First Nations engagement
Requirements for consultation with First Nations peoples are not included in the Bills, however new requirements are to be proposed through a National Environmental Standard consistent with the approach recommended in the Samuel Review.
Latest updates
The EPR Bill does not address the key policy questions that arose over the Samuel Review and subsequent consultations. It appears First Nations engagement will be embedded in EPBC Act processes through a national environmental standard, which has not yet been released. Minister Watt has flagged drafting of this standard is well advanced and it will be made publicly available either late this year or early in 2026.
Key provisions outlined in the EPR Bill, include:
- Opportunities for the incorporation of First Nations' knowledge and information in the threatened species and ecological communities listing processes.
- Expanded role of the Indigenous Advisory Committee, including to provide advice to the CEO of the NEPA and the Director of National Parks on request.
- Requires the Minister to invite and consider comments from the Indigenous Advisory Committee before making, varying or revoking a national environmental standard that relates to engagement with First Nations people.
How we got there
The Samuel Review found that the EPBC Act 'is not fulfilling its objectives as they relate to the role of First Nations Australians in protecting and conserving biodiversity, working in partnership with and promoting the respectful use of their knowledge'.
The Samuel Review recommended (among other things):
- the co-design of policy and implementation to improve outcomes for First Nations Australians.
- that publication of a National Environmental Standard on best-practice First Nations engagement and participation in decision-making (which should be co-designed with the Indigenous Advisory Committee, which would be renamed as the Indigenous Engagement and Participation Committee).
- First Nations knowledge and western science should be considered on an equal footing in the provision of formal advice to the Minister.
- Traditional Owners should have greater decision making responsibility in jointly managed parks (where aligned with their aspirations).
In response to the findings of the Samuel Review, the Government's Nature Positive package acknowledged the exclusion of First Nations people from involvement in environmental decision-making to date, and proposed that:
- a National Environmental Standard for First Nations engagement and participation in decision-making be developed, with co-design of the Standard to be led by the Indigenous Advisory Committee.
- the Government ensure appropriate access and handling and the protection of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property.
- future management models for federal National Parks could be co-designed based on the aspirations of Traditional Owners.
The package also referenced the Government's commitment to reforming the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth) (ATSIHP Act) in parallel and that further guidance would be provided on the interrelationship between the two regimes.
While First Nations engagement was a core theme of the Nature Positive package, the Government's position did not meaningfully evolve. This is in part because a draft National Environmental Standard for First Nations engagement and participation in decision-making was not included in the consultation materials, limiting opportunities for meaningful consideration and feedback.
The consultation materials included detail on the role of the Indigenous Advisory Committee, including the requirement that the Minister must request and consider advice from the Committee in relation to a National Environmental Standard for First Nations engagement and participation in decision-making.
A notable change in the National Environmental Standard for data and information was that early drafts of the Standard included the requirement to satisfy the CARE principles for Indigenous Data Governance (Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility and Ethics). The final draft of the Standard (March 2024) instead focused on six core principles to guide assessment of appropriate and suitable data and information. These core principles were drawn from various frameworks (including the CARE principles), rather than requiring full alignment with the CARE principles.
The Government provided limited detail on its reform intentions in relation to First Nations engagement under the new environmental laws and cultural heritage protection under proposed reforms to the ATSIHP Act.
It appears First Nations engagement will be embedded in EPBC Act processes through a national environmental standard, which has not yet been released. Minister Watt has flagged drafting of this standard is well advanced and it will be made publicly available either late in 2025 or early in 2026. Until then, key issues remain outstanding regarding:
- How all parties involved in environmental impact assessment (including the proponent, relevant First Nations peoples and the regulator) will obtain certainty as to who needs to be consulted, when consultation must occur and for how long, and who determines when consultation must be completed (which will be particularly important if consultation is a statutory requirement).
- Capacity and resourcing for First Nations organisations and individuals to participate in consultation.
- The extent of any proposed interrelationship between First Nations consultation under the new environmental laws and cultural heritage protection under proposed reforms to the ATSIHP Act.
As difficulties with consultation in recent years under the offshore petroleum and greenhouse gas storage framework and the repealed WA Aboriginal cultural heritage legislation demonstrate, providing certainty as to consultation requirements will be a critical element to ensuring a workable First Nations engagement and consultation framework.
Read more on headline issues
National EPA (NEPA)
A new, independent National Environmental Protection Agency. The CEO of the NEPA will be a statutory appointment and not subject to direction by the Minister. The CEO of the NEPA will be given a number of responsibilities under the Act, including compliance and enforcement functions, assurance of accreditation arrangements and the issuing of new enforcement tools such as environment protection orders.
