In the words of the Biodiversity Council, Australia's peak body of conservation scientists, this year's Federal Budget "left Nature behind". For me, the saddest and starkest take-home was a Budget tweet from Environment Minister Plibersek which didn't even mention the environment! Only the Labor Party and cost of living relief.
The crumbs in the Budget for the environment stand in stark contrast to the rhetoric of the Government's "Nature Positive Plan". Spearheaded by Minister Plibersek, it promises to transform environmental policies to protect and restore Nature. But a deeper look at the plan, its context within the Budget, and broader government actions reveals major compromises and contradictions. The plan is more about greenwashing and appeasement than it is about effective environmental stewardship.
Firstly, the plan is being scaled back even before its implementation. Initially comprehensive, the plan is now being fragmented into smaller parts, with critical elements like national environmental standards indefinitely delayed. This dilution is clearly a response to pressures from industry and political groups. It reflects a major watering down of ambitions that, at least rhetorically, were bold and comprehensive.
Secondly, the plan unfolds against a backdrop of increased promotion and support for fossil fuel interests. Recent events highlighted in the media show politicians, government officials and fossil fuel executives sharing platforms, underscoring ongoing relationships that influence policy directions in favour of gas and coal. These interactions raise serious integrity concerns.
Thirdly, establishment of a new Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as part of the plan, has major loop holes. While positioned as a robust authority to oversee environmental compliance, there are real fears that it could end up being a 'paper tiger', overly bureaucratic and insufficiently empowered to effect real change. The Minister has revealed that she expects to retain 'call in powers' which means she or future Ministers will be able to override the EPA's decisions. It won't be independent!
Fourth, the plan's approach to biodiversity markets and offsets is seriously flawed. Conservation groups have strong and legitmate concerns about environmental offsets, which remain central to the plan. These systems allow developers to compensate for environmental damage rather than prevent it, leading to ongoing net losses in biodiversity. Carbon markets have proven themselves to be seriously flawed, so it's almost impossible to envision an effective and ethical market for endangered species or habitats!
Fifth, the government's broader environmental record paints a worrying picture. It includes ongoing support for new fossil fuel projects, such as those in the Beetaloo Basin, and the recently announced Future Gas Strategy which actively promotes gas exploration and extraction out to and past 2050. These policies will undermine any benefits of the new environmental agenda by supporting fossil fuel industries and worsening climate change which is the biggest threat to Nature.
Finally, procedural aspects of how the Nature Positive plan has been handled - such as the lack of timely consultation and transparency in drafting the laws - suggest a top-down approach that won't incorporate the diverse views and needs of all stakeholders, including Indigenous groups and environmental NGOs. The fact that Minister Plibersek approved the recent bull-dozering of endangered Gouldian finch habitat at Lee Point in Darwin despite Traditional Owner pleas, stands as a recent stark example.
In a nutshell, while the Government's Nature Positive plan is strong on rhetoric about arresting biodiversity decline, current policy settings and actions suggest that, at best, it will be compromise-laden and fall far short of what's needed to save our wildlife. A truly nature-positive future requires not only robust and uncompromised legislation, but financial backing in the Budget, a transparent and inclusive approach to environmental governance, and a genuine shift away from fossil fuel dependency.
I met these Brown boobies at Raine Island in 2016.
Good summary of how pathetic Tanya is being as the environment minister, she is simply an extensio. Of the fossil fuel laden lobby groups