Federal Government and Opposition Approve Changes to Tasmania's Environment Laws

On Wednesday evening, significant alterations to the nation's environment laws were backed by the federal government and opposition, ensuring the continuation of the salmon industry in Tasmania's Macquarie Harbour. Eloise Carr, the Tasmania director of The Australia Institute, relayed concerns to broadcaster Leon Compton on ABC Tasmania Mornings, revealing that legal advice suggests these changes might not pertain to the fish farms in question. Carr criticized the expedited legislative process, arguing that it sidesteps thorough parliamentary scrutiny and is being rushed under the guise of the budget just before an election. Despite being approved late the previous night, Carr stated that these amendments considerably weaken the national nature law. They restrict any party, whether a citizen, civil society group, or minister, from revisiting such decisions beyond five years, neglecting the continuous evolution of science, especially in the context of climate change. On an opposing note, businesses might argue that these protections offer investment certainty, crucial for their business models. Carr, however, asserts that the core issue lies in the Environment Minister's delay in decision-making, not the law itself, accusing the government of breaking promises to strengthen these laws. In a colorful turn, South Australian Senator for the Greens, Sarah Hanson-Young, used an unconventional method to express dissent by brandishing a dead fish in parliament, emphasizing environmental degradation concerns with salmon dubbed an 'extinction salmon.' Such a stunt raises the question of political pressure effectiveness through unconventional means. The debate showcases a nuanced tension between environmental protections and economic interests, indicating broader implications of policy-making on natural conservation and business investments.