A MORE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS MUCH EASIER TO LAY DOWN ENVIRONMENTAL PRESCRIPTIONS THAN TO IMPLEMENT THEM, ESPECIALLY IN AUSTRALIA
to say that ‘no development project which intersects with a Matter of National Environmental Significance is approvable under a devolved decisionmaking model' if using the Standards recommended by Professor Samuel.
Whether or not this critique is accurate (and I don't think it is) it certainly points to the need for a deep engagement in developing the Standards. A more fundamental problem is that it is much easier to lay down environmental prescriptions than to implement them, especially in Australia where our federal system creates overlapping responsibilities and our administrative practice, driven significantly by under-resourcing, is in such a parlous state that we don't even have comprehensive baseline environmental data or the systems to make that data accessible.
As a result, even just one of Samuel's 38 recommendations, for a ‘quantum shift' in the availability of environmental information, is a major exercise in itself, requiring significant new investments in data gathering, information systems and intergovernmental agreements.
Switched-off Client
At first, the Government seemed concerned to be seen to be doing the right thing. When WA Premier Mark Mcgowan wrote to the Prime Minister in late 2019 urging him to proceed with devolution immediately, Scott
Morrison said he'd look at moving quickly but that any such move would need bipartisan support, as he ‘cannot pre-empt the outcome' of the review. Writing again in March 2020, Mcgowan pressed the argument that devolution should not ‘get caught up in the wider, long-term independent review of the EPBC Act'.
1
Something changed between March and July, when Environment Minister Sussan Ley appeared with Graeme Samuel as he released his interim report. Although the report was only interim, and there was clearly no bipartisan support for devolution, Ley announced that the government would immediately proceed with a ‘Streamlining Bill' to facilitate devolution. (Even though the EPBC Act already contained provisions for ‘bilaterals' to enable devolution, these provisions had some technical flaws that needed fixing to make devolution workable. The Streamlining Bill had been tabled before, by the Abbott Government, but had foundered in the Senate.) Ley also announced that the government would not proceed with Samuel's recommendation for an independent assurance regulator.
The Government tried to ram the streamlining bill through the Parliament, guillotining debate in House and preventing Independent MP Zali Steggall from moving an amendment to provide for National Standards. It later agreed to a Senate Inquiry when it was clear it didn't have the numbers.
In the subsequent Inquiry report in November 2020, key cross-bench members opposed passage of the Bill, not because they were opposed to devolution per se, but because the
Ley also announced that the government would not proceed with Samuel’s recommendation for an independent assurance regulator