Federal Parliament has now passed major reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. A deal between Labor and the Greens saw significant amendments agreed, and submissions to the Senate Inquiry are now closed. 

This is a real win that provides genuine building blocks to work with and it has only happened because of decades of hard work by so many in the conservation movement including First Nations communities, non- government organisations, scientists and everyday people like you pushing for change. 

At CAFNEC, we would like to thank our community for your ongoing support: your presence at our actions, handwritten letters, petition signatures and submissions truely made a difference. We would also like to thank our Federal MP for Leichhardt Matt Smith and Queensland Senator Nita Green for delivering this much needed reforms.

Nevertheless, while these reforms are a step in the right direction, they still leave big gaps on climate, First Nations justice and the hand-over of powers to the states, amongst others. 

Our job now is to make sure the new system actually works for nature and communities in Far North Queensland when this reforms are finally implemented.

Now, lets dig into the new EPBC Act…

1. The end of the Regional Forest Agreements (RFA) exemption:

For more than 25 years, native forest logging covered by RFAs has been exempt from the EPBC Act, even if the operation impacted Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES), such as Threatened Species habitat!

That loophole finally has an end date: from 1 July 2027, RFA forestry operations will be subject to federal assessment where they significantly impact MNES.

This is a huge shift for forests in Tasmania, NSW and WA and a direct result of sustained community and legal advocacy.

2. Closing the ‘continuation of use’ deforestation loophole:

Until now, vast areas of regenerated forest and mature bushland – including in the Great Barrier Reef catchments – could be cleared with no federal oversight under a “continuation of use” exemption.

Now, with the amendments, this exemption no longer applies to vegetation within 50m of a watercourse, wetland or drainage line in GBR catchments; and regrowth that has not been cleared for 15+ years (where it’s not a forestry operation).

This will bring a large chunk of Queensland’s deforestation crisis under federal scrutiny for the first time. 

3. Keeping the ‘water trigger’ at the federal level:

The reforms prevent the “water trigger” being devolved to the states, meaning the Commonwealth retains oversight and responsibility for assessing big coal and gas projects that threaten water resources – crucial for places like Beetaloo Basin in the NT where fracking is an ongoing threat to the environment. 

4. No fast-tracking for coal and gas

Through the Greens negotiations, fossil fuel projects are now excluded from: 

• The new streamlined (fast-track) assessment pathway

   

• “National interest” approval exemptions

   

• Priority “go zone” pathways under bioregional planning

This means coal and gas projects can’t be rushed through using these shortcuts.

5. Stronger framework for National Environmental Standards

National Environmental Standards are meant to be the backbone of the new system: they should set clear and measurable outcomes for nature protection and decisions made under EPBC Act will need to be in line with this Standards. 

Two draft standards are already out for consultation: the Standard for Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) and The Restoration / Offsets Standard. Scroll down to learn how you can have your say in this first consultation open until Friday 30th of January 2026. 

Some improvements were secured: decisions now have to be “consistent with”, rather than just “not inconsistent with”, the standards; and the “pay-to-destroy” offsets fund cannot be used for certain threatened species and matters, limiting the worst excesses of cash-for-destruction.

6. A new National Environment Protection Agency (NEPA) and more frequent reviews

The laws establish a new National Environmental Protection Agency, which will oversee compliance and enforcement, ensuring approved projects act in accordance with their conditions. 

This includes powers to: monitor projects and developments approved under EPBC Act, investigate alleged breaches, issue infringement notices and civil penalties and take enforcement action through the courts where needed. 

It could also assess and approve projects, but only if the Federal Environment Minister formally delegates those powers. 

The laws also require reviews of the EPBC Act every 5 years, instead of every 10 years. This gives more regular chances to strengthen protections. 

Despite these wins, the new laws still fall short in key areas that matter deeply for Far North Queensland communities, First Nations peoples and the climate.