Environment Information Australia (EIA)
A new function within the Department is to be headed by an independent statutory officer and is to be focused on the management of environmental data. The EIA would provide national leadership for the improvement of the availability and accessibility of high-quality, national environmental data and information, and ensure there is independent reporting and accountability for the state of the environment.
National Environmental Standards (NES)
A framework to establish legally enforceable National Environmental Standards that are intended to set the boundaries for decision-making to deliver the minimum protections to be achieved under the Act. These are intended to be subordinate legislation and will initially relate to matters such as the existing Matters of National Environmental Significance and environmental offsets.
Streamlined assessments and approvals
To remove certain lower-tier assessment pathways (such as assessment on referral information and public environment reports) and replace them with a 'streamlined assessment' pathway, intended to result in faster approvals timeframes. The bills also introduce a number of new tools to enable the Minister to ensure the protection of the environment, including 'Rulings' and 'Protection Statements' about how the Act should be interpreted and protections implemented.
Strategic assessments
Strategic assessments under Part 10 are retained, with new flexibility proposed, including to allow for the relevant policy, plan or program to evolve without necessarily requiring a new strategic assessment to be undertaken.
Bioregional plans
A new concept of bioregional assessments, allowing for broad-scale assessments to be undertaken to establish 'development' and 'conservation' zones, with 'priority actions' in development zones not to require further assessment and approval.
Biodiversity offsets and net gain
A new concept of passing the 'net gain' test will apply to compensate for significant residual impacts on protected matters. This can be achieved either by the proponent compensating for damage by securing an environmental offset, or by paying a restoration contribution charge in respect of the residual significant impact (unless the Minister has declared that a restoration contribution charge is not available for the relevant MNES).
First Nations engagement
Requirements for consultation with First Nations peoples are not included in the Bills, however new requirements are to be proposed through a National Environmental Standard consistent with the approach recommended in the Samuel Review.
Climate change
No 'climate trigger' is included. Instead, the EPR Bill requires certain proponents to disclose greenhouse gas emission information and reduction plans—this is anticipated to apply at least to facilities covered by the Safeguard Mechanism. This information is intended to be made available for transparency purposes only and will not inform decisions under the Act.
Penalties, merits review and third-party enforcement
Increased enforcement powers and, for certain large turnover body corporates, much higher maximum penalties for certain civil penalty provisions apply up to $825 million.
Unacceptable impacts
A redefined concept of an 'unacceptable impact', which varies for each protected matter. If an action has an unacceptable impact, the Minister must not approve it. Similar restrictions apply to other decisions made under the Act (eg to approve a regional plan, or when accrediting states/territories' assessment and approval powers).
Accreditation of states/territories for approval decisions
Various changes to the existing accreditation processes, placing a greater emphasis on the role of accredited state and territory processes to issue 'one-touch' approvals without the need for duplicative assessment by the Government.
National interest proposals and exemptions
The reforms introduce a strengthened national interest pathway, giving the Minister broad discretion to approve projects that serve Australia’s strategic priorities (noting that these exemptions are not available for fossil fuel actions). Under this approach, a project may proceed even if it conflicts with NES, has unacceptable impacts or fails the net gain test, where it is deemed critical to Australia’s defence, security or international obligations. At the same time, refinements to the existing exemption mechanism allow the Minister to dis-apply certain controlling provisions for protected matters, while imposing conditions and prescribing requirements to limit adverse impacts. Together, these changes create a more flexible framework for projects of national significance, balancing strategic imperatives with environmental safeguards.
Restoration fund
Proponents will be able to discharge their offset compensation liability (including under the new 'net gain' framework) by paying a restoration contribution charge to the Government. The money provided under this charge will be spent by a new independent Restoration Contributions Holder, supported by an expert advisory committee.
'Minor or preparatory' works
Authorisation to commence minor or preparatory works for an action after referral and before an approval has been issued. The Minister may also provide written agreement for other works that may commence.
Lapsing of not controlled action decisions
NCA and NCA-PM decisions will lapse after five years if the action has not 'substantially commenced'. The five-year period may be extended once by the Minister for a further period of up to five years (the total maximum being 10 years, lapsing from the date of the initial decision).
'Grandfathering' arrangements
Actions that are a lawful continuation of a use will no longer be exempt from approval if they involve clearing of vegetation from land within 50 metres of a watercourse, wetland or drainage line in a catchment area of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park or the land has not been cleared of vegetation for at least 15 years (and the action is not a forestry operation).
Regional Forest Agreements
The exemption from approval for actions undertaken in accordance with an RFA will sunset on 1 July 2027.


