Environment Discussions in the Senate (12/02/2025)

Senator Sue Lines opened the session, and discussions quickly pivoted to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsideration of Decisions) Bill 2024, introduced by Senator Richard Colbeck. Colbeck criticized the government’s handling of salmon farming decisions in Tasmania, claiming it favored environmental groups over the advice of the Tasmanian government, which he argued created uncertainty for the industry. He highlighted the support for his amendment from organizations like the Forest Products Association and the Minerals Council of Australia, underscoring the need for investment certainty (Pages 1-3).

In response, Senator Karen Grogan from the Labor Party countered Colbeck’s claims, arguing that he was exaggerating fears about potential home losses and that the current Act already included provisions for reconsideration based on new information. Grogan emphasized the importance of existing environmental protections for community health (Page 3).

Senator Sarah Hanson-Young of the Greens strongly opposed Colbeck’s bill. She described it as an attempt by the coalition to weaken vital environmental protections, stressing the importance of safeguarding biodiversity (Pages 5-6). Senator Jonathon Duniam defended the bill, asserting that it would provide necessary certainty for the salmon industry (Page 6).

Independent Senator Tammy Tyrrell expressed apprehensions about the potential loss of the salmon industry, which she indicated would be devastating for regional Tasmanian communities. She advocated for supportive measures for the industry alongside robust environmental safeguards (Page 7).

Senator Michaelia Cash proposed to move the discussion of the bill forward for further consideration (Page 9). Ultimately, the Senate voted on the bill, which resulted in a narrow defeat with 30 AYES to 31 NOES (Page 9).

Following the bill’s defeat, discussions shifted to the Agriculture (Biosecurity Protection) Levies Bill, where senators debated the economic implications of a proposed tax on farmers (Pages 10-14). There were calls for a review, and broader economic conditions affecting farmers were highlighted during the discussions (Page 10).

Amidst these debates, criticism was directed at both major political parties for their perceived failures in addressing environmental and community concerns, particularly in relation to Indigenous rights and climate action (Pages 31). This sentiment underscored the ongoing tensions within the Parliament regarding climate and environmental policies.