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
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 WhittakerDraft Threat Abatement Plan for Ecosystem Degradation, Habitat Loss and Species Decline, due to Invasion of Northern Australia by Introduced Grasses
NFF does not support the proposed Draft Threat Abatement Plan in its current form. This document has raised significant concerns from NFF members and producers across Northern Australia where many of the listed grass...
Chrissy KerinAPVMA draft Strategic Plan 2025–30
The NFF is a stringent supporter of the role of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) as Australia’s robust, independent, and science- and risk-based chemical regulator, and supports the...
Add comment