Extract from The Guardian
Turnbull says renewed attempt to amend law will limit the right of
‘systematic, well-funded’ environmental groups to challenge developments
in court
Labor says it will not support the Turnbull government’s attempt to
reintroduce controversial “green lawfare” changes to limit the legal
standing of conservation groups to mount environmental court cases.
Malcolm Turnbull this week flagged a renewed attempt to amend the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conversation Act, expressing concern that “systematic, well-funded” environmental campaigns were using the act to target major projects.
In August 2015, the Abbott government announced plans to remove the right of most environmental organisations to challenge developments under federal laws unless they could show they were “directly affected”.
The act allows any Australian citizen or resident who has engaged in conservation activities in the previous two years to bring a legal challenge to government environmental decisions.
Abbott’s proposed changes in August last year followed a federal court decision that the then-environment minister, Greg Hunt, had not properly considered all advice in his approval of the $16.6bn Adani Carmichael coalmine in Queensland.
After becoming prime minister, Turnbull unexpectedly retained plans to introduce the laws limiting legal standing in November last year.
He raised the prospect of those changes again this week.
Tony Burke, the shadow minister for the environment, said on Tuesday that Labor “does not support any changes to the [act]” that would remove Australians’ rights to challenge project approvals which could do damage to our environment.
On Wednesday, he said he did not think section 487 of the act was too broad.
“I find it odd that we’ve gone from complaining environmentalists are blockading or protesting to now complaining that they’re turning up to a courtroom,” he told ABC radio.
“That section is Howard government legislation. That’s where it comes from. That definition was put in there by Robert Hill under the Howard government.
“The challenge for this government isn’t that the law allows people to complain, it’s that some of the complaints have been successful.
“The way to solve this problem is to make lawful decisions. The original delays to the Adani project happened because the then-environment minister made a decision which, given recent rulings that had been made by the courts, was pretty reckless and should not have been made.
“That’s why the decision to overturn it ended up being an application from the federal government because they realised they’d got it wrong,” he said.
Last year, the attorney general, George Brandis, said the Coalition would seek to repeal section 487 (2) of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act and “return to the common law”. The government complained that “vigilante” green groups have been “sabotaging” development, jobs and growth, by “lawfare” – unfair and improper use of the courts.
Burke said on Wednesday that Labor has always supported the Adani coalmine subject to environmental approvals.
Nick Xenophon told Guardian Australia he was very unlikely to support the government’s attempt to amend the legislation significantly.
He said he might support amendments “around the edges, in cases where legal challenges were vexatious” but he was not persuaded about the need for a substantial overhaul.
Malcolm Turnbull this week flagged a renewed attempt to amend the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conversation Act, expressing concern that “systematic, well-funded” environmental campaigns were using the act to target major projects.
In August 2015, the Abbott government announced plans to remove the right of most environmental organisations to challenge developments under federal laws unless they could show they were “directly affected”.
The act allows any Australian citizen or resident who has engaged in conservation activities in the previous two years to bring a legal challenge to government environmental decisions.
Abbott’s proposed changes in August last year followed a federal court decision that the then-environment minister, Greg Hunt, had not properly considered all advice in his approval of the $16.6bn Adani Carmichael coalmine in Queensland.
After becoming prime minister, Turnbull unexpectedly retained plans to introduce the laws limiting legal standing in November last year.
He raised the prospect of those changes again this week.
Tony Burke, the shadow minister for the environment, said on Tuesday that Labor “does not support any changes to the [act]” that would remove Australians’ rights to challenge project approvals which could do damage to our environment.
On Wednesday, he said he did not think section 487 of the act was too broad.
“I find it odd that we’ve gone from complaining environmentalists are blockading or protesting to now complaining that they’re turning up to a courtroom,” he told ABC radio.
“That section is Howard government legislation. That’s where it comes from. That definition was put in there by Robert Hill under the Howard government.
“The challenge for this government isn’t that the law allows people to complain, it’s that some of the complaints have been successful.
“The way to solve this problem is to make lawful decisions. The original delays to the Adani project happened because the then-environment minister made a decision which, given recent rulings that had been made by the courts, was pretty reckless and should not have been made.
“That’s why the decision to overturn it ended up being an application from the federal government because they realised they’d got it wrong,” he said.
Last year, the attorney general, George Brandis, said the Coalition would seek to repeal section 487 (2) of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act and “return to the common law”. The government complained that “vigilante” green groups have been “sabotaging” development, jobs and growth, by “lawfare” – unfair and improper use of the courts.
Burke said on Wednesday that Labor has always supported the Adani coalmine subject to environmental approvals.
Nick Xenophon told Guardian Australia he was very unlikely to support the government’s attempt to amend the legislation significantly.
He said he might support amendments “around the edges, in cases where legal challenges were vexatious” but he was not persuaded about the need for a substantial overhaul.
No comments:
Post a Comment