TRANSCRIPT – ABC Radio Brisbane

Angie Bell MP

Shadow Minister for the Environment

Shadow Minister for Youth

Federal Member for Moncrieff

TRANSCRIPT

ABC Radio Brisbane

24 November 2025

Subjects: Environment laws.

E&OE…………………………………………………………………………………………………

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

Senator Watt’s also been holding talks with the Coalition’s Environment Spokesperson, Angie Bell who joins us now. Good morning.

ANGIE BELL:

Good morning. Kelly Higgins-Devine. What a great name. I just want to say that on air.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

Thank you so much. Okay, so with this legislation, we’ve heard that the Greens have been offered a concession. Have you been offered one or any of the items you would like to see change in this legislation?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly we’re offering a constructive pathway forward, Kelly, to secure these much-needed environmental reforms. We’ve put forward, to the government the substantive changes that we need to protect investment and, of course, the environment. And only then will we be able to support this legislation. It is in a Senate inquiry currently. And so that Senate inquiry is due to report back on the 24th of March next year.

And the only way that the Minister can actually pass these laws this week is if he, as self-proclaimed, if he does a deal with the Coalition or the Greens to have these bills passed this week in the last sitting week. So, the ball is in his court. I have put forward the Coalition’s position on the substantive changes needed to protect jobs, industry, investment in the country, and it’s beholden now to him to bring forward his amendments, which I haven’t seen yet.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

With that, is there room for negotiation or you get these changes through, or you don’t do a deal?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly I’ve been meeting with the Minister, as you outlined, probably seven or eight times now. And so, I would expect that we will have some conversations and look at these amendments when they arrive and judge them on their merits. But certainly, there is room to move on each of those areas that we have concerns with.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

You have particular concerns with an Environmental Protection Authority. What are your concerns with that?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, those concerns are around the scope and responsibilities of that authority. Currently, the CEO is not accountable or will not be accountable to the Minister and therefore there is no KPIs around the performance of the said CEO. And so, we want to see some guardrails around that, a statement of expectations. We want to see some key performance indicators attached with that so the person in the role, whoever that ends up being once these bills are passed, is accountable for the decision making. We want to see assessments and approvals remain in the department and we want to see what Graeme Samuel’s review said, and that is that audits are undertaken by the environmental protection authorities and assurance as well.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

So, you would prefer that the EPA wasn’t able to make any decisions about anything but just to give reports based on the environment itself and protection of the environment?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, there will be bilateral agreements in place after these bills are passed, if they are passed. Those bilateral agreements will fall to the states and territories to be accredited to make those assessments and approvals. Those other approvals that do come to the Commonwealth for matters of environmental significance will then, we would like the assessments and approvals to be in the department.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

Can I put to you, the Coalition has dumped net zero, Angie Bell. Does the Coalition at this point have political credibility when it comes to protecting the environment?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, look, I think what’s very important about our new energy policy is that it will deliver affordable energy to Australians and it puts that at number one because as we know, households around…[interrupted]

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

Affordable energy isn’t about protecting the environment though. Do you have any credibility?

ANGIE BELL:

I’ll get to that, Thank you. So, if you could just let me finish, I’m talking about energy as the most important thing and the cost that Australians…[interrupted]

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

But this is about the environment. This Act is about the environment.

ANGIE BELL:

Yes, and if you’d let me finish, and also a responsible reduction of emissions. And that will mean that we will commit to reducing emissions year on year, as we did when we were in government, and also reporting our nationally determined contributions every five years as well. And so, we remain in the Paris Agreement. But what we are doing here is shaking up the government’s bad energy policy because they are failing Australians and Australians are paying the price.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

If you don’t get this deal done with Labor, they a deal with the Greens, get it through anyhow. You could end up with none of these changes. Are you concerned that could happen?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, let’s have a look at the amendments that the Minister brings forward based on our talks to date and see where that leads. If the government decides to do a deal with the Greens, then that is on the government for not securing jobs, productivity, and investment in our country. And I think that would be disastrous.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

