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
National Environmental Standard for Environmental Offsets
The proposed Environmental Offsets Standard is not yet sufficiently clear or practical for implementation in agricultural landscapes. There is a need to clearly define how key concepts will work in-practice so that...
Chrissy KerinNational Environmental Standard for Matters of National Environmental Significance
At a high-level, NFF does not support the MNES Standard that has been presented. The draft Standard does not provide a clear, practical, or viable pathway for agriculture to assess our obligations or determine whether...
Carbon Credits and Other Legislation Amendment (Integrity and Transparency) Bill Consultation
NFF supports reforms that strengthen confidence in the ACCU Scheme and improve the integrity and transparency of carbon markets. Integrity reforms must be designed with the practical realities of agricultural...
Add comment