1. No clear duty to stop climate harm:

Projects will still not be assessed or refused on the basis of their climate damage. Proponents must disclose some emissions, but there is no explicit requirement for decision-makers to test or reject projects because of their climate risk to nature. 

In a region already living with marine heatwaves, mass coral bleaching, cyclones and floods, that is a glaring omission.

2. First Nations leadership still not embedded:

While there is talk of a future First Nations Standard, the package as passed was not co-designed with First Nations peoples and does not guarantee free, prior and informed consent. This First Nations Standard must embed genuine authority and consent, not just consultation but we are not there yet. 

3. Devolution: the “one-stop shop” problem isn’t gone:

The reforms add some safeguards like requiring accreditation of state processes before powers are devolved, and giving the Minister and the NEPA’s CEO limited “call-in” and review roles. 

But they still open the door to handing EPBC approval powers to the states, and state premiers are already pushing to be first in line. 

In resource-dependent states like Queensland and WA, where governments have strong ties to fossil fuel and mining industries, this raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest and weaker scrutiny especially for big projects in Reef catchments, Cape York and the Gulf.

4. Fast-tracking and “go zones” for everything except fossil fuels:

While coal and gas cannot be fast-tracked and are not eligible for the National Interest exemption, other damaging activities including large-scale land clearing, critical minerals mining, and poorly-sited renewables can still move through streamlined pathways and “priority” go-zone style arrangements under bioregional planning. 

Without strong, enforceable standards and genuine community input, these tools risk becoming “development zones” that lock in damage and sideline local voices.

5. Weak independence and powers for the new EPA:

The new national EPA: 

• Has enforcement powers, but only gets assessment/approval powers when the Minister delegates them

   

• Can be directed by the Minister when acting under delegation

   

• Has no independent board, with the CEO appointed at the Minister’s satisfaction

On top of that, the EPA’s ability to issue urgent “stop-work” orders has been curtailed, with strict time limits and higher evidentiary hurdles, making it harder to halt serious harm quickly. 

6. Unacceptable impacts test weakened:

The “unacceptable impacts” provisions, which should act as a hard line where destructive projects simply cannot be approved, were watered down during negotiations, raising the bar of certainty that the impact will occur. They have, for example, removed the language that an impact may “be likely to have” an unacceptable impact. 

7. A rushed process that limited scrutiny:

Finally, the government pushed an arbitrary deadline to pass around 1,500 pages of complex legislation before Christmas while the Senate Inquiry was still receiving submissions. This was a purposeful decision to limit the capacity of parliamentarians, communities, experts and First Nations organisations to properly scrutinise and shape the final laws.

The first 2 National Environment Standards are open for consultation until Friday 30th of January 2026. This means that the Department of Climate Change, Energy and the Environment and Water (DCCEW) is asking the public to have their say on the government’s draft:

1. Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) national environmental standard.

2. Environmental Offsets national environmental standard.

National Environmental Standards are the backbone of the new nature laws. If they are not strong enough, environmental protections won’t be strong enough. This is a crucial moment to have your say! 

Follow Environmental Justice Australia’s expert advise and use their submission guide + template to make your submission strong and impactful! 

Read the expert analysis from legal conservation organisations and key Australian Conservation Councils: 

1. Environmental Defenders Office – Historic environment reforms: What happened in Parliament and what comes next? 

2. Environmental Justice Australia – The detail: What’s in our new environment laws? 

3. Media Release – New environment laws falls short: gains for nature could be undermined by handing powers to the States. 

4. More information on the Australian Government’s DCCEEW webpage on consultation for National Environmental Standards – Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) and Environmental Offsests. 

In Queensland, Regional Plans are long-term, strategic planning documents that guide how a region will grow, change, and respond to development pressures. Under the statute framework in Queensland, regional plans set out land-use policies and spatial maps that local governments must follow when preparing their own planning schemes.

The new Draft Far North Queensland Regional Plan 2025, released 12 November 2025, is the latest review of the previous FNQ Regional Plan 2009.

