History of Australian Environmental Laws - Coursework Example

Heading: Managing the Legal Environment Your name: Course name: Professors’ name: Date Introduction Environmental protection and conservation is a critical subject in the current world. This is because the state of the environment determines the health of the wildlife, and human beings in the world. Various countries, today, have developed legal systems regarding the protection of the environment. In Australia, there are various Acts designed to regulate any operations on the environment in order to ensure that firms use the environment sustainably. These laws are instrumental in checking illegal activities of the certain companies like the Great Australian Operations Pty Ltd. This paper intends to explore some of the Australian legislation regarding environmental protection and conservation. These environmental laws are classified under the international laws, Queensland law, and Commonwealth laws. The paper also intends to analyze the mining case of the Great Australian Operations Pty Ltd against the environmental laws. History of Australian environmental laws The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) entails one of the main Australian government legislation relating to the environment, which started in July 16, 2000. The Act was designed to enable the government take part among other countries and territories in the providing an actually national environmental scheme, protection of heritage, as well as conservation of biodiversity. The Act also emphasizes on the government’s interest on the protection of issues of national environmental consequence, with the territories and states that are responsible for issues of local and state importance (Australian Government, 2012). The Act is administers by the government’s environment, sustainability, water, communities, and population. Some of the objectives of the act include the provision of environmental protection, particularly issues of national environmental importance; conservation of Australian biodiversity; provision a streamlined national environmental; and controlling the global movements of animals and plants wildlife products, and specimens obtained or made from wildlife. The Act is also aimed at promoting ecologically sustainable growth via the conservation and utilization of natural resources sustainably (McGrath, 2011). In addition, there is an Environment Act 1993, which involves a South Australian legislation concerned with the providing environmental protection; establishing Environment Protection Authority; and defining its powers and responsibilities among others. Another law that relates to environmental protection in Australia involves the Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981, which controls the waste dumping and loading at sea. The Act concerns the Australia’s global responsibilities in the London Convention and Protocol, aimed at preventing marine pollution through regulating waste and other substances from being dumped in the sea. Under this Act, the Commonwealth’s main aim is to reduce pollution risks through prohibition of ocean waste disposal, which is seen as dangerous if released in a sea environment. It also seeks to reduce the risks by controlling the legalized waste disposal in order to make sure that here are reduced environmental effects (Australian Government, 2012). It is worth noting that the Sea Dumping Act is applicable to all aircraft, vessels, and platforms within the Australian waters, and to other Australian aircrafts and vessels in any location of the sea. It emphasizes the need for permits for any kind of sea operation in the country. These permits are commonly given for dredging activities, as well as the construction of non-natural reefs. There is also an issuance of the permits concerning dumping of platforms, vessels, and other artificial structures, as well as sea burials. Nevertheless, Sea Dumping Act is not applicable to operational discharges from sea vessels like galley scraps and sewage, which are controlled by the laws of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority. What is more, Australia has water legislation that consists of three components include Water Act of 2007, Water Amendment Act of 2008, Water Regulations, and Water Efficiency Labeling and Standards Act of 2005. To start with, the Water Act of 2007 started on March 3, 2008, and enforced main changes for the management of water in Australia. One of the fundamental characteristics of the Act includes the fact that it develops the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA), with its powers and functions, which include implementation powers necessary in ensuring that the resources of the Basin water are well managed in an incorporated and sustainable manner. In addition, the Act needs the MDBA to establish the Basin Plan, which is a strategic arrangement meant for sustainable and incorporated water resources management within the Murray-Darling Basin. Moreover, the Act creates a Commonwealth environmental Water Holder, charged with the management of the Commonwealth’s water to safeguard and restore ecological resources in and outside the basin, where Commonwealth possess water. additionally, the Act is charged with the responsibility of providing a fundamental duty to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) in the development and execution of water market and water charge legislation as per the National Water Initiative standards. Lastly, the Water Act of 2007 is concerned with the provision of functions of water data to the Bureau of Meteorology, as an addition to the current roles of the Meteorology Act 1955. Water Amendment Act of 2008 is another Australian water legislation, which resulted from the amendment of the Water Act 2008. One of the main characteristics is the transfer of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission to MDBA; hence, the present