Industry, unions, greens unite on reform push for faster environmental knock-backs at economic roundtable

Industry and green groups alike are looking for faster rejections when projects aren’t going to pass environmental hurdles.

There’s a growing consensus too that the Federal bureaucracy needs a cultural shift to focus on outcomes and have better communication with the States, after environmental approvals came under the spotlight on the economic roundtable’s second day.

Environment Minister Murray Watt joined Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Housing Minister Clare O’Neil for the discussion on Wednesday morning.

BHP’s Australia president Geraldine Slattery and Australian Conservation Foundation head Kelly O’Shanassy were in the Cabinet room too, along with the business, union and civil society representatives in the roundtable’s core group.

While the discussion crystallised the areas of agreement that have already come up in Senator Watt’s more focused consultations, multiple sources said those in the room who hadn’t been involved in the area previously were surprised at the high level of consensus.

“We have been talking about this the last five years, but we haven’t actually got anything into the Parliament,” independent MP Allegra Spender said, characterising the conversation on Wednesday as “really constructive”.

Australian Industry Group head Innes Willox said the conversation had “consolidated things” for the minister.

The two sticking points are what role the States will play in the national approvals process and whether a Federal environmental protection agency would also make decisions.

There were ongoing problems with State and Commonwealth bodies not talking to each other, with suggestions about better using technology to make this happen.

The Nightly revealed in June this was an issue in the lengthy process for Woodside’s North West Shelf extension, with the Federal department asking for information to get a headstart on their decision, but WA bureaucrats saying it wasn’t possible to provide early.

NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey said the States “just want to plain make sure” all the systems were talking to each other.

“One of the most simple things we can do is to simply say, here are the standards, here are the states, they’re ready to play a role in administering federal law,” he said.

Senator Watt told The Nightly last week that there was “very strong and broad support” to involve the States more in the assessment process.

However, there was a less unified position on the idea that States could be the sole point of approval, as recommended in Graeme Samuel’s review of the laws.

Ms O’Shanassy said there was broad agreement about the need for more transparency and accountability.

She called for “outcome-oriented” regulation.

Industry sources used nearly identical language.

“People agree today that they want fast ‘no’s, don’t bother asking, this place is too important’,” Ms O’Shanassy said.

Having national environmental standards in place “would build greater efficiencies from the get-go, because proponents would know where they can develop and where nature should be protected from the start, and not go through a several-year process only to get a no”.

Business groups conceded the Government had now taken a promised federal EPA to two elections, and said the argument now was over how much responsibility it would take over from the minister.

“You don’t want the same entity doing both approvals and compliance,” Business Council of Australia chief executive Bran Black said.

Several people also said shadow treasurer Ted O’Brien made the “right noises” in the room about the Coalition taking a constructive approach to helping pass the laws.

“It was therefore very useful for the shadow treasurer, as a roundtable participant, to hear the depth of support for change,” Senator Watt said after the meeting.

The Government needs backing from either the Coalition or the Greens to pass the laws through the Senate.

Mr O’Brien said it would depend on what Labor put forward, but that the existence of an EPA was no longer a red line.

“We are absolutely willing to be as constructive as we can. And so if we can work together, let’s work together,” he said.

“There is certainly openness to be dealing with trying to fix the environmental laws. There’s no doubt about that.”

Ms Spender said he’d made a positive contribution.

Senator Watt has told industry and environmental groups he wants to put a bill to Parliament before Christmas.

“It is clear from today’s roundtable that there is very strong support — across business, environment and community representatives — for serious reform to deliver stronger environmental protections, faster and simpler project approvals and greater transparency in environmental regulations,” he said on Wednesday.

Earlier, it became clear that a freeze or re-write of the national construction code is on the cards as a way of speeding up home building.

The 1500 pages of rules builders have to comply with is due for an update next year anyway, but there was consensus that further changes other than those dealing with urgent defects or safety issues could be put on ice while the whole thing is reviewed.

The Government has a target to build 1.2 million homes in the five years to mid-2029, but Treasury and the housing sector say that won’t be met at the current rate of construction, in part because of the amount of red tape.

Mr Black pointed out it took an average seven years to develop an apartment building, meaning there could be three updates to the construction code before the project was finished.

“We need to take a look at whether the code is fit for purpose, and certainly for the period of that review, you’d be looking at making sure that there is no further change,” he said.

Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry head Andrew McKellar called the construction code “incredibly complex” and said it “overreaches at the moment and makes the process unwieldy”.

The Coalition took a policy to the election to freeze the construction code for a decade, but the proposal expected to come out of the roundtable isn’t expected to be as long as that.

Opposition Leader Sussan Ley backed a pause “where the National Construction Code is unhelpful”.

Dr Chalmers opened the second day of talks by declaring that better living standards for Australians were the “holy grail” for everyone in the room.

He told attendees he was pleased with the constructive engagement around the Cabinet table on day one, having counted about 100 contributions from those present, and urged them to build on the momentum.

“We need to keep front of mind what all of this is about — it is about creating more opportunities for more people in every part of our country, lifting living standards by making our economy more productive,” he said.

“That is the holy grail for us, and that’s the focus of today. But not just today, all of the work that happens after here as well.”