What else would you like to see changed in this legislation? We mentioned the EPA. I just want people to get the sense of what you feel about this legislation is so bad that you need to block it?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, it is 1,459 pages of package of the bills before the House. So, there is a lot, sorry, before the Senate. So, there is a lot in it and there are a lot of, well, perhaps unintended consequences and intended consequences and so it’s wading our way through those. I’ll point to the definition of unacceptable impacts and net gain in the bills. Currently there’s seven or eight pages around unacceptable impacts that are broad and far-ranging. What we’d like to see is a more specific definition of what unacceptable impacts means and of what net gain means. Because if you are to put more back into the environment than you’ve taken out, then you must have a baseline of data as a proponent to know what net gain actually means.

We also want to see the application of natural justice across the bills. That is that proponents have the right to a timeline on their assessments and approvals and how they will challenge those through the courts. That’s important as well. Environmental protection orders put a significant deal of power in an unaccountable EPA. Remember, I talked about that in the CEO’s powers and the circumstances in which they can be issued is irresponsibly broad as well. And so there is a lot of terms in the bills that are broad and not closely defined. We’d like to see the Minister tighten up on those definitions. And so, we await those amendments. It’s been reported they’re coming to me today, but I haven’t received them at this point in time.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

Angie Bell, is there anything in this 1,400 pages, that’s a lot of legislation looking at there, but is there anything that you would like to see tightened up on business?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly this will put more certainty around timelines for business and approvals.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

But that’s for them, I mean against them. Sorry, I was probably a bit vague there. Anything that you think business need to have tightened up on them rather than for them?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly I think it does come back to that certainty for industry. And the Minister’s talked about quick yeses and quick noes. And that will save industry, obviously, time. But what it will do is protect the environment as well. We want to see a balanced set of bills. We want to make sure that the environment is protected because our environment is going backwards. And it’s been some 25 years since the EPBC Act came into place with Robert Hill as the Minister at that time.

And since the Graeme Samuel review, we’ve had now five years since we commissioned him to deliver that report and we’ve seen the Minister take some of the recommendations out of that review and apply them in the bill. Some are the way Graeme Samuel envisaged them to be and some are not. And so, we continue to work with the Minister in a constructive way so that we can move forward to protect our environment, but also strike a balance when it comes to industry and jobs, because of course, that’s what makes our economy go around.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

Have the talks been, I’m to say friendly? Oh, yeah, I’ll throw friendly out there. Have they been cooperative at this point?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly I’ve been 100 per cent focused on my talks with the Minister and Murray and I have been very respectful to one another during these talks. I’m sure he will agree with that. It has been a long process so far over the last few months since he introduced the bills and so we’ll continue to engage in a constructive manner to see if we can move forward to deliver certainty for Australians. That’s what we’re here for, right?

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

That’s it. That’s what everyone, yeah, they actually, people want you all to just get it done and get it done respectfully. So if that’s happening, that’s good.

ANGIE BELL:

We need to get it done right. We’re not in a rush to fail on these bills either, Kelly. So, we’ve got to get it done right. We’ve got to make sure that we deliver for the environment and for certainty for industry.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

Well, that’s it. Both the Coalition and the Greens might decide now. We’re not going to agree and we’re back to next year. For you, is it important to get it done? It’s obviously important for Murray Watt to get this signed this week. Is it important for you to get it signed this week?

ANGIE BELL:

We’re not in a rush to failure. It was the government that failed in the last term, three years under Minister Plibersek, to reform these laws. And so, we’re not in a rush to fail. If the amendments come back and they, you know, there’s movement on those areas that we have concerns around, then I can see a way forward. If not, then we’ll have to go into next year and continue our negotiations.

KELLY HIGGINS-DEVINE:

All right. Angie Bell, it’s been an excellent conversation. Thank you.

ANGIE BELL:

Thanks so much. Bye, Kelly.

ENDS.