News live: Tanya Plibersek vows to protect 30% of Australia’s land and oceans by 2030 in press club speech

Goal of protecting 30% of Australia’s land and oceans by 2030

Plibersek announced an expansion of Australia’s national estate.

Our government will set a goal of protecting 30% of our land and 30% of our oceans by 2030. We’ll explore the creation of new national parks and marine protected areas including by pursuing the east Antarctic marine park.

This will be the latest chapter in a very proud Labor story. Labor protected the Daintree, the Great Barrier Reef, Antarctica and the Tasmanian world heritage area, and as minister, I intend to add to that legacy.

Updated at 23.24 EDT

Key events:

Show key events only

Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature

Deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia delivers speech

At the same time as Plibersek’s speech, Michelle Bullock, the deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia is in Brisbane delivering a speech on how the central bank sees rising interest rates playing out for home owners.

Now, it was not that long ago that Bullock was speaking about Australia’s “very buoyant” housing market. You know – nine months ago, when the RBA was envisioning it would be locking in the historic low 0.1% cash rate target until 2024.

But that was a different world. Since then, inflation fears have led to interest rates increasing, meaning home owners are facing higher payments, so the RBA has turned its attention to how it thinks mortgage holders will cope.

It’s mostly focussed on the 1/3rd of “indebted” home owners – those who hold mortgage debt.

You won’t be surprised to learn that the RBA thinks most of that cohort will be able to handle the increase in payments. It’s reasoning is there are still a higher than usual level of savings from the pandemic, and while debt may be high, the value of the assets (the houses) is higher (in most cases). Plus, Bullock is heartened by the tighter lending controls from the banks in the wake of the royal commission.

But that is all in the aggregate.

As always, the story is in the margins – and those who sit on the outskirts of the ‘aggregate’. And for them, the story is not quite as rosy.

And in this case, the margins are homeowners in the bottom 20% of incomes, or first home owners.

As Bullock said:

Highly indebted households are especially vulnerable in the event of a loss of real income through higher inflation, particularly if combined with rising interest rates, and a decrease in housing prices.

Recent borrowers are more vulnerable than earlier cohorts, as they are more likely to have borrowed at high DTIs [debt to income ratio] have had their serviceability assessed at lower interest rates (albeit with larger interest rate buffers) and have had less time to accumulate equity and liquidity buffers.

Government policies to improve housing market accessibility for first home buyers (FHBs) during the pandemic also means that FHBs are more highly represented among this group of recent borrowers than they are in earlier cohorts. Historically, FHBs have tended to have persistently higher LVRs [loan to valuation ratio] and lower liquidity buffers than other borrowers, making them more vulnerable to a given house price or cash flow shock.”

So the less you earn, or the later you bought, the more likely you are to be impacted by rising interest rates.

Environment v budget recovery

Plibersek drew laughs after being asked if she wanted to continue, as more journalists had questions.

Plowing on, she is asked if environmental reform was “high on the list of priorities” considering Australia is nearly a trillion dollars in debt:

I think it’s very high on the list of most Australians to have a clean and healthy environment they can hand onto the kids and grandkids.

We have already made substantial investment announcements, including, as I mentioned, $1.2bn over coming years to restore and repair the Great Barrier Reef, money for threatened species, money for recycling, Indigenous protected areas, Indigenous rangers, Landcare rangers, there is a list of commitments we have made that we will fund.

We made those promises before the last election and we will fund those promises and they will deliver good results for the environment.

The other thing I would say about this, as part of this, is about getting economic settings right. In coming years we see a desire frombusiness to invest carbon credits, if we make carbon credits have the dual benefit of protecting and restoring biodiversity, then we get an environmental return out of the business decision that Australian businesses want to make anyway.

They want to say to the shareholders, not only are we reducing our carbon pollution liabilities, we also are investing in the environment because we know that our customers and shareholders care about that stop.

Updated at 23.35 EDT

Too soon to talk about logging bans, Plibersek says

Guardian Australia’s Josh Butler has stepped up for the next question, following up on the logging question earlier, asking Plibersek how logging can continue after the Samuels report:

I understand why people are super keen to be talking about specifics on regional forestry agreements and other areas. It is way too early in the term of the new government … to be doing that. I am six weeks into this job, we are six weeks into a new government.