The Draft Far North Queensland Regional Plan 2025 recognises important regional values like the Great Barrier Reef, the Wet Tropics and our unique communities. But it fails to adequately prepare the region for a future shaped by climate change.

The draft does not mention climate change at all, despite the rising frequency and severity of natural disasters, and despite the existing 2009 Regional Plan referencing climate change more than 100 times. Without acknowledging what is driving increased hazards, the plan cannot properly address the growing risks to our communities.

We are also concerned that the plan removes an Acknowledgement of Country, despite highlighting the globally significant environments that the First Nations people of Far North Queensland have cared for more than 60,000 years.

Finally, the consultation period has been halved and scheduled over Christmas and the wet season. This limits community participation at the exact time of year when Far North Queenslanders are most affected by heatwaves, cyclones and flooding.

CAFNEC has made a detailed submission on the Draft Far North Queensland Regional Plan 2025, focusing on the parts of the Plan that will have the biggest long-term impact on nature, climate resilience and community wellbeing in our region.

Our submission concentrates on:

• Protecting biodiversity and landscapes across Far North Queensland, including wildlife corridors, Strategic Rehabilitation Areas, and areas connected to the Wet Tropics and Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Areas.

• Stopping further biodiversity loss, by ensuring land use planning is based on the current state of ecosystems and includes clear pathways to recovery, not just protection on paper.

• Planning for climate change, including increasing heat, flooding, cyclones and other natural hazards, so new development does not increase risk to people or nature.

• Keeping nature-based solutions front and centre, such as tree canopy, green space, wetlands and healthy catchments, which protect communities while supporting wildlife.

• Making sure the Plan can actually be delivered, with clear responsibilities, monitoring and accountability, not just high-level aspirations.

You can read CAFNEC’s full submission here if you’d like to dive into the detail.

Key issues for community submissions:

You don’t need to be a planning expert to make a submission. You might like to comment on things like:

• Biodiversity loss: Do you think the Plan does enough to protect wildlife and habitats in Far North Queensland, especially as climate change impacts worsen?

• Climate change and natural hazards: Should the Plan more clearly recognise that risks like flooding, heat and cyclones are increasing, and plan accordingly?

• Tree canopy and green space: Do you support strong, measurable targets for tree cover and urban greening to reduce heat and improve liveability?

• Protection of World Heritage areas: Should areas connected to the Wet Tropics and Great Barrier Reef be protected from all incompatible development, not just certain types?

• Delivery and accountability: Do you think the Plan clearly explains how its goals will be delivered, monitored and reviewed over time?

Community submissions don’t have to be long or technical. Sharing your local knowledge, lived experience and concerns can make a real difference.

Submissions are open until 11:59pm Monday 5 January 2026.

Click here to visit the Queensland Government’s webpage where you can download and read the draft FNQ Regional Plan 2025 and learn more about how to have your say. 

How to make a properly made submission:

Your submission will be considered in finalising the plan if it:

• Is addressed to the Deputy Premier, Minister for State Development, Infrastructure and Planning and Minister for Industrial Relations

• Includes your name, residential or business address and an electronic or postal address

• Is made in writing (and signed if not lodged electronically)

• States the grounds of your submission and the facts supporting those grounds

• Is lodged within the consultation timeframe

You can submit online using the official survey tool, or send submissions via:

Email: FNQRPsubmissions@nulldsdip.qld.gov.au

Post: PO Box 15009, City East QLD 4002

More information is available from the Queensland Government website.

We need your help to stop this Bill from becoming law. The Queensland Parliament’s Health, Environment, and Innovation Committee is accepting submissions, and your voice matters.

Make A Submission

The Parliamentary Committee is currently accepting submissions on the Bill. This is your opportunity to demand its rejection and advocate for a responsible, science-based approach to crocodile conservation.

Deadline: 10am, Thursday 3 April 2025

Every submission counts! By raising your voice, you can help protect Queensland’s crocodiles, preserve First Nations cultural heritage, and ensure that conservation efforts are based on science—not politics.

