Bob Brown urges Greens to punish Labor at election if Albanese amends law to protect salmon farming
Former Greens leader Bob Brown has urged the minor party not to preference Labor ahead of the Liberal party in Tasmanian seats at the upcoming election if the Albanese government legislates to effectively exempt salmon farming from national environment laws.
Conservationists have sharply criticised Anthony Albanese's pledge that he will rush through legislation next week to protect the salmon industry in Macquarie Harbour, on the state's west coast, from the potential results of a long-running legal review.
The legislation has been listed to be introduced in parliament on Tuesday as an amendment to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. It is planned to end a formal reconsideration by the environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, into whether an expansion of fish farming in the harbour in 2012 was properly approved.
The reconsideration was triggered by a legal request from three environmentally focused organisations. An environment department opinion released under freedom of information laws suggested that it could lead to salmon farming having to stop in the harbour while an environmental impact statement was prepared.
Guardian Australia has learned the legislation would prevent reconsideration requests in cases where developments were deemed 'not a controlled action' – meaning they did not need a full federal environmental assessment. To qualify, the developments would need to be ongoing or recurring, have been under way for at least five years before the request was made, and be subject to state or territory oversight.
A spokesperson for Albanese this week said the government would amend the 'flawed' environment law 'to secure jobs and local industries'.
Asked on Friday if he would support the amendment, the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, said: 'Absolutely. We've proposed it. We've been months and months and months ahead of the game in relation to the salmon industry. We have stood with the salmon industry, with workers.'
Environmentalists said the change would weaken laws that were already failing to protect Australia's most celebrated natural sites or to stop species going extinct.
Brown said if Albanese acted on his pledge it would be 'the lowest direct act by a national Labor government against Australia's environment in memory'.
'On coalmines, gas fracking, forest logging and now industrial fish farms, Labor and Liberal are in lockstep in this epic age of environmental destruction,' he said. 'Greens voters should be directed to preference like-minded candidates on this critical issue, but then be left to decide which of the old parties to put last.'
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
The Wilderness Society said the legislation could lead to the extinction of the Maugean skate, an endangered species endemic to the harbour, and undermine the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. Its campaign manager, Sam Szoke-Burke, said: 'If passed, this bill will be remembered as Prime Minister Albanese cementing species loss into law. It would be in stark contrast to Bob Hawke's legacy of protecting the Franklin [River].'
Brendan Sydes, from the Australian Conservation Foundation, said Albanese had failed to deliver a promised revamp of environmental law, had intervened on behalf of mining and resources interests to shelve a proposed national environment protection agency and was now planning to reduce nature protection.
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
'We really need a PM who is prepared to step up and deliver on the commitments his government has made on environmental law reform and start acting in the national interest, rather than acting in the interests of environmentally harmful industries,' he said.
The independent Tasmanian MP Andrew Wilkie said Albanese was prioritising winning a seat that 'they're probably not going to win anyway' – Braddon, in the state's north-west – over saving a species from extinction.
'That's just an appalling misstep by Anthony Albanese and his government, and an appalling breakdown in good governments and proper process,' Wilkie said. 'I'm very disappointed in Albo, he's better than this.'
A spokesperson for the Greens leader, Adam Bandt, said preferences were 'a matter for the party, but our focus is on keeping Peter Dutton out and getting Labor to act'. 'This attempt to ram through further weakening of our environment laws at the behest of big corporations is going to make people very angry,' they said.
The government has said it remained committed to reforming environment law if it wins the next election, but not released details.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
The big change to superannuation 'all young Aussies' should fear
Millionaire and entrepreneur Mark Bouris has warned young Australians will be the hardest hit by Labor's proposed tax hike on superannuation. The Albanese government plans to double the tax on superannuation balances above $3million from 15 to 30 per cent from July 1. Labor expects the hike, which will also apply to unrealised gains, to only affect an estimated 80,000 people or 0.5 per cent of the population. Mr Bouris said young Australians should be wary of the proposal given they stand to be denied the same tax conditions that benefited older generations. 'Every young person in the country should be worried about this, and I'll tell you why,' he said on his Mentored Plus podcast. 'Because every old person in the country has experienced building their superannuation up with only 15 per cent tax rate from day one, for the last 30, 40 years. 'We've had this, all of us had this fantastic low-tax situation with the money we earn in our super fund,' he said, adding young people 'will not have the same benefits'. Bouris dismissed the idea that young people stand to gain as older Aussies look to withdraw and gift their savings to avoid paying the higher tax. 'If you're a young person now and you're saying: "Oh this is great, because the rich people are going to transfer the wealth across to the younger people", you will be transferring it to your kids and it's going to keep going like that forever.' Mr Bouris said former Prime Minister Paul Keating, who oversaw the introduction of compulsory superannuation in Australia, must feel 'completely demoralised'. 'All this is going to do is put more strain on the government because people are not going to retire with enough money because they're paying too much tax,' he said. The Greens want the threshold to be lowered to $2million and indexed to inflation while deputy Liberal leader Ted O'Brien has ruled out any compromise. O'Brien suggested the Coalition would be open to a deal on the tax hike if Labor agreed not to tax unrealised gains - but has since taken a harder approach. 'Labor's super tax - it's super big, it's super bad. It flies in the face of what we believe as a Coalition,' O'Brien told Sky News last week. 'We will definitely, as a Coalition, oppose this unfair super tax of Labor's every step of way. Every step of the way.' The 30 per cent tax rate would only apply to the value of a super account over a $3million threshold, while the 15 per cent rate would continue below that amount. Industry groups have warned the threshold, which will not be indexed to inflation, will capture an increasing number of Aussies in line with rising costs and wages. Modelling from Treasury and the Grattan Institute estimated one in ten Australians will have super balances over $3million by the 2050s. Treasurer Jim Chalmers last week said the proposal had undergone multiple rounds of consultation and would not undermine superannuation tax concessions. 'We provided years of opportunities for people to suggest different ways to calculate that liability and nobody has been able to come up with one,' he said. Labor, which does not have a majority in the Senate, will need to work with the Greens or the Coalition to get the proposal over the line.
