The handover of environmental approval powers to the states is flawed because it ignores the inherent conflict of interest for state and territory governments when considering state-based projects. For example, state governments may stand to gain tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in royalty payments if they approve major mining or coal seam gas projects. In major infrastructure projects like port expansions or highways, the state may be both the proponent and approval authority. Historically, the demise of the Murray-Darling river system before Federal intervention provides a glaring example of the inability of the states to consider the national interest or prioritise the national interest over their own financial and political interests. The Federal Government rarely uses its powers to frustrate state-based developments,but when it does, it does to avoid unacceptable environmental impacts on nationally significant environmental features Minister Hunts one-stop-shop laws will accredit state planning laws which have consistently failed to reach Federal standards for environmental protection, particularly for threatened species. The Australian Network of Environmental Defenders Offices undertook an audit of threatened species in 2012 and found that no state or territory biodiversity or planning laws currently meet the suite of Federal environmental standards necessary to effectively and efficiently protect biodiversity. This is also plain from the 2011 State of Environment Report which found that, across Australia, our unique biodiversity is in decline, and new approaches will be needed to prevent the accelerating decline in many species. Australia has one of the worst rates of extinction in the world. Read more: abc.net.au/environment/articles/2014/09/03/4079497.htm?site=goldfields
Posted on: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 09:57:03 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015