By Frances Medlock, Senior Solicitor – Government & Parliament Liaison
2024 has been a big year in the Federal Parliament for the environment and climate. Moves towards “nature positive” and transitioning Australia to net zero have been high on the agenda, with a flurry of legislative change in the final days of the December sitting weeks resulting in some good wins for the climate. And yet the reform of Australia’s nature laws remains seemingly on a knife’s edge. The federal election is now looming on the horizon, and focus is shifting to how law reform in the new year could secure better outcomes for the climate, the environment, and Australian communities who rely on both.
This update charts some of the key legislative moments from the year, including bills passed in what could have been the last sitting for the 46th Parliament of Australia. With some good steps towards the energy transition, some bad proposals that risk undermining community rights, and some significant unfinished business when it comes to nature law reform, 2024 was, ultimately, a mixed bag. There is still plenty of work to be done in 2025.
The good: steps forward for Australia’s renewable future
With four relevant bills passed on the final day of parliamentary sitting this year, the government’s Future Made in Australia (FMIA) policy is well and truly off the ground. The suite of policies includes a framework to support investment in the transition to a net-zero economy, and a Guarantee of Origin scheme for certification of green products.
As initially introduced, the bills had some serious risks when it came to possible use of public money for fossil fuel projects, and potential for greenwashing. However, in the Senate the government eventually amended the FMIA Bill to prevent any commonwealth support under the FMIA framework from being provided for activities including the extraction of coal, oil or gas, or the construction of fossil fuel infrastructure. The Guarantee of Origin scheme, which will be used to certify renewable hydrogen, was also amended to have stronger safeguards against greenwashing. This is a huge win and means the FMIA framework will truly support a transition towards a net-zero Australia.
Similarly, the Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (CRFD) legislative framework also passed this year through the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Market Infrastructure and Other Measures) Bill 2024. Improving financial disclosures will help investors understand how a company is addressing climate change and the risks to a business associated with the climate transition. This measure has the potential to curb greenwashing at a time when it is prolific.
While unfortunately the bill passed with provisions that could make it harder to hold some greenwashing companies to account in the short term, other amendments made in the Senate usefully updated the climate scenarios companies must use when reporting. This means reporting companies will be obliged to consider a range of possible climate scenarios, preventing them from cherry-picking scenarios in ways that would compromise the consistency and credibility of emissions reduction pathways.
Finally, the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES) passed the parliament in May, finally rectifying Australia’s position as one of the last developed economies without a fuel efficiency standard. The NVES aims to cut emissions from new passenger cars by 60% in the next five years by incentivising car companies to supply new vehicles that are more fuel-efficient, with low or zero emissions.1 Given transport emissions account for 19% of Australia’s emissions and the sector is projected to be the largest source of emissions by 2030, the implementation of a fuel efficiency standard is a welcome, and long overdue, measure.
Next for climate, EDO will be looking to the Federal Government to commit in the new year to a strong emissions reduction target that reflects the urgency of the climate crisis and to put in place policies to implement it. While Australia takes steps to build up renewable capacity and switch our energy and transport systems, it is essential that we have strong laws to keep us moving towards a world without the biggest contributor to climate change: fossil fuels.
The bad: holding the line against ongoing risks to community rights
The parliament also saw its fair share of regressive or misguided legislation in 2024, some of which, if passed, would have wound back community consultation rights, or reduced oversight and transparency when it comes to environmental laws.
In early 2024, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) Bill 2024 was introduced by the government. The main purpose of the bill was to amend the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (OPGGS Act) in relation to offshore worker safety. However, the bill also proposed to introduce a new section that would reduce oversight of offshore approvals, which includes approvals for new offshore gas.
Currently, offshore approvals for fossil fuel projects are managed under an arrangement in line with our national environmental law, ensuring the OPGGS Act and regulations are consistent with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The proposed provision reduced safeguards for this arrangement, meaning environmental or consultation requirements could have been weakened without the oversight of the Federal Environment Minister. Luckily, EDO was able to draw attention to this risky clause in the Offshore Bill,2 and it was amended, resulting in the worker safety provisions passing without the problematic sections.
Similarly, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsideration of Decisions) Bill 2024, recently introduced by a Coalition Senator, sought to restrict community’s right to ask the Environment Minister to reconsider a certain type of decision under the EPBC Act. Currently, people can ask the minister to reconsider certain types of decisions about controlled actions where there is significant change in circumstances that were unforeseen when the decision was originally made, or if there is substantial new information about the impacts of the action in question, such as in the case of the endangered Maugean Skate in northern Tasmania. The bill seeks to limit the community’s ability to use these reconsideration powers by imposing a time limit.
The Reconsideration of Decisions Bill is unnecessary and would unduly limit the ability of communities to raise legitimate concerns with the Environment Minister about past decisions and take active steps to protect the matters of national environmental significance the EPBC Act is intended to safeguard. The Senate Environment Committee has similarly concluded that the bill should not pass, in line with EDO’s recommendations. However, its introduction shows the ongoing risk of misinformation about how and when the community can challenge or seek reconsideration of environmental decisions under our nature laws.
And the unfinished business: nature law reform on a knife’s edge
After a long year of “lock-in” stakeholder consultations in Canberra, multiple Senate inquiries, and intense debate in the parliament, EDO was disappointed to see the Nature Positive Bills, including legislation to establish a new national environment protection authority (EPA), fail to pass the Senate. The bills, while needing amendment to live up to their “nature positive” moniker, could be a step forward in fixing our nature laws. Alongside the EPA, the bills would set up Environment Information Australia (a body tasked with undertaking state of the environment reports), establish a legislative definition of “nature positive”, and add new compliance powers to the EPBC Act.
The failure of the bills to pass the Senate is especially disappointing as media reports show that an agreement had been reached with key Senate crossbenchers to include crucial strengthening provisions, including setting up National Environmental Standards. This could have had a real impact for nature. Instead, the negotiation about-face can only have negative impacts for our environment, as our existing nature laws fail to protect precious places, at-risk species, or uphold community trust. Many of Australia’s unique wildlife species are rapidly going extinct under these broken laws. It is well beyond time our environmental laws were fixed. It is the koalas, parrots and possums, the beaches and the rainforests that are paying the price of the delay.
With parliamentary sittings scheduled for February 2025, the Nature Positive Bills could still pass before the federal election. Failure to progress these, and the wholescale reforms to the EPBC Act, would be a failure of this government’s stated commitments and responsibilities to the beautiful and threatened environment that Australians love.
Where to from here?
In 2025, EDO will continue to advocate for a world where nature thrives. In the Federal Parliament, that means supporting strong laws that move us towards net zero and nature positive, identifying legislation that could undermine community rights or environmental protection, and providing expert legal guidance on how to reform our laws to protect the climate, nature, and the community’s right to have a say.
1 DCCEEW, New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (June 2024), https://www.dcceew.gov.au/about/news/new-vehicle-efficiency-standard.
2 The Guardian, ‘Labor accused of trying to ‘silence Aboriginal voices’ over possible changes to gas project consultations’ (20 February 2024) https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/feb/20/labor-accused-of-trying-to-silence-aboriginal-voices-over-possible-changes-to-gas-project-consultations.
