Business and industry groups call on Tanya Plibersek to rule a line in the sand on a climate trigger

Farmers, miners, property developers and big business are demanding Tanya Plibersek rule out using a climate trigger as a bargaining chip to establish a new green cop.

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek points out legislation to set up a green cop didn’t include a climate trigger when it passed the lower house, but she won’t emphatically rule one out. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Farmers, miners, property developers and major employers are demanding Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek rule out using a climate trigger as a bargaining chip to establish a new green cop to protect Australia’s environment, warning such a move could “blow up” local investments and jeopardise the government’s Future Made in Australia agenda.

The Business Council of Australia was particularly concerned Ms Plibersek could negotiate a climate trigger by another name, allowing her national environment protection agency to make “climate considerations” when scrutinising and approving projects.

The alliance of business and industry groups say such a mandate for Environment Protection Australia would duplicate the safeguard mechanism, whose job is to lower emissions, while stopping projects critical to the country’s economic and social prosperity.

“To go and duplicate that (the safeguard mechanism) and create uncertainty for business would just be a useless own goal. It’s a loopy idea and it should be an easy ‘no’ from the government,” National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke told The Australian.

“From a farming perspective, we’re talking to government about making more here in Australia – including inputs like fertiliser and chemicals through to value-added food products. A move like this could blow up the sorts of investments we’re trying to attract.

“They should draw a line through it so we can all move on.”

Urban Development Institute of Australia, with 2500 members involved in property development, said a climate trigger as called for by the Greens was an “unnecessary and unworkable addition” to any environmental legislation and would reverse industry understanding the government’s overhaul of the Environment Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act would not include such a mechanism.

“Introducing a climate trigger would likely exclude projects that are critical to Australia’s balance of economic and social issues,” UDIA national president Col Dutton said.

“This includes potentially halting very large precinct projects for housing supply in growth areas and affordable housing, undermining infrastructure projects needed to build our cities and renewable energy, as well as stopping critical projects that we rely on for exports and GDP.

“To introduce a climate trigger ... would effectively bring previously excluded projects into the EPBC process with no predictability on outcomes and an added overlay of further conditions. A climate trigger risks the need to start the reform process from the beginning to reassess the rules.”

With the EPA legislation stuck in the parliament, Minerals Council chief executive Tania Constable said the ever present threat of a climate trigger killed investment certainty.

“If the government is truly committed to a future made in Australia, they must reject any proposals to include a climate trigger in the bill. Such an economy-wrecking measure would seriously undermine investment, jobs and economic stability,” she said.

“If a ‘future made in Australia’ is more than just a slogan for the government, they must address industry’s concerns and resist pressure to appease the Greens and radical activist groups.

“The nation’s economic future relies on pragmatic and balanced policymaking.”

Business Council of Australia chief executive Bran Black said a climate trigger would disproportionately affect the West Australian economy and jobs, claiming that if it found its way into the EPA bill then three of 14 major WA resources projects currently under construction would not proceed, including the Covalent Lithium Kwinana refinery.

“Success in these reforms comes down to achieving balance, protecting the environment and allowing development to proceed, and we hope the government and Coalition can work together in a bipartisan way,” Mr Black said.

“Professor Graeme Samuel’s independent review of the EPBC Act in 2020 specifically noted that the EPBC Act should not duplicate the Commonwealth’s framework for regulating emissions.”

Ms Plibersek’s spokeswoman said: “The (EPA) legislation that recently passed the House of Representatives includes the establishment of a national indepen-dent environment protection agency with strong new powers and penalties. It does not include a climate trigger.”

The Greens, who are pushing for a climate trigger across Labor’s climate agenda, were contacted for comment.