Federal environment laws must be overhauled to toughen controls on land clearing and impose tighter restrictions on ministerial powers, a Senate report says.
It warns current laws are failing to deal with the ''devastating impact'' of land clearing across Australia, including an accelerated rate of species loss.
The report raises concerns about the inability to challenge ministerial decisions on development approvals, endangered species listings or recovery plans for threatened plants and wildlife.
Co-director of the Australian National University's centre for climate law, Andrew Macintosh, has also questioned the cost-effectiveness of the Federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which was passed in 1999 and amended in 2006.
In a new book to be published later this year, he estimates the annual cost of administering the Act may have blown out to $30 million well above the Government's published estimate of $13 million.
''To justify such a large administrative expense, along with the associated compliance costs, there should be clear evidence of positive improvements in environmental outcomes,'' Dr Macintosh said.
He said the Act had limited application to land clearing and climate change, two of the biggest threats to biodiversity, and little effort had been made by the Federal Government to monitor compliance and enforce relevant laws.
The Senate report says several submissions to the inquiry investigating the Act's effectiveness, suggested it ''does not actually protect or require protection of anything'' and falls short of meeting Australia's international obligations under the World Heritage agreement.
Submissions to the inquiry suggested developers were exploiting a loophole in the Act, by breaking up big projects into smaller components to play down their total environmental impact.
As a result, Australia's native plants and animals face ''a death of a thousand cuts'' as piecemeal developments progressively erode remaining habitat, the report said.
The Senate committee was also concerned that ''ministerial discretion'' and delays in assessing threatened species listings ''are undermining the credibility of the nomination and listing process''.
The report recommends the Government ''consider including a land clearing trigger in the Act'', but in additional comments appended to the report, the Australian Greens have urged a tougher stance.
In a joint statement, Senator Rachel Siewert and Senator Scott Ludlum said the Act had ''effectively bureaucratised the protection of the environment and the conservation of biodiversity producing a moribund box-ticking approach''.
Australian Conservation Foundation spokeswoman Amy Hankinson said Australia is '' long overdue for strong laws that grapple with land clearing''.
She said it remains a major environmental threat and is Australia's fourth largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions.
A spokesman for federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett said the issue of new triggers for the Act ''including greenhouse and land clearing'' is within the terms of reference for a statutory review of the Act, currently being conducted by former ANU chancellor Allan Hawke.
Email a friend