Australia spends around 50 times more on subsidising activities that harm the environment than it spends on helping it, according to a first-of-its kind report examining government payments published Monday.

The report, put out by NGO Biodiversity Council, found that 4% of the federal budget per year, or A$26.3 billion ($17.9 bln), goes to subsidising activities that are likely to have a medium to high adverse impact on biodiversity.

This compares to the A$475 mln per year governments have invested in biodiversity over the past decade, such as on threatened species recovery, feral animal control, and pollution control at the Great Barrier Reef, Biodiversity Council Director James Trezise said in a statement accompanying the report.

He said the NGO was “deeply concerned” by the apparent lack of action by the Australian government to identify and eliminate subsidies that harm nature, one of the targets of the Global Biodiversity Framework that it agreed to in 2022.

“That is why we undertook this first pass assessment to identify subsidies that are likely to be having an adverse impact on nature,” he said.

“While our findings are preliminary, they provide a robust first assessment that indicates the vast scale of the problem. It also presents a massive opportunity. Removing these subsidies will benefit nature and save billions of tax-payer dollars each year, some of which could be reallocated to new conservation investments.”

Some A$7.5 bln of the subsidies identified by the report went towards the government’s fuel tax credit scheme, which it said would likely increase carbon emissions with indirect impacts on biodiversity.

It identified another A$7.7 bln per year in spending on road transport projects. It also included non-recurring subsidies, such as the A$1.9 bln committed to the Middle Arm industrial precinct in Darwin, A$1.5 bln in energy relief payments, and the A$600 mln that went to the Kurri Kurri gas-fired power plant.

The report noted it relied on publicly available information to come up with its findings, emphasising that many subsidies that are harmful to biodiversity are likely to be missed, and the monetary value of some subsidies may be inaccurate.

It did not assess the value and impact of harmful subsidies from state and territory governments, which it said were likely to be significant.

“With our poor track record of extinctions and nature loss, and as one of only two wealthy and megadiverse nations, Australia should be world leading in making a major contribution to the global goal to reduce subsidies by at least $500 billion per annum,” report author Paul Elton of the Australia National University said.

The Biodiversity Council estimates that 1% of the annual federal budget, or A$7 bln per year, is needed to significantly improve the outlook for biodiversity in Australia.

This funding could achieve several of Australia’s targets including recovering the majority of Australia’s threatened species populations, meeting its international commitment to protect 30% of its ecosystems by 2030, and restoring 13 mln hectares of degraded land.

MAKE A DEAL

The report was published on the eve of Australia hosting its first Global Nature Positive Summit in Sydney, however the government has remained tight-lipped about any announcements on spending it might make.

At the same time, the Labor government will seek to pass the second tranche of its nature reforms in the Senate this week, that would establish a federal-level Environmental Protection Agency and data gathering body Environment Information Australia (EIA).

Minister for the Environment Tanya Plibersek told the Saturday Paper over the weekend the government was determined to get the legislation through, with negotiations ongoing between the government, the opposition Coalition, and the crossbench.

However, the bills themselves are not being put up for debate until Thursday, with one source close to the negotiations telling Carbon Pulse that means it is unlikely they will be passed this week.

As negotiations have rolled on, other sources have highlighted the chances of a deal being struck will diminish the closer it gets to the federal election, slated for the first half of next year.

The resources industry, particularly in electorally-important Western Australia, has been wary of the reforms and the way the government has consulted on them, claiming it will tie new projects up in green tape.

Meanwhile, the Greens and Independent Senator David Pocock have written to the government, offering to support the legislation on the condition that deforestation loopholes are closed and climate considerations are integrated into environmental assessments, among other requests.

“Labor is failing our environment and failing to protect our koalas. The government should work with the Greens to enforce and strengthen environment laws to stop native forest logging, protect habitat, and ban new coal & gas mines,” Greens environment spokesperson Senator Sarah Hanson-Young said in a statement Friday.

The third tranche of the government’s reforms, which would seek to update the laws underpinning the new agencies it is seeking to establish, is not expected until after the next election.

By Mark Tilly – mark@carbon-pulse.com

*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***