TRANSCRIPT – ABC News Breakfast

Angie Bell MP

Shadow Minister for the Environment

Shadow Minister for Youth

Federal Member for Moncrieff

TRANSCRIPT

ABC News Breakfast

30 October 2025

Subjects: Labor’s unworkable environmental law reforms; Australians beware of a deal with the Greens that would halt productivity and send investment offshore; Net Zero; Watt’s BOM Blunder.

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

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

The federal government’s new environment laws face an uncertain path through the parliament where they’ll be introduced today. The coalition wants a string of changes. Shadow Environment Minister Angie Bell joins us now. Good morning to you.

ANGIE BELL:

Good morning, Bridget.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

Good to speak with you. So, when Graham Samuel initially did the review into these laws delivered to the Coalition government at the time, he said the focus on the Act should really be the Commonwealth’s core responsibility to the environment and to biodiversity. At a time when we’re losing so many species and when global warming is of concern, that has to be the core focus of this Act, doesn’t it?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly this Act is about preserving and protecting the environment. There’s no doubt about that. But we need to have a balanced approach to the reforms in this Act. And what we are saying is that it has not been balanced and that currently, the way the seven bills are, the almost 1,500 pages that will be introduced this morning are not balanced, are not workable, will be a handbrake on jobs and investment in this country and will be a green light for investment to go offshore.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

Which specific parts of the, I mean, it’s 1,500 pages, I take your point. There’s a lot to get through in this Act. But if you could highlight for us one specific part of this Act that you feel would be a handbrake on industry, what is it?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly more green tape is a problem. More red tape is a problem. And the Prime Minister’s new Environmental Protection Authority will be holding up those processes. We’ll see a bigger bureaucracy, bigger government, which is what this government is all about. and we won’t see faster, necessarily, approvals through that process. Now, the EPA will have a CEO that is a statutory appointment, so that means that the Governor-General is the only person that can remove that person in that role, and so we think that the CEO should be accountable to the Minister. That’s one of the first problems.

Another problem is that Scope one and two emissions will need to be reported through this process. And that is already a mechanism that is under the safeguards mechanism. So, that will be reported there at the moment. We think it’s a double up. Again, bigger bureaucracy, more red tape, more green tape for proponents who would like to get an assessment approval. And so they are just a couple of problems. There’s also big problems with those unacceptable impact definitions and net gain definitions as well that are in the Act. And so, what we think at the moment, this Bill is completely unworkable. We entered good faith negotiations with the Government. However, the way it is right now, there’s no net gain for industry and for jobs and for certainty for those approvals processes at the moment. And that’s what we’re concerned about.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

Let’s talk about direct and indirect emissions reporting. I mean, that’s already a requirement for a lot of Australian businesses. We have very stringent requirements for businesses to actually be reporting this anyway. This is as part of our net zero commitments. I mean, a lot of Australians are concerned about us reaching those targets. There’s global concern. Why wouldn’t that be a prudent part of this bill?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, this is doubling up. So under the safeguards mechanism, Scope one emissions are required to be reported, and we know that they will decrease by 4.9 per cent a year to 2050. But scope one and two emissions, if they are to be reported in this Act, could open up a can of worms when it comes to legal challenges, depending on how that is interpreted by a judge. And so, I don’t think business will go ahead with new projects if there’s a risk that will be the case.

BRIDGET BRENNAN

But they already have to consider their emissions requirements as it stands, don’t they?

ANGIE BELL:

Not under the EPBC Act, no.

BRIDGET BRENNAN

But in general, they do. There is a lot of concern in the community and we have a commitment under net zero. So many businesses are already considering this. How hard can it be to be reporting this to the federal government?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, this is duplication again into the EPBC Act when we already have it under the safeguard mechanism under energy and emissions reporting.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

What do you think will happen with this bill? Do you think the government may actually go to the Greens and start looking at some concessions that they want to get this through the Parliament?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, I think Australians should be horrified at the prospect that the Labor Government would go to the Greens for a deal on this. Because let’s look at our nation’s wealth and what has built our nation when it comes to education, when it comes to hospitals across our country, infrastructure. Where’s that money come from? And I think that’s so very important to think about where that’s coming from. Because if these projects, if mining projects, if resources are held up, then people lose their jobs and the country is less wealthy and we don’t have the benefits of that in our economy. So, I think Australians should be horrified at the thought of Labor doing a deal with the Greens on this because of the consequences that would come from that.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

Are you open to compromising? Is there a key concession that you’d work on with the government on this bill?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, we’ve gone into faith negotiations as I said with the government on this from the beginning of this process which has been not the whole six months but just you know the last month or so we’ve had a number of meetings. I’ve met with Minister Watt a couple of times and the department a couple of times as well. And we’ll continue to work with the government on this. We have put a few suggestions forward and the Bills at the moment, when they are brought into the House this morning, are simply unworkable for Australians for jobs for industry and for investment in our country.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

What’s your view on the Coalition’s review on net zero? Do you think it’s a policy you should be sticking with?

ANGIE BELL:

Look, we’re going through that process and we have another meeting tomorrow where the backbench will come together to talk about their views on the net zero policy. We’ll come to that in due course.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

I just want to ask you about the BOM website. It seems like a lot of Australians are a bit confused by the changes. Do you think the BOM should be sticking with the current design or having a look at whether or not it’s accessible to all Australians as it is now?

ANGIE BELL:

Well, certainly I know that millions of Australians rely on the BOM website. And what I will say about this is that Murray Watt, the Minister, is a Queenslander. It’s his department. He should know better than to make these changes just before storm season, when millions and millions of Australians and South East Queenslanders rely on this. And they’ve had a look at this website that’s been changed and misread it because of the colour scheme on the website. I think that’s appalling. It’s happened under Murray Watt’s watch.

BRIDGET BRENNAN:

Angie Bell, thanks for your time on the show this morning.

ANGIE BELL:

Thank you.

ENDS.