We need to talk to state and territory governments, in detail, about some of the land-clearing issues that we face as a nation. We need to consult widely on legislative reforms that we might propose. I’m not going to preempt those discussions by making individual comments about issues like that.

Updated at 23.33 EDT

Plibersek asked if emissions targets should be reviewed

Next up, Plibersek is asked if Labor’s emissions targets should be reviewed in light of the “shocking” Samuels report:

I think this report would give anyone who reads it, very strong message that we need to do better the environment. I don’t think the only way we do better on the environment is about, it’s not just about the size of the land or water we protect, that’s an important part of it is, it’s about having a representative block of ecosystems we are covering, choosing areas that are most vulnerable and most precious, so it’s not our proposal to go beyond the target of 30% of land but, that doesn’t mean we don’t have really high ambition to protect beautiful, unique, vulnerable ecosystem. Tanya Plibersek is asked whether Labor’s emissions targets need updating in the light of the Samuels report. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP

Updated at 23.28 EDT

‘A lot of consultation’ to be done on form of federal EPA

Plibersek is next asked about the EPA, and her seemingly important decision to not say the word “independent” before it.

The question goes on to ask if balancing the environment and the economy is a “political task.”

Plibersek rejected the description, saying that seeing the balance that way was always problematic, specifically referring to Matt Canavan:

We do support an independent EPA, but the design of that, well, there is a lot of consultation to be done before I come back to you with a final design. The specific roles the EPA will have, and the way it’s constituted.

I’ll talk to again in a few months about that, I’ll release an exposure draft, you will be able to comment and there will be a lot of opportunities for people to make their views known, on the format roles that an appropriately independent environmental protection agency will have.

On the other issue, I really disagree with that, you are saying it’s a political job to balance jobs versus environment and I think that’s the problem we have had.

I actually think the job of government is to set up laws and institutions that work to meet the objectives that we make public …

The sort of legal changes we need to make, the sort of institutions we need, to enforce any changes we make, the resourcing required to do it – I’d actually really like to take the politics out of this decision-making, instead of having people like Matt Canavan running around the country saying ‘never seen a coalmine that I didn’t want to make bigger,’ perhaps we need to thoughtfully assess using the laws and processes we have in a transparent way.

Updated at 23.31 EDT

Goal of protecting 30% of Australia’s land and oceans by 2030

Plibersek announced an expansion of Australia’s national estate.

Our government will set a goal of protecting 30% of our land and 30% of our oceans by 2030. We’ll explore the creation of new national parks and marine protected areas including by pursuing the east Antarctic marine park.

This will be the latest chapter in a very proud Labor story. Labor protected the Daintree, the Great Barrier Reef, Antarctica and the Tasmanian world heritage area, and as minister, I intend to add to that legacy.

Updated at 23.24 EDT

Question on national standards on regional forestry agreements

Next question put to Plibersek is on whether or not national standards on regional forestry agreements need to be addressed before they are due to be reviewed in 2023, considering some species, such as koalas, are listed as endangered.

Chuckling at the question, Plibersek said she was still early in her role, and would look at it:

Thanks for that question.

As I say, six weeks into the job I’m not going to start ruling things in or out, and I haven’t, I haven’t even begun to do the amount of consultation that I want to do with state and territory governments, with environmental and business stakeholders on some of these big questions.

I know those regional forestry agreements are all coming up for renegotiation in coming years, and those conversations with state and territory government will be important conversations to have.

I take the issue of threatened species and the risk of extinction very seriously. It was me that listed the greater glider and that is why we set aside a substantial extra amount of funding for threatened species, for dealing with threatened species.

I go back to something else I said in the report, this is something that will absolutely need environmental law reform, it will need institutional reform to make sure when we change our laws we are enforcing the law properly and resourcing that enforcement properly. It’s also going to need clearer settings for business, industry, philanthropic groups and others doing amazing work and habitat protection and restoration. It’s all part of the picture.

