The NFF’s 3 April 2014 submission to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications Inquiry into Offsets outlined two major concerns; offsets are generally not feasible for agriculture applications under the EPBC Act, and secondly, that agricultural land is often the ‘target’ of large enterprises, such as coal mines, seeking to offset the impacts of their own developments. The NFF advocates for a more flexible approach based on the nature of the project, the availability of direct and indirect offsets, and whether the offset delivers improved environmental outcomes for the projected matter.
You may also like
Third Independent Review of the Water for the Environment Special Account
It remains unclear whether recent and proposed Commonwealth water purchases are being financed through WESA or via the undisclosed Federal Budget allocation. If the latter is correct, then remaining WESA funds should be...
Chrissy KerinAustralian Law Reform Commission: Review of the Future Acts Regime
At a high-level, NFF does not support the proposals outlined in the Discussion Paper. Reforms must be guided by the principles of efficiency, fairness, and supporting regional economic resilience. In our view, the...
Review of the Fair Work Act’s definition of ‘small business employer’
The National Farmers’ Federation’s additional submission to the Fair Work Ombudsman’s review of the definition of “small business employer”, following the consultation questions received on 5 June 2025. NFF...
Ashleigh Whittaker
Add comment