Latest news with #EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct
The Age
4 days ago
- Business
- The Age
Like ChatGPT, we need clear goals and rules. Otherwise, we could make bad decisions
And, after an independent review led by the former chair of the competition watchdog Graeme Samuel recommended a series of big reforms in 2020, both ministers – from opposite sides of the political fence – promised to act on them. Loading 'Yet here we are, in the winter of 2025, and nothing has changed,' Henry points out. That's despite the clear warning signs and relatively broad support for such change. Could it be that political focus has shifted to the economic issue of the day? Treasurer Jim Chalmers, having moved past inflation, has made it clear the government's second term will be focused on boosting the country's lagging productivity growth. Never mind the existential issue we face. But as Henry points out, even if productivity is our focus, no reform is more important to the country's ambition to pump out more of what we want (with less work hours or materials) than environmental law reform. 'If we can't achieve [that], then we should stop dreaming about more challenging options,' he says. There's been no shortage of activity on environmental reform – from policy papers to bills and endless rounds of consultation – yet little to show for it. Henry rejects the idea that this 'policy paralysis' comes down to a conflict between climate warriors and those wanting to charge ahead with economic growth. If this were the case, then why, he asks, is the pace of environmental damage speeding up at the same time our economy is stagnating? Henry acknowledges reforms won't be easy. Businesses and politicians are good at seizing moments of uncertainty when new changes are floated to send those changes to the graveyard. For some, he says, the stakes are high: 'We have whole industries with business models built on the destruction of the natural world.' Loading But we've done hard things before. And Henry points out it's now or never. While Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his team won't want to hear it, changes have to be made within this term of parliament. The Labor Party may have been swept into a second term in power with a huge majority despite doing little to improve environmental laws. However, the growing national vote for the Greens is solid proof that voters have more appetite for environmental reform than the major parties have been serving. Many of these reforms are clear and supported by a wider range of people with different interests. So, what reforms are we actually talking about? Well, Graeme Samuel's review made 38 recommendations. But a big focus was on fixing what's known as the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which Samuel said was complex, cumbersome and essentially powerless. Us humans are full of shortcomings, but by recognising them and changing the frameworks we work with, we can improve the way we look at our choices and make decisions. Samuel's suggestions ranged from introducing a set of mandatory National Environmental Standards and enforceable rules to apply to every environmental decision made around the country. These standards would be detailed, based on data and evidence, use clear language and leave very little wriggle room. He also recommended wiping out all special exemptions and moving from a species-to-species and project-by-project approach, to one that focused on the needs of different regions: areas that shouldn't be developed, those needing to be revived, and those where development assessments could be waved through more quickly. This would help give businesses greater certainty, but also help us overcome one of our biggest shortcomings. Because nature is so vast, when we assess the negative environmental impact of one project at a time, it will often seem tiny and irrelevant. That leads us to underestimate the environmental damage we are allowing over time, especially in particularly vulnerable ecosystems. The remarkable thing is that Samuel's recommendations were – and still are – widely supported by both business and environmental organisations. Yet, there has been no movement five years on. Loading That's a problem because there are plenty of big projects we need to get cracking on: huge investments in renewable energy generation and the government's ambitious target of building 1.2 million homes by 2030. In 2021, assessment and approval of a wind farm or solar farm blew out to 831 days – up from 505 days in 2018. And between 2018 and 2024, 124 renewables projects in Queensland, NSW and Victoria needed to be assessed under the Environment Protection Act. Only 28 received a clear 'yes' or 'no' answer. There could also be a way to give accreditation to state and territory decision-makers if they proved they could protect the national interest. That would remove the double-ups and complexity in approvals processes, and cut down the time taken to assess development proposals. Of course, developers have stressed the importance of the types of reforms which fast-track development, while environmentally-focused groups have pushed for more focus on new protections. Samuel also recommended an expert, independent and trusted decision-maker, in the form of a national Environmental Protection Authority, to work with the government to protect the national interest. Us humans are full of shortcomings, but by recognising them and changing the frameworks we work with, we can improve the way we look at our choices and make decisions. One of our problems is that, under the current Environment Protection Act, we tend to undervalue the environment. Part of that, as we've discussed, comes down to the vastness of nature (which needs to be matched by a broader regional lens, rather than our project-by-project approach). The other is our short-sighted view. Because the cost of damaging nature is overwhelmingly shouldered by future generations, Henry points out we have found it very difficult to stop ourselves stealing from the future. Loading Like bad eyesight, these issues are not unsolvable. We just need clear goals, rules and accountability measures to keep us on track. As Henry puts it, economics is concerned with optimising choices. That requires carefully defining what we're wanting to achieve and, just as importantly, determining the constraints that shape the choices we're incentivised to make. 'If the constraints are mis-specified, then decisions will be suboptimal,' Henry says.