Make Your Submission

Use your own words, or use this handy submission template developed by our friends at the Environmental Defenders Office (EDO).

ONLINE: Lodge your submission by uploading to the Committee Page – link below. 

EMAIL: You can make a submission by sending an email to heic@nullparliament.qld.gov.au.

Why this Bill must be rejected

🛑 Conflicts with National & International Law
The Bill disregards Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), potentially breaching international agreements.

🛑 Undermines Queensland’s Science-Based Crocodile Management
Queensland already has a structured Crocodile Management Plan. This Bill would replace it with poorly defined regulations, including mass culling and commercial trade, without sound ecological justification.

🛑 Increases Risks to Human Safety
The removal of dominant crocodiles can lead to increased aggression and more dangerous human-crocodile interactions—the opposite of what the Bill claims to achieve.

🛑 Threatens First Nations Cultural Rights
Crocodiles hold deep cultural and spiritual significance for First Nations communities. The Bill ignores these connections and could infringe upon protected cultural rights under Queensland’s Human Rights Act 2019.

The Australian government currently has no duty of care to protect young people and future generations from climate change. This has allowed politicians and policy makers to make decisions regarding climate policy without considering how they affect future Australians. However, this may soon change…

PHOTO: Activist Anjali Sharma (left), Hana (centre), and Senator David Pocock (right) at Parliament House, Canberra.

For the first time, the Federal Parliament is considering a Bill to implement a duty of care to require decision makers to consider the wellbeing of current and future children when making certain decisions that are likely to contribute to climate change, including decisions that will increase scope one, two, or three emissions. The Bill builds on the case of Sharma v Minister for the Environment, which was a legal challenge by brave Australian children who argued that all young Australians are owed a duty to take reasonable care to protect them from climate change harm. Read more about their story here.

The Climate Change Amendment (Duty of Care and Intergenerational Equity) Bill 2023 imposes a statutory duty on decision makers:

1. To consider the likely impact of decisions that could harm the climate on the health and wellbeing of current and future children as the paramount consideration; and

2. Not to make a decision that could harm the climate if the decision poses a material risk of harm to the health and wellbeing of current and future children in Australia. 

The Senate Committee on Environment and Communications is accepting public submissions on the Climate Change Amendment (Duty of Care and Intergenerational Climate Equity) Bill 2023 until 23 November 2023.

Make A Submission

We have a chance to make our voices heard on this important Bill by making submissions to the inquiry. The Duty of Care team has prepared a How-To Guide for submissions, which can provides details on how the Bill would work, how to structure your submission, and some key points to include. It’s very important that the Committee hears from young people on this issue, so encourage the young people in your life to use these resources to write a submission too. 

Make Your Submission

ONLINE: Lodge your submission by uploading to My Parliament – link below. If this is your first time submitting online to an inquiry, you will need to create a My Parliament log in.

EMAIL: You can make a submission by sending an email to ec.sen@nullaph.gov.au. 

Submission Writing Workshop – Online

The Duty of Care Team has organised Youth Writeshops to help young people under the age of 25 write submissions for the Duty of Care Bill. Find and register for these events here. 

CAFNEC and Parents 4 Climate co-hosted an online workshop for all ages, which included an explainer on the Bill from Duty of Care team member Jess, and a how-to guide for writing submissions. 

Parents for Climate (P4C) are urging parents, grandparents, carers and family members to sign a petition calling on Federal Parliamentarians to support the Climate Change Amendment (Duty of Care and Intergenerational Equity) Bill 2023. Support this initiative by signing their petition here. 

Australia is in an extinction crisis. Our EPBC Act is failing to protect the plants and animals that we love. It is weak, poorly funded and doesn’t even mention climate change.

Without a serious overhaul of our environmental laws we will continue to loose our beautiful wildlife and the places they live. We will continue to see development prioritised over habitat, forests bulldozed at an unsustainable rate and the ongoing decline of specises as we ignore how they suffer from climate change.