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
As Australia campaigns for Cop31 hosting rights, it's time to stop talking and start doing
Australian officials are gearing up for next week's mid-year climate talks in Bonn where they'll be going full tilt lobbying other governments to support the bid to host next year's COP31 negotiations. But can the government claim enough climate leadership? Our latest Climate Action Tracker shows the government's efforts to cut emissions are still rated 'insufficient'. Australia is not on track to meet its renewable energy target, its flagship industrial emissions policy is deficient, and its support for the fossil fuel industry – especially exports – remains unwavering. The climate change and energy minister, Chris Bowen, has said getting the COP31 host honour would restore Australia's leadership on climate – after what have been many years of denial and delay – but it could equally serve to show the world how inadequate his policies are. While the Albanese government has made some progress on climate policy since it came to power in 2022, restoring leadership won't come from hosting climate talks; it means turning words into action on both domestic and international fronts. The latest emissions inventory shows only a 1.5% reduction over the last two financial years, throwing this challenge into sharp relief – this rate needs to nearly double to 3% every year to reach the government target. We have based our update for Australia on government projections from 2024. The federal government has released emission figures for 2024, which were broadly similar. The Albanese government claims it is on track for emission reduction of 42.6% by 2030 from 2005 levels – close to the national 43% target. While this is partly the result of the renewables rollout, it's mostly due to the increase in the projected carbon stored in the land by 2030, such as in soils and vegetation. Without the increase in projected 2030 land sequestration in the past three years, Australia would only record a 34.9% emission reduction. Excluding the land and electricity sectors, emissions from all other economic sectors are projected to be 4.5% above 2005 levels in 2030. Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton's Clear Air column as a free newsletter Australia's 43% target is not aligned with the Paris agreement, which aims to keep global warming to no more than 1.5C. It should be at least 59%. The government also has yet to announce its 2035 emissions reduction target, well behind the February deadline. This needs to be at least 72% below 2005 levels. The government's 82% renewable energy target for the power sector by 2030 doesn't cover off-grid generation, which mostly occurs in mining regions of Western Australia where connecting to the main grid is not feasible. These account for about 10% of Australia's electricity generation. So the government's target translates to only a 77% renewable power grid nationwide by 2030. And that's assuming the target is met; the Climate Change Authority has warned that the renewables rollout must be accelerated to make that happen. Barriers to renewable energy development include slow planning and environmental approval processes, grid bottlenecks, tighter markets for equipment and labour, a lack of community acceptance and state rollbacks of renewable energy targets or projects. Overcoming these problems is crucial and provide a strong case for the federal government legislating Australia's renewable energy targets for 2030 and beyond. This would ensure it becomes a national standard and provides certainty for investors. But the 2030 target is just one milestone on the way to 100% renewable electricity system by the late 2030s, and this will require national coordination. Labor has tightened its flagship policy to curb emissions from industry's biggest polluters: the safeguard mechanism. Emissions from companies captured by the policy account for about 31% of Australia's total emissions The policy sets declining limits for how much facilities can emit with 'net' emissions to decline to 100 MtCO2e by 2030, or 28.1% below 2023 levels, allowing companies to buy carbon offsets rather than make real emission reductions. Offsets are not equivalent to fossil fuel CO2 reductions and often do not represent real and permanent emissions reduction, as Energy Australia was forced to admit. Allowing a company to buy carbon offsets means it does not change its on-site operations to be less polluting, delaying the structural change needed across high-emitting sectors to decarbonise which is critical if climate goals are to be met. Sign up to Clear Air Australia Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis after newsletter promotion Our new analysis shows that, due to the use of carbon offsets, the companies could collectively reduce their actual emissions by only 2% by the end of this decade, from 2023 levels. Fossil fuel projects in the approval and development pipeline threaten to swamp emissions reductions projected by the government out to 2030. This includes Woodside's North West Shelf gas extension, which Labor has approved to operate until 2070 – decades beyond the point when Australia is meant to have reached net zero emissions. Australia's transport sector is set to become the country's greatest source of emissions by 2030. The national fuel efficiency standard introduced by Labor last term applies to new light vehicles. The standard should be extended to heavy vehicles to encourage a transition to electrification. Heavy vehicles accounted for 22% of Australia's transport emissions last year and are expected to increase. Australia's electric vehicle uptake remains slow compared with other countries. The growth of Australia's fast-charging network is not keeping pace with electric vehicle sales, which could limit uptake further. It's clear Australia must lift its domestic game to align with anything close to the Paris agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C. That would still leave the problem of emissions flowing from our fossil fuel exports, which, together with our domestic emissions, are responsible for about 4.5% of the global total. After the first assessment of global action, governments agreed at COP28 in Dubai that the world needs to 'transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems to achieve net zero', a call strongly supported by Bowen. But our analysis shows Australia's fossil fuel exports are projected to remain close to recent levels through the next decade in official projections. In the lead-up to the decision on hosting rights for the COP31 talks, Australia has much work to do to lift its climate game and ensure its policies withstand global scrutiny. Bill Hare, a physicist and climate scientist, is the chief executive of Climate Analytics
