passing historic reforms to our national environmental laws, or do they want to see the other side get in on the action and do it with us instead? I've said all along that what we want is a balanced package of reforms that delivers both to the environment and to the business community. It can't be one or the other, and both the Coalition and the Greens need to work out what are their absolute bottom lines and ensure that the final package that comes through this Parliament does deliver both environmental gains and business gains, and I think that's absolutely possible.

SALLY SARA: Which way do you think it's going to go, Coalition or Greens?

MURRAY WATT: I think this is the tenth time already this morning I've been asked that, Sally.

SALLY SARA: I didn't want to feel left out.

MURRAY WATT: Absolutely. It's genuinely too hard to say at this point in time. I'm very confident that we will pass the laws, it's less clear who it will be with. Obviously, the Coalition are seeking changes that, in their view, would benefit business. The Greens are seeking changes that in their view would benefit the environment. And what I keep saying to both of them is that it’s not one or the other. We can't take all the environmental gains out for a Coalition deal. We can't take all the business gains out for a Greens deal, but the number of issues that each side is seeking change on is smaller than it was this time last week and that's a good thing, and we'll keep working round the clock to get this done this week.

SALLY SARA: How much more do you have to give to either side? Are all the concessions on the table now, or have you got some more up your sleeve?

MURRAY WATT: There's certainly some more that we could compromise on. There is a limit to what we're prepared to compromise on.

SALLY SARA: But we haven't hit that yet?

MURRAY WATT: No. I've always said that I'm a realist, I am a Senator, I work in the Senate, I understand that you've to make changes to bills to get them through. But as I say, the bottom line for me is that we need to be able to point to very real benefits for the environment and business once this law comes through. And I think that can be done. I am prepared to compromise a little bit more on either side to get this through as long as we don't get rid of those core principles. And that's where the discussions will now focus over the next couple of days.

SALLY SARA: Native forest logging is currently exempt under the EPBC Act. You're proposing removing this exemption, but could native forest logging continue under those changes anyway?

MURRAY WATT: The short answer is yes. And we have said, and I've said privately to the Greens, that we're not going to be ending native forestry altogether. And we're not going to be getting rid of regional forest agreements under which native forestry occurs. But we are open to increasing the environmental standards expected of native forestry, and that's one of the things that Graeme Samuel recommended. So I have made that offer both to the Greens and the Coalition, because in our discussions with the forestry industry, they recognise that there are benefits to the industry in building their social licence and demonstrating that they meet the same environmental standards as every other industry. So I'd like to think that those changes are something that all sides could get behind. But we won't be ending the industry altogether.

SALLY SARA: The Greens still want to see a greater consideration of climate in the environment laws. Can you offer more than the reporting requirements outlined so far?

MURRAY WATT: We've been very clear all along that we're not prepared to add what are known as a climate trigger or climate considerations to the bill. And I recognise that's a big ask from the Greens. But you will have seen over the weekend that we said that we are prepared to remove fossil fuel projects from the national interest approval mechanism that is included in the bill. That has been quite a controversial aspect of this bill, allowing a minister to approve a project in rare circumstances where it doesn't meet environmental standards. We've said that we wouldn't do that fossil fuel projects, so I guess that's a bit of a nod towards the concerns around climate change and fossil fuels. But no, we won't be including climate considerations.

SALLY SARA: Minister, the Coalition wants penalties attached to this scaled back. Are you open to that?

MURRAY WATT: Our view is that the dollar figures attached to the penalties and the maximum penalties are very comparable to the United States, the UK, the sort of places that we would compare ourselves to. One area where there probably is some room to move is for the bill to make it a little bit clearer about what kind of circumstances would attract the maximum penalties. So we're having a bit of a look at what could be done there. I don't think that anyone would expect that a minor breach of the law would result in an $850 million fine, which is the maximum. So I understand the point that we could possibly give some more guidance there. But I think the overall dollar figures are pretty comparable to other countries.

SALLY SARA: When it comes to the new national EPA, you've decided that the minister will have final say on approvals. How much of the assessment process should be done by an independent body versus the minister, in your view?

MURRAY WATT: We think that the assessment should be done by an independent EPA. Currently, those sorts of assessments are done by my department, and the way we have proposed in the bill is that the new EPA would not only have powers to enforce the law and prosecute people, but also to undertake those assessments. And where it's delegated by a minister to also approve a project, we have retained the current provision of the law which says that the minister of the day can make a project decision in any situation. But in practise what happens now is that about 90 per cent or more of the number of projects that attract the EPBC actually get approved by departmental officials. We would see a similar approach being taken by the EPA with them having that approval power, but with the minister always having the ability to make a decision if they chose to. So the way we've constructed the EPA is that they would have a mixture of roles, not just compliance and enforcement, but also assessment and approvals. And as you probably have seen, that's something that the Coalition have asked us to reconsider.

SALLY SARA: Minister, just finally and briefly on a separate issue, we've learned that the relaunch and changes to the Bureau of Meteorology website, the total cost of that's around $96 million. Is that too much?

MURRAY WATT: You would have seen, Sally, that I've already said that I've got very serious concerns about how this website change was managed. As soon as the issues came to light a couple of weeks ago, or maybe a month ago now -

SALLY SARA: But this cost is much higher than we initially understood.

MURRAY WATT: It is, and I think the BOM has got some explaining to do about that. We do have a new CEO of the BOM who only started two weeks ago after this all occurred. I met with him on his very first day. I've met with him since, so twice in his first fortnight, and made very clear to him that I want him to get on top of the issues around the website, not just continue making changes to make it more usable, but get on top of how we got to this situation in the first place.

SALLY SARA: So when there was initial negative reaction, I think the number that was being thrown around was around $4 million. Did you know at that time that the real cost was 96? Had the BOM told you that?

MURRAY WATT: What the BOM had said to me was that there were other elements of the website design that did increase the costs. I don't think that I was aware of that total cost of $96 million. I certainly knew that it was more than four, and my recollection is that there were media reports at the time that said that the $4 million related to just the website design, but there was a lot of back-of-house activity that had costed more. But I understand that people are very concerned about that amount of money, and that's why I've asked the new CEO to get on top of what occurred.

SALLY SARA: Minister, thank you for coming in this morning.

MURRAY WATT: Thanks, Sally.