Every five years, the Federal government commissions an independent review of the state of the environment and what actions are needed to keep our country in good health. As you could imagine, each year the State of the Environment report gets more dire… to the point where the 2021 instalment was so bad, it’s been kept in a government desk drawer until now. Coming off the back of Labor’s triumph in the “Climate Election”, this is the first time in almost a decade we will have different decision makers responding to the report findings. Should we feel hopeful about that, or are we destined for more of the same empty gestures?
Here’s our assessment of the 2021 State of the Environment Report, and Labor’s response. Don’t read this if you’re having a bad day.
Yes, this is low-key on the Coalition
Let’s get one thing out of the way first: this State of the Environment Report was a hot potato passed on by Scott Morrison’s Coalition government. The report itself was finalised and given to then Environment Minister Sussan Ley (currently Shadow Minister) in December 2021. She chose not to release it to the public before the 2022 election, which is why the new Labor Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek has done so now, seven months after it was ready and just six weeks into this government’s first term.
While that’s not an honest or honourable decision on Ley’s part, it is an understandable one because this report findings were B-A-D. The headline takeaway is that in the past five years, the Australian environment has seen rapid deterioration in eight out of nine categories (the urban environment is the only element not classified as ‘deteriorating’). And it all took place under the Coalition government’s supervision.
So when Plibersek and the ALP blame three consecutive Coalition governments for undercutting and trashing the environment, that’s valid.
There is no point dwelling on this for too long though, because a) in Opposition Labor has also been complicit in some of that decision making, and b) what’s done is done, and in power they now have a chance to fix it.
At #NPC @pablovinales asks Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek if the release of the damning State of the Environment report should prompt a reassessment of Labor’s 2030 emissions targets. #auspol @SBSNews pic.twitter.com/IdttUTkHsy
— Naveen Razik (@naveenjrazik) July 19, 2022
Main message: Everything is bad, climate consequences are here
It’s well worth taking the time to read through the report yourself online – for a government publication, it is written in just about as clear, accessible language as you could hope for.
There is no big bombshell in this report. Instead, it confirms and reiterates the reality that Zee Feed readers are already very aware of: things are really bad, and the climate crisis is affecting all aspects of our natural environment and human health.
The only noteworthy differences to previous reports are:
- That the environmental damage, loss of species etc is accelerating (to be expected as the climate crisis worsens with no intervention)
- Climate crisis impacts have shifted from being predictions about what will happen, to observations about what is currently happening.
If there is a key message from the State of the Environment report, it’s that the consequences of inaction are here. Now. The report is as explicit as possible that our lives and wellbeing are being impacted by the deteriorating environment, due to poor management and the worsening climate crisis.
I knew @jonkudelka would be good today after the week we’ve had, but this exceeded my optimistic expectations pic.twitter.com/woEwnkQpIM
— Rachel Withers (@rachelrwithers) July 16, 2022
Labor’s plan… and the Greens’ beef with it
Plibersek’s speech to the National Press Club officially launching the report had a sense of urgency that felt appropriately serious, although not quite reassuring. After all, they’d made this report a priority in the first six weeks of governing (a point she reiterated more than once in the Q&A portion of her address).
Some of the environmental election promises Labor made do address issues raised in the report. For example, increasing the funding for and number of Indigenous Rangers, as the report highlights the importance of First Nations knowledge and practices in sustainable management of the environment. These changes and policies will be welcomed, of course.
But sitting underneath the many strategies we will need to protect, restore and rejuvenate each environmental category are two big policy areas: fossil fuels and environmental protection laws.
Plibersek was directly questioned about whether Labor would agree to stop approving new coal mines, given the severity of this report. She said no – that mining “will continue to be an important part of Australia’s prosperity” and it was vital for our economy to continue to allow new mining projects to be opened. According to climate activist group, Sunrise Project, there are currently 27 new coal mining developments or extensions currently seeking approval from Federal and State governments.
Labor insists that the new emissions reduction target they are trying to legislate – 43% by 2030 – is good enough. Their logic is that they campaigned on the 43% target and therefore must stick to it is as a ‘floor’, not a ‘ceiling’ of emissions reduction.
But the problem is that actually achieving a 43% reduction in emissions is slightly less than what is actually needed to keep Australia on track to hit net-zero by 2050; less than what is needed to keep global heating to 1.5ºC; and less than what many other countries are committing to under the Paris Agreement obligations. On top of that, most countries are not hitting their 2030 targets – so we can assume Australia will also be unlikely to hit ours, too. It is not possible to achieve this while still operating fossil fuel plants.
That’s the rub.
It’s why the Greens and some independents were understandably critical of Labor’s response to the State of the Environment report, and their push to legislate the 43% target. The Greens have offered to support the Bill only if it includes a ban on new coal projects.
The other big consideration in all this is the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBCA), which went through an independent review in 2019. This is often referred to as the ‘Samuel Review’, as it was led by Professor Graeme Samuel.
The review called for comprehensive reform of the EPBCA, including setting specific national standards that must be met across a range of categories and establishing an independent body to enforce those standards. It also called for the reformed Act to specifically address climate change (which the current 1999 version does not). With these changes, it’s unlikely that new fossil fuel projects could ever be approved again as there is no way they could meet any reasonable environmental protection standards.
Plibersek has promised that Labor will respond to the Samuel review before the end of the year, with a plan to introduce reformed laws in 2023. But she hasn’t provided answers for how that would deal with projects that have only recently been approved – like Woodside’s Scarborough gas project in WA, which will be one of Australia’s highest-emitting sites ever.
So while the new government has been dealt a shitty hand by the old one, that’s just how it goes. The moment is calling for ambitious, urgent action. There is optimism in setting a stretch goal and striving for it (in order to hit our real targets), rather than the under-promise-over-deliver approach.
Who knows, maybe more ambitious plans are still to come? But settling for a “better job than the last guys” won’t cut it.
Comments are closed.