FARMERS NEED ANSWERS ON LABOR’S NEW ENVIRONMENT LAWS

Farmers and producers across the Lyne electorate deserve clear answers about what Labor’s new federal environmental laws mean for the everyday management of their farms.

Federal Member for Lyne Alison Penfold said concerns were growing as the detail emerged about the practical consequences of Labor’s overhaul of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

“For farmers in our region, this isn't an academic debate about environmental law in Canberra. It is about what you can actually do on your own farm,” Ms Penfold said.

“Can you clear regrowth along a fence line? Maintain a laneway used to move cattle? Repair a creek crossing? Control lantana and other invasive weeds? Maintain a firebreak or remove vegetation threatening farm infrastructure?

“Or do you first have to work out whether Canberra considers that work likely to have a significant environmental impact?

“These are the practical questions our farmers need answered.”

The new National Environmental Protection Agency has released an Agriculture and the EPBC Act Guide to help farmers understand their obligations.

But Ms Penfold said one of the most concerning elements was the National EPA’s own acknowledgement that reforms mean that ‘continuous use of the land’ may no longer provide an exemption from Commonwealth environmental law.

“That should immediately get the attention of every dairy and beef producer in Lyne.

“Farming isn't a museum. A working farm changes constantly.

“Pastures are improved, fences are replaced, cattle laneways are maintained, weeds and regrowth are controlled, dams and creek crossings need work and vegetation has to be managed for productivity, animal welfare and bushfire safety.

“And we already know what happens when environmental regulation becomes a bureaucratic maze.

“In my first speech to Parliament, following the devastating May 2025 floods in my electorate, I spoke about farmers who were ‘desperate to stabilise river and creek banks but wading through multiple state government agencies for approval with no start or end point’.

“These were farmers trying to repair environmental damage caused by a catastrophic natural disaster. They wanted to stabilise damaged riverbanks, protect their land and waterways and get on with the recovery — but they couldn't even get a clear answer about where the approval process started or finished.

“That experience should be a warning to Canberra, not a model to build upon.

“Our farmers should not now have another layer of Commonwealth regulation added on top of the state system without absolute clarity about where federal powers start and stop.”

Ms Penfold said farmers were already required to navigate NSW laws governing native vegetation, biodiversity, waterways and land management.

“Now they potentially have another regulator and another set of rules in Canberra to navigate.

“The Government says most routine farming activities can continue. That's welcome. But a farmer needs to know what ‘most’ means.

“If you're running cattle or milking cows twice a day, you shouldn't need an environmental lawyer on speed dial to work out whether repairing a fence, clearing regrowth or fixing a creek crossing is lawful.”

The National Farmers’ Federation has raised concerns about changes affecting established agricultural practices, including vegetation management undertaken to control regrowth, manage weeds, maintain productive land and reduce bushfire risks.

AgForce has similarly warned about imposing regulatory processes designed for major developments on lower-impact agricultural activities, while Nationals Leader Matt Canavan has warned the new regime risks creating a new form of “farm police”.

“These organisations are raising these concerns because uncertainty itself has a cost for farmers,” Ms Penfold said.

“A beef or dairy farmer can't simply put essential property maintenance on hold for months while they navigate a complicated Commonwealth assessment process.

“They need to know where the line is before they do the work, not after somebody makes a complaint.”

Ms Penfold said the Government and National EPA should urgently provide practical, activity-by-activity guidance explaining what farmers can do without Commonwealth approval, particularly in relation to fencing and laneways, vegetation and regrowth, weeds and pests, fire management, dams and creek crossings, and repairing damage following floods and storms.

“We also need a clear explanation of how these new Commonwealth requirements will interact with NSW laws so farmers aren't caught between two regulators.”

“Farmers in Lyne care deeply about their land. Many of our beef and dairy properties have been cared for by the same families for generations.

“They understand better than most that healthy soil, clean water, productive pastures and responsible vegetation management are essential to the future of their farm.

“This isn't an argument against protecting the environment. It is an argument for laws that recognise the practical reality of producing food and managing a working farm.

“Our farmers have enough uncertainty from floods, droughts, input costs, milk and cattle prices and the weather.

“They shouldn't have to add ‘Do I need Canberra's permission to do this?’ to the list every time they undertake ordinary work on their farm.

“We've already seen farmers caught in bureaucratic limbo trying to repair their properties after a natural disaster. Labor must make sure its new federal environmental laws don't make that problem worse.

“Our farmers need clear rules, one clear pathway and certainty about what they can do on their own land.”

Ends