unified body charges with overseeing water asset planning in the Basin. The Act has also fortified the function of ACCC through the provision of water charge and market legislation applicable to all water transactions and providers. Additionally, the Act widened the current ACCC powers to establish or authorize purpose plans for all controlled rural water charges. Besides, the Act has facilitated the Basin Plan in order to give arrangements for satisfying sensitive needs of human water. It is worth noting that the Act was founded on an amalgamation of Commonwealth legal authorities and referral of particular powers from Basin countries to Commonwealth. It also went through the Commonwealth parliament via the referring law of the Basin States including New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, and Victoria. The achievement of the Act occurred upon negotiation of two vital intergovernmental treaties, which are the Memorandum of Understanding on Murray-Darling Basin Reform in March 2008, and the Intergovernmental Agreement on Murray Darling Basin Reform in July 2008 (Australian Government, 2012). The third water legislation entails Water regulations. These regulations may be intended to prescribe specific issues as per the Water Act of 2007. On June 19, 2008, Federal Executive Council endorsed the Water Regulations 2008. In fact, any regulations under this Act upon principal regulations are Water Amendment Regulations (Australian Government, 2012). One of the regulations to be made under the Act include the amendment regulations and principal regulations in 2008, which deals with issues concerning the MDBA, the establishment of the border of the basin, water information, amendments of the MDBA, MDBA special powers, and process followed by the Minister in making water market and charge legislation. In 2010, other regulations were made to improve the water charge laws as per the Act, while in 2012, the regulation assumed various responsibilities including the prescription of two differences designed to Snowy Hydro License; prescription of certain Victorian water assets arrangements; and specifying water information given to the Bureau of Meteorology. Before the establishment of the Water Act 2007, five territories and states ran the Australian Murray-Darling Basin with competing interests. Signing of the River Murray Waters Agreement happened in 1914 by Victoria, New South Wales, and South Australia, and developed the River Murray Commission. These plans are still greatly unaffected until the start of Water Act, preventing change, and facilitating decision-making that did not focus on the Basin entirely. The current over allocation of water assets in the Basin, mixed with low inflows and climatic changes were predicted during the signing of the agreement. Moreover, the Act offers the ability to satisfy future problems that face the Basin’s management, which is among the country’s main resources. What is more, there is the Water Efficiency Labeling and Standards Act 2005, whose mandate is to specify household water-using products labeling and registration for their water effectiveness. Some of present, products under the scheme include dishwashers, washing machines, taps, showers, urinals, and toilets. The Australian Government manages the plan in collaboration with territory and state governments, which have corresponding legislation to ensure nationwide coverage (Australian Government, 2012). Environmental law concerns in Queensland According to McGrath (2011), the environmental law in Queensland is the administrative structures and laws controlling the effects of human on the natural environment, as well as life’s quality in certain geographic or jurisdiction area as Queensland and United States. The main paradigm of the ecological legal system in the country is environmentally sustainable progress. The Queensland is divided into four degrees International Law, Commonwealth Law, Queensland law, and Common Law. International law is the legislation between countries. The internal constitutional obligations are enforceable merely by other nations and not by public members unless they are integrated unto the local legislation. This law is established by a collective activities of almost 200 individual countries across the world, and no multinational body or organization independently rules the globe. The UN is a congregation of the majority of these countries but, with restricted exemptions for the maintenance of international peace, it does not have power to separately enforce or impose rules on individual countries. International law is based on the notion of equality and sovereignty on country states. Sovereignty is the right and power of a country to govern a clear part of the world. The state is a political organization in which sovereignty is personified. There is a consistent tension between the independence of countries and their global responsibilities. National selfishness is usually important in international matters and implementation of global legislation is difficult against recalcitrant countries. The environmental protection is a key part of global law. Although the customary global law offers limited environmental protection, the country has a broad range of treaty responsibilities that include biodiversity, Antarctica, climate change, migratory species, marine pollution, as well as World Heritage (McGrath, 2011). Biodiversity convention The Biological Diversity 1992 convention places very important and broad on Australia. According to article 8, there is a general responsibility on the country regarding the conservation of biodiversity in both marine and terrestrial ecosystems (Anton 2011). General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1947 Another convention involves the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1947, which intends to enhance free trade across the world. GATT’s article XX allows trade limitations to satisfy