Updated at 23.19 EDT

Covid update in an hour

Meanwhile, we are expecting to hear from the federal health minister in around an hour.

Updated at 23.18 EDT

Press club questions begin

Tanya Plibersek Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP

So first question to Plibersek is on Labor’s 43% emissions reduction target, and if that is enough in light of the Samuel review.

The question also touched on whether coal and gas projects under assessment by the government need to be assessed on their emissions and environmental impact.

Here is what Plibersek had to say:

On the 43% target, we made a promise to the Australian people and we will keep that promise as a government. I’m delighted one of the first things we will do as a new government is legislate higher ambition on climate change policies.

I’m proud of that and, of course, we will work cooperatively with all of the crossbench – and indeed with the Liberals and Nationals – it would be terrific if we got maximum consensus on the carbon pollution reduction target and the other elements of the legislation we are taking to the parliament. But we have to keep our promise to the Australian people.

And on the issue of what some people are calling the climate trigger, and environmental laws, I’d say, the starting point for the environmental law process that we will be looking at is the work done by Prof Graeme Samuel.

He did consider a climate trigger as some people are calling it, and his view was that there are other laws that deal with issues around climate change including carbon pollution reduction and that’s the proper place there.

Of course, the process of reforming our environmental laws and reforming the mechanisms we have for enforcing those laws, is going to be a really important listening time for me as a minister and I’m certainly not going to stand here six weeks into the job and start ruling things in or out but I would say, to know the direction we are heading in with environmental law reform and reform of the institutions that deliver on those laws, they should start by looking at the work of Prof Graeme Samuel.

Updated at 23.16 EDT

Environment portfolio ‘hand-in-hand with the Labor reconciliation agenda’

Plibersek says Indigenous knowledge needs to be incorporated in conservation programs and says number of Indigenous rangers will be doubled.

Here I see the environment and water portfolio going hand-in-hand with the Labor reconciliation agenda.

First Nations Australians have managed this country for 65,000 years and they did it through changing seasons, shifting climates and across radically different environments.

These systems of environmental knowledge have been passed down for thousands of generations, and any modern conservation program should incorporate them and that’s why the Labor government will double the number of Indigenous rangers, by the end of the decade to 2030 … and will significantly increase funding for Indigenous protected areas.

We will deliver the $40bn of Indigenous water promised by the Morrison government in 2019 but never produced and will make it easier for First Nations Australians to protect their cultural heritage.

We have committed to introduced standalone cultural heritage legislation, which will co-design with the First Nations heritage protection alliance.

A healthy environment sits at the heart of our national legacy. And it feeds our national soul. Our sense of ourselves, our health as a society is bound up with the health of our land and water.

Updated at 23.11 EDT

‘I want to see a plastics-free Pacific in our lifetime’

Plibersek is highlighting the links between environment and regional partnerships with Pacific Nations.

I want to support … efforts to reduce petrochemical products while working with the states and territories to encourage a circular economy.

That means promoting recycling, reusing and repairing as much as possible. We know how important this issue is to our friends in the Pacific.

At the UN’s ocean’s conference last month, our Pacific family told me about the impacts that plastics are having on their health, their environment and their livelihoods. It’s an area where Australia can forge really strong regional partnerships.

As I said to the Pacific leaders, I want to see a plastics-free Pacific in our lifetime.

Updated at 23.12 EDT

Government to formally respond to the Samuel review by the end of the year

Plibesek says to help guide the reform to environmental laws, “I’m announcing that by the end of the year the Australian government will formally respond to the Samuel review.”

We’ll then develop new environmental legislation for 2023. We will consult thoroughly on environmental standards, but in the meantime I want to see an immediate start on improving our environmental data and regional planning. Establishing a shared view around what needs to be protected and restored, the areas where development can occur with minimal consequences.

Updated at 23.17 EDT

Environmental indicators to be included in the ‘wellbeing budget’

Plibersek says environmental reform will also “allow us to speed up most processes so we can build new housing, construct new projects, lay the roads that connect our communities, better environmental outcomes and faster, clearer decisions”.

For too long people have seen these goals as mutually exclusive. They’re not. They’re not. Good environmental law is also good economic reform.

