With a sharp reputation as a skilled negotiator, Australia’s newly appointed Environment Minister, Murray Watt, enters one of the most politically sensitive roles in the government. He will need every ounce of his political expertise to manage competing interests in a portfolio where tensions between economic development and environmental conservation run deep.
At the top of Senator Watt’s agenda are the long-awaited nature law reforms in Australia, which aim to revamp outdated federal environmental legislation. However, this task is far from straightforward. He also inherits several controversial resource project decisions, all while stepping into the shoes of Tanya Plibersek, who was recently moved to the social services portfolio.
His immediate focus is to continue the groundwork laid by his predecessor: establishing a national environmental watchdog and overhauling the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. This legislation governs how more than 2000 threatened species are protected across the country, yet it has been widely criticized for being ineffective.
Australia’s current environment laws are meant to safeguard “matters of national environmental significance” against destructive development. But they have drawn criticism from both sides — seen as too weak by conservationists and too restrictive by industry stakeholders. In 2020, the Samuel review confirmed the legislation was outdated and ineffective, prompting the Albanese government to commit to significant reforms.
These planned reforms, branded as the “nature positive plan,” hit turbulence just before the last federal election. A deal struck by Plibersek with crossbenchers for a new federal environmental protection agency was derailed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. He was accused of yielding to mining interests in Western Australia, an allegation he firmly denied.
Felicity Wade, national co-convenor of the Labor Environment Action Network, noted the mining sector’s retreat from constructive engagement amid fears the Coalition would regain power. “There was a perception that a change of government was possible and their preparedness to be a constructive reform participant evaporated,” she told AAP.
Labor’s sweeping electoral victory has since rekindled hope that the industry will return to negotiations. “There are productivity and efficiency gains to be gained through this legislation, but not at the expense of the environment,” Wade asserted.
Early signals from the mining industry suggest renewed willingness to collaborate. Tania Constable, CEO of the Minerals Council of Australia, stated the industry’s commitment to “faster, clearer decisions” through environmental law reform.
Meanwhile, environmental advocates argue that reforms are overdue and essential. Kelly O’Shanassy, CEO of the Australian Conservation Foundation, emphasized urgency: “There can be no more delays, caving to lobby groups and carving out industries.”
Senator Watt is no stranger to tackling complex and divisive issues. He previously led the push to end live sheep exports, a policy long mired in political and industry controversy. This track record has earned him praise from across the political and activist spectrum.
Michele O’Neil, president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, called Watt a “frank, fair and skilled negotiator who got things done.” “He makes sure he is on top of the detail, listens to varied perspectives and keeps his eye on the objectives,” she added.
Watt has already signaled that creating a federal environmental watchdog remains a top priority. He plans to visit Western Australia soon to meet with the state premier and key mining stakeholders. In a recent interview with The Guardian, Watt suggested he may abandon the “nature positive” branding in favor of clearer language that resonates with everyday Australians.
In Parliament, the success of any environmental legislation will depend on support from either the Greens or the Coalition. The Greens, now led by Queensland Senator Larissa Waters, want the laws expanded to include climate and forest protections.
Yet, deals with the Coalition are not off the table. Sussan Ley, the new opposition leader, was environment minister when the Samuel review was commissioned. According to Wade, Ley had been “thoughtful” in her response to the findings and attempted to implement national standards.
Wade continued: “Her party limited her ability to act, the million-dollar question is whether they have learnt and will respect the mandate of the Albanese government this time round.”
Senator Waters delivered a pointed message on Labor’s options: “Do they want to do a proper job, or do they want to stick with (former coalition prime minister) John Howard’s laws from last century?”
As political leaders spar over the path forward, experts stress the need for decisive action. Peter Burnett, an honorary associate professor at the Australian National University and member of the Biodiversity Council, remains hopeful that Labor is still committed to its environmental agenda.
“Now we wait to see if the government announces any change of direction,” he said.
Burnett argues that enforceable national standards are the cornerstone of effective reform. Such standards — for example, banning land clearing in critical habitats — would minimize arbitrary political decisions and give real power to an independent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
He was critical of the consultation process during Labor’s first term, saying it took too long and left insufficient time for legislation. “Now it’s the task of the new minister to try and get a major reform through in what is a relatively tight timeframe of a parliament,” Burnett concluded.
The road ahead for Murray Watt is riddled with political landmines, from internal party dynamics to powerful industry players and demanding environmental advocates. Whether he can reconcile these forces and deliver meaningful reform will define not only his tenure but also the future of Australia’s environmental legacy.
