Skip to main content

Andjela Djakovic

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?

I believe the minor changes to the EPBC act have absolutely not lived up to their purpose. Australia?s nature is in record breaking decline. With the highest rate of biodiversity loss, highest extinction rate, 2nd highest rate of deforestation and the largest carbon emitter per capital in the WHOLE WORLD- all within the last 2 decades just proves the EPBC act is outdated, weak and currently doing more harm than good.

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?


Should the objects of the EPBC Act be more specific?

YES!!! specific and clear!

Should the matters of national environmental significance within the EPBC Act be changed? How?

We need national/ federal accountability for the environment

What high level concerns should the review focus on? For example, should there be greater focus on better guidance on the EPBC Act, including clear environmental standards? How effective has the EPBC Act been in achieving its statutory objectives to protect the environment and promote ecologically sustainable development and biodiversity conservation? What have been the economic costs associated with the operation and administration of the EPBC Act?

Climate change, emissions, mining leases, investment in renewables, indigenous rights and representation, species protection and new initiatives to transition.

What additional future trends or supporting evidence should be drawn on to inform the review?

Climate scientists
Indigenous people
Corporate greed

Should the EPBC Act regulate environmental and heritage outcomes instead of managing prescriptive processes?


Should the EPBC Act position the Commonwealth to take a stronger role in delivering environmental and heritage outcomes in our federated system? Who should articulate outcomes? Who should provide oversight of the outcomes? How do we know if outcomes are being achieved?


Should there be a greater role for national environmental standards in achieving the outcomes the EPBC Act seeks to achieve?

In our federated system should they be prescribed through:

  • Non-binding policy and strategies?

  • Expansion of targeted standards, similar to the approach to site contamination under the National Environment Protection Council, or water quality in the Great Barrier Reef catchments?

  • The development of broad environmental standards with the Commonwealth taking a monitoring and assurance role? Does the information exist to do this?


How can environmental protection and environmental restoration be best achieved together?

  • Should the EPBC Act have a greater focus on restoration?

  • Should the Act include incentives for proactive environmental protection?

  • How will we know if we?re successful?

  • How should Indigenous land management practices be incorporated?

> yes
> yes
> we can see the change.
> give rights and decision making back to our elders.

Are heritage management plans and associated incentives sensible mechanisms to improve? How can the EPBC Act adequately represent Indigenous culturally important places? Should protection and management be place-based instead of values based?

Give voice back to our elders.

Should the EPBC Act require the use of strategic assessments to replace case-by-case assessments? Who should lead or participate in strategic assessments?

Indigenous mob

Should the matters of national significance be refined to remove duplication of responsibilities between different levels of government? Should states be delegated to deliver EPBC Act outcomes subject to national standards?

Needs to be federal issue with federal accountability and consequences

Should low-risk projects receive automatic approval or be exempt in some way? How could data help support this approach? Should a national environmental database be developed? Should all data from environmental impact assessments be made publicly available?


Should the Commonwealth?s regulatory role under the EPBC Act focus on habitat management at a landscape-scale rather than species-specific protections?


Should the EPBC Act be amended to enable broader accreditation of state and territory, local and other processes?


Are there adequate incentives to give the community confidence in self-regulation?


How should the EPBC Act support the engagement of Indigenous Australians in environment and heritage management?

  • How can we best engage with Indigenous Australians to best understand their needs and potential contributions?

  • What mechanisms should be added to the Act to support the role of Indigenous Australians?

Give mob their voices back, their right to make decision and oversee projects.
More indigenous leaders, funding in education, ATTENTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT SO THEY FEEL SEEN.

How should community involvement in decision-making under the EPBC Act be improved? For example, should community representation in environmental advisory and decision making bodies be increased?

Meetings, community incentives

Should the Commonwealth establish new environmental markets? Should the Commonwealth implement a trust fund for environmental outcomes?


Do you have suggested improvements to the above principles? How should they be applied during the review and in future reform?

Having action plans in place for those whom may lose their jobs in environmentally damaging sectors, replanting initiatives, community incentives and funding

Is the EPBC Act delivering what was intended in an efficient and effective manner?


How well is the EPBC Act being administered?

Not well enough

Is the EPBC Act sufficient to address future challenges? Why?

No. Needs to be updated, reviewed regularly and keep up with the changing times.

What are the priority areas for reform?

This incredible land

What changes are needed to the EPBC Act? Why?

They don?t mention climate change
They don?t mention extinction initiatives
They don?t recognise indigenous mob as sovereign custodians

Additional information

Supplementary navigation and content


Submission ID

In response to

Discussion paper
Andjela Djakovic


Threatened species
The objects of the Act
Matters of National Environmental Significance
International obligations
Indigenous Australians
Great Barrier Reef
Environmental Impact Assessments
Cumulative impacts