By agreement with the treasurer, the historic wellbeing budget will also include environmental indicators. As the treasurer said recently, it’s really important that we measure what matters in our economy in addition to all of the traditional measures: not instead of, but in addition to.

Because this is not a conflict between jobs and the environment. We have got to go beyond that thinking when we reform our environmental laws.

Updated at 23.02 EDT

Plibersek announces federal environment agency Tanya Plibersek speaking at the National Press Club. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP

Plibersek has now moved onto the part of the speech where she is discussing the government’s plan for change, including establishing a federal environmental agency and real-time data to track environmental progress.

In this term of government I will be guided by three essential goals. To protect, to restore and to manage Australia’s environment.

We need to protect our environment and heritage for the future. We need to restore environments that have already been damaged and we need to actively manage our landscapes, oceans and waterways, and the critical places that we have vowed to protect so they don’t become run down through neglect.

That’s our agenda. To offer proper protection we need to set clear environmental standards with explicit targets around what we value as a country and what our laws need to protect. This will require a fundamental reform of our national environmental laws and empowering a new environmental protection agency to enforce them.

We need trust and transparency. Decisions need to be built on good data, to show the public how we’re tracking in real time. Data that can be shared so we don’t keep collecting the same information again and again but instead we build over time a useful, usable, picture of our environment … We also need certainty and efficiency. This will allow us to speed up most processes so we can build new housing, construct new projects, lay the roads that connect our communities, better environmental outcomes and faster, clearer decisions.

Updated at 23.17 EDT

‘The Liberals and Nationals came to power with a mission to put the environment last’

Plibersek says the previous government wilfully inflicted harm on the environment.

There was wilful damage inflicted as well. From Tony Abbott to Scott Morrison, from Barnaby Joyce to Matt Canavan, the Liberals and Nationals came to power with a mission to put the environment last, to repeal climate legislation and to slash emissions reduction targets.

They cut funding to the environment department by 40% and they thought that was pretty clever until they saw what it did in practice. Without proper funding, environmental decision times exploded. According to a National Audit Office review in 2020, the average federal decision for a new project was 116 days behind schedule, and of these decisions around 80% were either non-compliant or contained errors. The previous government’s funding cuts held back business, they damaged the economy and they undermined practical efforts to protect our environment …

That’s the situation I’m inheriting as environment and water minister. Years of warnings, ignored or kept secret, promises … made but not delivered, dodgy behaviour undermining public confidence, brutal funding cuts, wilful neglect, laws that don’t work to protect the environment or smooth the way for sensible development, all against a backdrop of accelerating environmental destruction. It’s time to change that.

Updated at 23.09 EDT

Plibersek criticises Coalition’s environment record

Plibersek is criticising the previous government, saying their management led to widespread distrust in environmental management.

We see from the State of the Environment Report, the previous government was no friend to the environment.

Too many urgent warnings were either ignored or kept secret, but there are other failures too. The former government made nice promises but rarely bothered to deliver them.

For example, the previous government had a decade to fulfil the Murray-Darling basin plan. It’s a good plan, Labor-made. We delivered it and it saved the river system from dying in 2019. But it’s yet to be fully implemented. By the time the Morrison government left office, they had delivered just two of the promised 450 gigalitres of environmental water – just two gigalitres of a promised 450. And there was no plan to find the other 448 gigalitres by 2024, when it’s due.

The former government promised $40m for Indigenous water, of which they never delivered a drop. The Morrison government made a series of pledges on recycling, pledging that the Labor government broadly supports. I think most Australians would be really shocked to know just how far we are from meeting these targets and that the former government had no real plan for getting there.

Again and again the former government behaved in a way that undermined public trust in environmental management. They gave a private charity almost half a billion dollars without tender or process to guide our response to the crisis in the Great Barrier Reef. It actually doesn’t matter how good an organisation is. No one should walk in to the prime minister’s office and leave with hundreds of millions of dollars they didn’t even ask for.

For nine years, the previous government oversaw a broken, barely regulated national water market. The ACCC found that it was a market with no rules against inside trading, no requirements to keep proper records. This led to widespread distrust in the system.

Updated at 22.52 EDT