Submission in response to discussion paper
Some have argued that past changes to the EPBC Act to add new matters of national environmental significance did not go far enough. Others have argued it has extended the regulatory reach of the Commonwealth too far. What do you think?
Extinction is for ever - - protect these species while you can.
How could the principle of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) be better reflected in the EPBC Act? For example, could the consideration of environmental, social and economic factors, which are core components of ESD, be achieved through greater inclusion of cost benefit analysis in decision making?
People will always destroy - be it the environment, species or air. Rules have to be clear and written down - do not give them the "thin edge of the wedge" - money will always corrupt.
Should the objects of the EPBC Act be more specific?
Which elements of the EPBC Act should be priorities for reform? For example, should future reforms focus on assessment and approval processes or on biodiversity conservation? Should the Act have proactive mechanisms to enable landholders to protect matters of national environmental significance and biodiversity, removing the need for regulation in the right circumstances?
Biodiversity conservation..... Be careful of removing regulation "if the landowner wants it" - circumstances change and money will eventually always become a factor.
Is there anything else of importance to you that you would like the review to consider?
I don't understand the details of this act - I live in the United States, where "the almighty dollar" ALWAYS takes precedence over the care and handling of our planet - Please don't fall into the same trap - Americans will always do the right thing, but ONLY after they have tried everything else - sometimes that is too late.... Good luck