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
It was always going to be a tightrope walk... Now Albo has everything on the line when he meets Donald Trump this weekend: PETER VAN ONSELEN
Anthony Albanese is expected to meet US President Donald Trump during the G7 Leaders' Summit in Canada, starting in three days time. And boy are there some big issues likely to be on the agenda, starting with the AUKUS agreement. Australia's ambitious plan to enhance its naval capabilities through the AUKUS partnership faces renewed uncertainty as the United States launches a comprehensive review of the agreement. Assuming their meeting still happens it will be the first face-to-face encounter between the PM and Trump since the US President was elected. It's only been a matter of months since Trump has been back in charge, and he's already seeking to reassert a combative vision of American power globally. How Albo reacts to Trump when they meet will test the PM's ability to defend national interests without undermining the alliance. Under the AUKUS pact, Australia is set to acquire between three and five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the US. However, questions have arisen about the US industrial base's capacity to produce the subs without compromising its own needs. The review is being led by Under Secretary of Defense Elbridge Colby, a known skeptic of the pact. Its terms of reference include assessing whether the AUKUS agreement aligns with President Trump's America First policy. Colby has previously questioned the wisdom of transferring critical assets like the Virginia-class submarines to US allies, suggesting it could weaken America's naval strength. Deputy PM and Defence Minister Richard Marles has attempted to downplay the significance of the review, describing it as a natural step to ensure alignment with US defence priorities. But it will certainly be on the top of the agenda when Albo and Trump meet. The PM will want to be able to say that he has received assurances that the agreement is iron clad. The question of defence spending also isn't clear cut. Trump's supporters in the US have floated a 3.5 per cent of GDP benchmark they want Australia's defence spending to rise to. Given that it's currently only at 2.4 per cent (including across forward estimates stretching all the way out to 2034), to lift our defence spending in line with US expectations would be fiscally reckless without cuts being made elsewhere. The Australian budget is already forecast to be in deficit for the coming decade, with gross national debt at the trillion dollar mark. While some domestic foreign policy hawks are independently pushing for higher defence spending, the figure team Trump wants us to meet is unrealistic for a country that faces no direct military threat and is unlikely to anytime soon. Equally, social spending pressures are mounting. The recent election campaign included a raft of new spending promises, with recurrent spending on policies such as the NDIS already a strain on the budget. To increase defence spending in that climate is unlikely to be popular. Besides, Australia's commitment to spend $368 billion on the AUKUS submarine program should be more than enough to signal that we take our defence and alliance duties seriously. Another volatile topic expected to come up at Albo's meeting with Trump is trade. The US President's across-the-board 10 per cent tariff on imports is economic vandalism dressed up as nationalism, and Australia currently isn't exempt. It's a regressive policy that punishes allies and undermines the very order the US once built. Albanese has been unusually forthright on this issue, condemning the move and seeking exemptions. Whether he can actually secure them is another matter, and depends less on the logic of his arguments than it does on Trump's whims. If the meeting achieves anything it will be to gauge whether the President is open to pragmatism rather than simply doubling down on his new found protectionism. Finally, the beef issue is deceptively niche but symbolically important for Australia. For decades, we have maintained biosecurity restrictions on US beef imports, particularly those involving supply chains running through countries with a history of mad cow disease. Washington wants access to the Australian market but the government is firm in saying no way. Albanese has so far been unequivocal that protecting Australia's disease-free status is non-negotiable. The blunt rejection of US demands for access is all about Australia retaining its access to high-value export markets like Japan and Korea, which is dependent on our gold-standard reputation for safe meat. In all of these areas of discussion the real test for Albanese when he meets Trump Mark II for the very first time is to show resolve in the face of Trump's tendency to dominate and distract. Voters won't necessarily remember every talking point, or the finer details of what gets discussed. But they will notice if their Prime Minister looks like he blinked and Trump got the better of him.
