skip to content
National Farmers' Federation

Home About NFF Media Centre Policy & Issues Farm Facts Commodities Our Members Our Partners

Submissions Search Results

< Submissions to Government

There were 11 results for your search:

  • Policy Subcategory: Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

Natural Resource Management

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

  • Preview Bilateral Amendment Bill: Submission (PDF 29.7 kb)
    Submitted to Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications on 6 June, 2014

    The NFF's 6 June 2014 Submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications inquiry into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Bilateral Implementation) Bill 2014 highlights that the NFF has long advocated for changes to the EPBC Act to reduce duplication between State and Commonwealth environmental legislation. The current Government has committed to establishing "one-stop shops" with the States and Territories in order to significantly streamline environmental approvals. This is reform that the NFF and its members welcome and support.

  • Preview Cost Recovery: Submission (PDF 485.6 kb)
    Submitted to Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications into the EPBC Amendment on 30 May, 2014

    The NFF's 30 May 2014 submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications inquiry into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment opposes Government recovery of costs for agriculture referrals under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). In NFF's view cost recovery from agriculture will not achieve the objectives of the EPBC Act, and indeed may result in negative environmental outcomes.

  • Preview Offset Inquiry: Submission (PDF 49.9 kb)
    Submitted to Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications on 3 April, 2014

    The NFF's 3 April 2014 submission to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications Inquiry into Offsets outlined two major concerns; offsets are generally not feasible for agriculture applications under the EPBC Act, and secondly, that agricultural land is often the 'target' of large enterprises, such as coal mines, seeking to offset the impacts of their own developments. The NFF advocates for a more flexible approach based on the nature of the project, the availability of direct and indirect offsets, and whether the offset delivers improved environmental outcomes for the projected matter.

  • Preview Performance Audit of Managing compliance with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) Conditions of Approval: Submission (PDF 30.7 kb)
    Submitted to Australian National Audit Office on 7 November, 2013

    The NFF's 7 November 2013 submission to the Australian National Audit Office on the Performance Audit of Managing compliance with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) Conditions of Approval highlighted the difficulty in communicating the EPBC Act to farmers and therefore jeopardising compliance. The NFF has repeatedly called for a better framework from the Department of the Environment to provide more information and enable improved consultation to farmers and those in rural communities. As such, the NFF recommends the establishment of an open dialogue that delivers enforceable conditions able to undergo monitoring, audit and compliance.

  • Preview EPBC Water Trigger: Submission (PDF 124.3 kb)
    Submitted to Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications on 4 April, 2013

    The NFF’s 4 April 2013 submission to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications inquiry into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment Bill 2013 [Provisions] outlines the government’s attempt to introduce a new matter of national environmental significance in relation to the significant impacts or likely significant impacts of coal seam gas development and large coal mining development on a water resource (water trigger). While NFF recognises the genuine concerns of farmers within areas affected by CSG, NFF believes that using a water trigger within the EPBC act presents an unreasonable future risk to all farmers. The NFF, while supporting the intent to protect the interests of farmers in terms of water quality and water quantity, does not support the use of the EPBC Act water trigger as the mechanism to resolve community and farmer concerns.

  • Preview Effectiveness of Threatened Species and Ecological Communities Protection in Australia: Submission (PDF 58.7 kb)
    Submitted to Senate Standing Committee on Environment on 16 January, 2013

    The NFF’s 16 January 2013 submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Environment Inquiry into the Effectiveness of Threatened Species and Ecological Communities Protection in Australia summarises some of the major issues confronting land managers regarding the EPBC Act, and suggests ways to alleviate some of these concerns.

  • Preview EPBC Act Cost Recovery Consultation: Submission (PDF 428.2 kb)
    Submitted to Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities on 21 June, 2012

    The NFF's 21 June 2012 submission to the EPBC Act's Draft Cost Recovery Impact Statement details numerous issues still to be addresseed. In this submission, the NFF makes a number of recommendations including changes to the definition that might rightly apply to small businesses.

  • Preview EPBC Act Amendment (Protecting Australia’s Water Resources) Bill: Submission (PDF 106.9 kb)
    Submitted to Senate Standing Committee on Rural Affairs and Transport on 14 December, 2011

    The NFF’s 14 December 2011 submission to the inquiry into Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Protecting Australia’s Water Resources) Bill 2011 outlines the major concerns regarding the Bill and highlights that the proposals for water triggers under the EPBC Act are a poor solution for what should be better regulation at a State/Territory Government level for the mining and onshore petroleum industries.

  • Preview EPBC Act Amendment (Emergency Listings) Bill: Submission (PDF 36.1 kb)
    Submitted to Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications on 12 December, 2011

    The NFF’s 12 December 2011 submission to the inquiry into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Emergency Listings) Bill 2011 notes that the NFF cannot support this Bill due to its retrospective provisions, which significantly increase uncertainty for the agricultural industry.

  • Preview Independent Review of the Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act: Submission (PDF 841.7 kb)
    Submitted to Dr Allan Hawke Independent review of the EPBC Act on 12 August, 2009

    The NFF's 10 August 2009 submission seeks a streamlining of Australia’s environmental law across all jurisdictions. Any changes to the EPBC Act must be based on credible and substantial justification for change.

  • Preview Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act Senate Inquiry Submission (PDF 455.8 kb)
    Submitted to Australian Government on 26 September, 2008

    The NFF's 26 September 2008 submission regarding the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) strongly supports incentives-based approaches, rather than regulation, to ensure a culture of active management of private land environmental assets leading to optimal outcomes.

▲ top of page

< Submissions to Government

[Get Adobe Reader]