Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) Bill 2022 explained

The short answer

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) Bill 2022 explained

The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Climate Trigger) Bill 2022 is a private senator's bill first introduced by Senator Sarah Hanson-Young (Australian Greens) in the Senate on 5 September 2022, early in the 47th Parliament. The bill proposes to amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) to require climate impacts to be considered when assessing major projects — a so-called 'climate trigger'. It would require actions emitting between 25,000 and 100,000 tonnes of CO2-equivalent scope 1 emissions annually to undergo EPBC assessment, mandate outright rejection of projects emitting over 100,000 tonnes, direct the Climate Change Authority to develop a national carbon budget to 2050, and introduce penalties for unauthorised emissions-intensive actions. The bill has had two second reading debates, was referred to and reported on by a Senate committee, lapsed and was restored, making it one of the more scrutinised private senators' bills in recent years — but it has not passed.

This is a federal system guide. State constitutions, parliaments and local-government laws can allocate comparable functions differently.

The useful question is not only “what is the rule?” but also “who administers it, which document controls it, and when might it change?” That distinction prevents an accurate general explanation from becoming wrong advice in a particular election, chamber or policy setting.

Evidence review

What the bill proposes — the climate trigger mechanism

The bill creates a three-tier system for assessing the climate impacts of major projects under the EPBC Act. At the lowest tier, actions that would emit between 25,000 and 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) scope 1 emissions in any one year would require assessment and approval under Part 9 of the EPBC Act. The minister would be required to consider Australia's national carbon budget and greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets when deciding whether to approve such actions.

At the highest tier, the bill would mandate outright rejection of any action that would emit more than 100,000 tonnes of CO2-e scope 1 emissions — effectively a ban on approving large-emitting projects through the EPBC process. The minister would also be prohibited from using alternative (typically faster) approval processes such as bilateral agreements or accredited assessment processes for certain emissions-intensive actions, subject to limited exceptions.

Evidence review

National carbon budget and the Climate Change Authority

The bill would require the Climate Change Authority to develop a national carbon budget to 2050 — essentially a cumulative limit on Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions between now and mid-century, consistent with Australia's international climate commitments. The Authority would be required to assess the budget annually and report on whether Australia is on track.

The concept of a carbon budget is that there is a finite amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted while keeping global warming within agreed temperature limits. By embedding this concept in the EPBC Act, the bill aims to require decision-makers to consider whether approving individual projects would cause Australia to exceed its share of the global carbon budget.

Evidence review

Penalties and enforcement

The bill introduces penalties for undertaking emissions-intensive actions without approval, where the action has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on the environment. This extends the EPBC Act's existing enforcement framework to cover climate-related impacts that were not previously considered a 'matter of national environmental significance'.

Under the current EPBC Act, the matters of national environmental significance that trigger assessment include World Heritage properties, nationally threatened species, migratory species, Ramsar wetlands, Commonwealth marine areas, nuclear actions, and water resources in relation to coal seam gas and large coal mining. The bill would effectively add greenhouse gas emissions as a new matter requiring assessment.

Evidence review

Parliamentary scrutiny and committee inquiry

This bill has received substantially more parliamentary scrutiny than most private senators' bills. It was referred to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee on 8 September 2022, just three days after introduction. The committee conducted an inquiry, received submissions from stakeholders, and reported on 7 February 2024 — an inquiry period of nearly 18 months.

The bill was also examined by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, which published its findings in Scrutiny Digest 5 of 2022 on 6 October 2022. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee examines legislation against principles of personal rights, parliamentary oversight, and legal clarity.

The bill has been the subject of second reading debate on three occasions: 2 August 2023, 28 February 2024, and 23 July 2025 (after restoration to the Notice Paper following the end of the 47th Parliament). This makes it one of the more debated private senators' bills.

Evidence review

The broader EPBC Act reform context

The bill sits within the broader and long-running debate about reform of Australia's national environment law. The EPBC Act has been the subject of multiple independent reviews, most notably the 2020 Independent Review of the EPBC Act (the Samuel Review), which found that the Act was ineffective and recommended fundamental reform. Whether or not to include a climate trigger has been one of the most contentious aspects of this reform debate.

The government has committed to EPBC Act reform but has not adopted the climate trigger approach contained in this bill. The government's approach has instead focused on national environmental standards and a proposed Environment Protection Australia agency. This bill represents an alternative vision — one in which climate change is directly embedded in environmental assessment and approval processes.

Evidence review

What happens next

The bill is before the Senate with the second reading having been moved. As a private senator's bill, it would need government support or a majority crossbench vote to pass. The committee inquiry has completed its work, and the bill is technically ready for debate.

The bill's restoration to the Notice Paper after the parliamentary reset means it remains alive in the 48th Parliament, but the government has not allocated time for its further consideration. The climate trigger debate is likely to continue as part of broader environmental law reform discussions, regardless of the fate of this specific bill.

Common questions

Before you rely on the answer