The Australia Institute has released a scathing report on the Federal government’s efforts to fulfil the environmental objectives of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBCA). The Institute has analysed the environmental assessment and approval aspects (EAA) of the Act to see whether:
- any improvements in the condition of the environmental issues covered by the EAA have occurred
- the activities which threaten the matters of national significance covered by the EAA are being appropriately regulated
- the lists of threatened species, threatened ecological communities and national heritage places have been appropriately maintained
- people are being required by the Commonwealth to comply with the EAA regime
- the bilateral agreements between the Commonwealth and the States have improved state and territory environmental laws and reduced unnecessary duplication.
The Australia Institute concludes that in almost all areas, the EAA regime has failed to deliver any noticeably improved environmental outcomes. In five years, the EAA provisions have been used only twice to stop activities where they could potentially have been used to cover thousands of activities. In these two instances, the conditions which have been imposed have been largely "ineffectual, unenforceable or a mirror of those already imposed under other processes.” The Institute also points to the fact that since the enactment of the EPBCA, land clearing in Queensland has actually increased.
The Department has also only taken two enforcement actions in five years. The first was dismissed at the committal hearing while the second has resulted in the imposition of substantial civil penalties in the Greentrees case.
Under the biodiversity provisions, numerous species and ecological communities have not been listed for political reasons including commercial marine fish species like southern blue fin tuna. The Institute believes that there are strong grounds for arguing that the Minister is in breach of his statutory duty to "take all reasonably practical steps to maintain lists of threatened species and ecological communities.”
The Institute concludes that the EAA regime is nothing other than a "waste of time and money” since the environmental return on an investment of taxpayer funds of between $55 - $150 million has been negligible.
