Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025; Reference to Committee

Opened the debate

Hanson-Young moved a motion to suspend standing orders to refer the bill to a committee. Hanson-Young argued the legislation was rushed through parliament under the cover of the federal budget without proper scrutiny. Hanson-Young claimed the bill created loopholes for corporations to pollute and undermined environmental protections across various industries, not just the salmon sector. Hanson-Young stated the bill was a political fix that failed to give the community a voice or protect wildlife.

Government response

Wong characterised the motion as political grandstanding by non-government parties. Wong argued that the Senate should prioritise other legislation, specifically the Workplace Gender Equality Amendment Bill 2024. Wong suggested the Greens were delaying the process to gain media attention rather than addressing substantive policy issues. Wong moved that the motion be put immediately to allow the Senate to proceed with its program.

Opposition response

Duniam opposed the referral to committee but criticised the government for handling the Tasmanian salmon industry crisis poorly. Duniam argued the bill was introduced late due to ministerial inaction over 18 months. Duniam expressed concern about the stability of the legislation given internal government divisions and potential future minority arrangements. Duniam stated the Liberal Party would oppose any establishment of a new federal environment protection authority.