Sydney Morning Herald
4 days ago
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
Like ChatGPT, we need clear goals and rules. Otherwise, we could make bad decisions
And, after an independent review led by the former chair of the competition watchdog Graeme Samuel recommended a series of big reforms in 2020, both ministers – from opposite sides of the political fence – promised to act on them. Loading 'Yet here we are, in the winter of 2025, and nothing has changed,' Henry points out. That's despite the clear warning signs and relatively broad support for such change. Could it be that political focus has shifted to the economic issue of the day? Treasurer Jim Chalmers, having moved past inflation, has made it clear the government's second term will be focused on boosting the country's lagging productivity growth. Never mind the existential issue we face. But as Henry points out, even if productivity is our focus, no reform is more important to the country's ambition to pump out more of what we want (with less work hours or materials) than environmental law reform. 'If we can't achieve [that], then we should stop dreaming about more challenging options,' he says. There's been no shortage of activity on environmental reform – from policy papers to bills and endless rounds of consultation – yet little to show for it. Henry rejects the idea that this 'policy paralysis' comes down to a conflict between climate warriors and those wanting to charge ahead with economic growth. If this were the case, then why, he asks, is the pace of environmental damage speeding up at the same time our economy is stagnating? Henry acknowledges reforms won't be easy. Businesses and politicians are good at seizing moments of uncertainty when new changes are floated to send those changes to the graveyard. For some, he says, the stakes are high: 'We have whole industries with business models built on the destruction of the natural world.' Loading But we've done hard things before. And Henry points out it's now or never. While Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his team won't want to hear it, changes have to be made within this term of parliament. The Labor Party may have been swept into a second term in power with a huge majority despite doing little to improve environmental laws. However, the growing national vote for the Greens is solid proof that voters have more appetite for environmental reform than the major parties have been serving. Many of these reforms are clear and supported by a wider range of people with different interests. So, what reforms are we actually talking about? Well, Graeme Samuel's review made 38 recommendations. But a big focus was on fixing what's known as the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which Samuel said was complex, cumbersome and essentially powerless. Us humans are full of shortcomings, but by recognising them and changing the frameworks we work with, we can improve the way we look at our choices and make decisions. Samuel's suggestions ranged from introducing a set of mandatory National Environmental Standards and enforceable rules to apply to every environmental decision made around the country. These standards would be detailed, based on data and evidence, use clear language and leave very little wriggle room. He also recommended wiping out all special exemptions and moving from a species-to-species and project-by-project approach, to one that focused on the needs of different regions: areas that shouldn't be developed, those needing to be revived, and those where development assessments could be waved through more quickly. This would help give businesses greater certainty, but also help us overcome one of our biggest shortcomings. Because nature is so vast, when we assess the negative environmental impact of one project at a time, it will often seem tiny and irrelevant. That leads us to underestimate the environmental damage we are allowing over time, especially in particularly vulnerable ecosystems. The remarkable thing is that Samuel's recommendations were – and still are – widely supported by both business and environmental organisations. Yet, there has been no movement five years on. Loading That's a problem because there are plenty of big projects we need to get cracking on: huge investments in renewable energy generation and the government's ambitious target of building 1.2 million homes by 2030. In 2021, assessment and approval of a wind farm or solar farm blew out to 831 days – up from 505 days in 2018. And between 2018 and 2024, 124 renewables projects in Queensland, NSW and Victoria needed to be assessed under the Environment Protection Act. Only 28 received a clear 'yes' or 'no' answer. There could also be a way to give accreditation to state and territory decision-makers if they proved they could protect the national interest. That would remove the double-ups and complexity in approvals processes, and cut down the time taken to assess development proposals. Of course, developers have stressed the importance of the types of reforms which fast-track development, while environmentally-focused groups have pushed for more focus on new protections. Samuel also recommended an expert, independent and trusted decision-maker, in the form of a national Environmental Protection Authority, to work with the government to protect the national interest. Us humans are full of shortcomings, but by recognising them and changing the frameworks we work with, we can improve the way we look at our choices and make decisions. One of our problems is that, under the current Environment Protection Act, we tend to undervalue the environment. Part of that, as we've discussed, comes down to the vastness of nature (which needs to be matched by a broader regional lens, rather than our project-by-project approach). The other is our short-sighted view. Because the cost of damaging nature is overwhelmingly shouldered by future generations, Henry points out we have found it very difficult to stop ourselves stealing from the future. Loading Like bad eyesight, these issues are not unsolvable. We just need clear goals, rules and accountability measures to keep us on track. As Henry puts it, economics is concerned with optimising choices. That requires carefully defining what we're wanting to achieve and, just as importantly, determining the constraints that shape the choices we're incentivised to make. 'If the constraints are mis-specified, then decisions will be suboptimal,' Henry says.
