This review could shape the future of WA’s environment laws. So, were any green groups consulted?

Questions have been raised over whether any conservation groups were consulted as part of a critical review used to shape the future of Western Australia’s environmental protection laws.

Last month, former WA Environmental Protection Authority chair Paul Vogel told this masthead that, while working on the review, he’d discussed it with the Australian Marine Conservation Society and attempted to contact the Conservation Council of WA for input.

Conservation Council WA executive director Jess Beckerling and Australian Marine Conservation Society WA director Paul Gamblin.Credit: CCWA

However, both groups cast doubt on Vogel’s claims, raising questions over what input from environmental organisations found its way into the important document, which informed sweeping legislation currently before parliament that is designed to speed up environmental approvals.

This masthead has also confirmed consultation with the state’s most influential mining and property lobby groups was extensive, involving email conversations, and in some cases face-to-face meetings.

Premier Roger Cook ordered Vogel and co-author, planning expert David McFerran, to conduct the review in October last year.

Cook unveiled the review’s 39 recommendations in December – which the conservation movement panned as “pro-industry” – but has since refused to make the report public despite concerns around consultation.

One Labor government backbencher – and the party’s former environment spokesman – Chris Tallentire even attacked the review for its failure to include environmental groups, describing how it was conducted as a disgrace.

In response to questions from this masthead about what environmental input was sought, Vogel defended his work and said he “discussed the review with a senior member of the AMCS”.

He also said he sought the CCWA’s input via email, and the council was made clear the review was happening, but claimed he received no response.

“How [CCWA] juggle priorities is their business,” Vogel said last month.

Paul Gamblin, the WA director of the Australian Marine Conservation Society, confirmed he had contacted Vogel by text in late November after reading about the review in a newspaper, but was told the review had already been completed and submitted to government.

“What is clear is that the WA government failed at the time of the rapid review to consult with the conservation sector in this vitally important matter for WA’s environment,” Gamblin said.

Gamblin spoke to Vogel a week after that on a separate environmental policy issue the AMCS was working on.

CCWA executive director Jess Beckerling said after reading Vogel’s comments, the council tried to find his email but had been unable to.

What Labor’s new environmental laws aim to do

• Expand the Environmental Protection Authority Board
• Introduce a statement of expectation to be issued by the Minister for Environment to the authority, outlining “objectives” for the performance of its functions
• Allowing projects to gain environmental and other government approvals concurrently
• Remove the right to appeal when the authority decides not to assess a proposal

She said regardless of the missing email, a single attempt of contact “does not constitute adequate or proper consultation, especially for an issue of such significance for all West Australians”.

“The WA government’s fixation with fast-track processes would be better applied to climate action, given WA’s increasing emissions are driving the climate crisis destroying our nature,” she said.

Vogel did not respond to further requests for comment, but his co-author McFerran admitted the review timeframe was tight, and the opportunity was constrained and time-limited.

On CCWA’s missing email, McFerran said the consultation timeframe overlapped a period of considerable upheaval at the CCWA where the president, vice president and treasurer, along with the executive director, left the organisation.

Former WA EPA head, Dr Paul Vogel.Credit: Purple

“For the reviewers, the consultation period was particularly intensive throughout October last year to allow the review and recommendations to be prepared,” he said.

“The focus of the review was on how to improve the way environmental assessment was undertaken, from a process and procedures perspective, in WA.”

McFerran said he was proud the review had brought attention to the areas of duplication, lack of coordination, culture, resourcing and communication in the state’s environmental approval regime.

He said the authors’ recommendations endeavoured to create a well-resourced, strong and timely approvals process.

An Association of Mining and Exploration Companies spokesman said it had met with Vogel in-person for about an hour and relayed its membership’s concerns about the approvals system.

The Chamber of Minerals and Energy said it provided informal comments to the review, but did not lodge a formal submission.

On the property front, both the Urban Development Institute of Australia WA and Property Council WA confirmed they were consulted and provided input into the review.

Gamblin said it was now clear the government failed to consult the conservation sector.

“The government should now engage with us and independent experts before it rushes through legislation that will weaken WA’s nature laws and undermine the independence of the EPA, leading to further damage to WA’s depleted environment,” he said.

Those comments were echoed by Beckerling, who said the Vogel-McFerran report and its terms of reference should be made public, and the legislation referred to an upper house committee for proper scrutiny.

Cook rejected those calls last month and said the review was purposely quick to identify “low-hanging fruit” to improve efficiency in WA’s environmental protection system.

“[The legislation] that we’re putting through the parliament at the moment does not go to the issue of the nature of the assessment, the independence of the assessment, or indeed any of the science which contributes towards it,” he said.

The legislation is currently being debated in the upper house but, with Labor’s majority, it is expected to sail through when parliament returns later this month.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.