AU Financial Review
5 days ago
- Business
- AU Financial Review
Ken Henry's top reform: the environment, not tax
Fixing Australia's broken environment laws to speed up development approvals while safeguarding nature is more important than tax reform or any other measures when it came to boosting Australia's ailing productivity, former Treasury secretary Ken Henry says. Henry, whose white paper for Labor in 2010 remains the most recognised template for tax reform, will tell the National Press Club on Wednesday that the country's productivity challenge faces no greater imperative than overhauling the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
Sky News AU
5 days ago
- Business
- Sky News AU
Labor will be forced to 'raise taxes quite significantly' or cut spending if productivity stalls, Ken Henry declares
Labor has been warned it will be forced to hike taxes quite significantly if productivity continues to stall as the Albanese government powers on with its second term economic agenda. Former Treasury secretary Ken Henry faced the National Press Club on Wednesday where he weighed in on the economic challenges facing Australia. Mr Henry, who authored a highly recognised white paper on tax reform in 2010, warned Labor that lagging productivity would mean the government will be forced to either hike taxes or cut spending. It comes as Labor faces growing fiscal pressures on the budget such as the ballooning NDIS and demands for Australia to increase defence spending. 'If the budget is to meet these growing spending pressures, then we've got two options: We either increase taxes as a share of GDP, or we grow the economy faster,' Mr Henry told National Press Club on Wednesday. He said the slump in productivity that continues to plague Australia's economy would force the government to find revenue elsewhere. 'Over the decade of the 1990s, average productivity growth was 2.31 per cent a year,' Mr Henry said. 'Over the past 25 years, it's averaged 0.98 per cent a year. That's a pretty fundamental difference. 'If we continue on that trajectory … we will have no option but to raise taxes. And quite significantly, by several percentage points of GDP ... or cut spending.' Mr Henry also voiced concerns about the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) during his address, which he said needed an overhaul to boost productivity. 'I can think of other reforms to boost productivity. Some even harder, though none more important. And if we can't achieve environmental law reform, then we should stop dreaming about more challenging options,' Mr Henry said. He argued changes to legislation are critical for Labor as it wants to balance environmental concerns with ambitious projects, including delivering 1.2 million new homes and continuing with the Future Made in Australia plan. It would also mean changes to laws surrounding mining and critical minerals projects. 'The Australian government has an ambition to massively increase critical minerals exports and downstream processing here in Australia,' Mr Henry said. 'This means more mines, new industrial facilities, and more pressure being loaded onto broken EPBC project assessment and approval processes.' Labor is considering a raft of changes to boost productivity. The nation's economy will take centre stage at the productivity roundtable in August where leaders across business, economics, politics and unions will come together. A coalition of 28 businesses and industry groups have listed overhauling the EPBC as a major priority. Australia's enormous superannuation sector, alongside major industries including artificial intelligence and manufacturing, will also come under the microscope.
Sky News AU
6 days ago
- Business
- Sky News AU
Fix environmental laws to productivity boost, Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation chair Ken Henry tells Labor
Fixing national environmental laws holds the key to boosting productivity in Australia, a leading environmental expert has told the Albanese government. Ken Henry, the former Treasury secretary who handed down a highly recognised white paper on tax reform, now serves as chair to the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation and will address the nation's flailing productivity at the National Press Club on Wednesday. Productivity has become a major focus point for the Albanese government in its second term as it looks to bolster Australia's growth. Mr Henry will tell attendees the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) - Australia's main environment legislation - needs a radical overhaul. 'I can think of other reforms to boost productivity. Some even harder, though none more important. And if we can't achieve environmental law reform, then we should stop dreaming about more challenging options,' Mr Henry will say. He will says changes to legislation are critical for Labor as it wants to balance environmental concerns with ambitious projects, including delivering 1.2 million new homes and continuing with the Future Made in Australia plan. This also includes changes to laws surrounding mining and critical minerals projects. 'The Australian government has an ambition to massively increase critical minerals exports and downstream processing here in Australia,' Mr Henry will say. 'This means more mines, new industrial facilities, and more pressure being loaded onto broken EPBC project assessment and approval processes.' He will call for a 'quick and efficient' delivery of the ambitious projects in a 'way that not only protects, but restores, nature' as Labor attempts to reduce carbon emissions. 'To put it bluntly, there is no chance of Australia meeting stated targets for net zero, renewable energy, critical minerals development, housing and transport infrastructure without very high-quality national laws that set clear environmental standards for major projects, a strong national decision maker respected by all parties, and significant improvement not only in Commonwealth environmental protection systems, but also in those of the States and territories,' Mr Henry will say. 'And all these projects will be critical to enhancing economic resilience and lifting flagging productivity growth. 'Boosting productivity and resilience relies upon environmental law reform.' Labor is considering a raft of changes to boost productivity. The nation's economy will take centre stage at the productivity roundtable in August where leaders across business, economics, politics and unions will come together. A coalition of 28 businesses and industry groups have listed overhauling the EPBC as a major priority. Australia's enormous superannuation sector, alongside major industries including artificial intelligence and manufacturing, will also come under the microscope.