environmental goals as long as they are not discriminatory or arbitrary. The country is WTO’s member, established in 1995 to manage GATT and other relevant trade treaties. What is more, there is MARPOL 73/78, which involves a global convention that regulates the oceanic environment pollution by vessels from accidental or operational causes. International Maritime Organization administers the Act. A connected agreement concerns Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter of 1972 and 1996, which is a London Convention charged with limiting the wastes that could be generated on land and dumped at the ocean (McGrath, 2011). CITES CITES is another treaty, which offers a framework for regulating global trade in endangered species. It gives differing level of protection of over 30,000 animal and plant species, traded as fur coats, live specimens, or dried herbs. The secretariat in the UNEP in Switzerland administers the treaty. Other conventions that enhance environmental conservation and protection include UNCLOS 1982, Ramsar Convention of 1971, and World Heritage Convention in 1972 (McGrath, 2011). Commonwealth law McGrath (2011) says that this involves the law created and enforced the Australian government. It is also involves statutory instruments like subsidiary legislation and policies established under such legislation. The main law the Environment Protection and Biodiversity conservation Act 1999 (Cth). Besides, the commonwealth also has a critical role in export and customs regulations for global trade in rare species and greenhouse issues, fisheries, and ozone (Anton, 2011). According to the section 51 (29) of the commonwealth law, there is a regulation of places external to the country, such as, a marine environment. Nevertheless, Commonwealth offered private legislative and rights authority to the Northern Territory and States for marine waters. Consequent shared plans also offer State fisheries law to exceed the coastal waters. One of the Commonwealth acts is the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth). Under the law, the country’s vital Aboriginal objects and areas are highly protected, as per the Minister, inspector, or a permitted officer. The country’s Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population, and Communities enforces it. Airports Act 1996 (Cth) regulates all the main airports situated on the Commonwealth territory. In Queensland, these airports include Archerfield, Brisbane, Townsville, Coolangatta, and Mt. Isa. Here, the Airports Regulations 1997 (Cth) controls noise pollution, as well as imposes a common environmental duty on all operators in order to take all practical and reasonable measures to stop adverse effects to environment, pollution, and offensive noise. In the case of other airports environmental management and development endorsement is controlled under the Queensland law, such as, the Environmental Protection act 1994 (Qld), and Sustainable Planning Act 2009, (Qld). The department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, and Local Government enforces this act (McGrath, 2011). In addition, there is another act involving Australian Heritage Council act 2003(Cth), which incorporated the national heritage evaluation into the EPBC Act upon the peal of the initial Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975 (Cth). The DSEWPC administers the act. Commonwealth is banned from dealing in nuclear amenities, such as, the nuclear reactors, unless the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 (Cth) permits it. Consequently, there is an inexistence of nuclear facilities in region. In Australia, the only available nuclear reactor is run at Sydney’s Lucas heights in order to generate industrial and medical products. The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Authority administer the act. Besides, EPBC Act controls nuclear activities, such as, uranium mining. Notably, there is no Federal legislation, which bars anybody else, apart from the Commonwealth from operating a nuclear plant, or mining uranium in Queensland. Nevertheless, the Nuclear Facilities Prohibition Act 2007 (Qld) bars anybody from operating or building a nuclear plant in Queensland. EPBC Act 1999 is the main Commonwealth environmental legislation that controls effects on issues of national environmental importance, and effects on the ecosystem concerning Commonwealth land. It also regulates the multinational wildlife trade, and interfering or killing with listed cetaceans and marine species (McGrath, 2011). Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 (Cth) prohibits the incineration or dumping at the ocean of wastes, radioactive material, and other materials. According to the Act’s section 15, there is a defense for any dumping is aimed at safeguarding human life, or when a ship is in danger. This Act was established in pursuit of the London Convention. This is applicable to all vessels operation within the intercontinental waters. The Act is enforced by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (McGrath, 2011). Another important Commonwealth Act concerned with environmental protection is the Fisheries Management Act 1991 (Cth), which functions in collaboration with the Fisheries Act 1994 (Qld) in order to control fisheries along the coast of Queensland in multifaceted plans. The Act also states the Australian fishing territory over the country’s Exclusive Economic Zone, apart from the coastal waters, and other exempted waters. In some fisheries, the Act is applicable to the Australian citizens and flagged vessels that fish in global waters. In Queensland waters, the legislation controls the certain fisheries, and Australian Fisheries Management Authority enforces it. What is more, Fuel Quality Standards Act 2000 (Cth) is a Commonwealth legislation that regulates the quality of fuel sold in the country. The Act develops standards that help in the reduction of atmospheric pollutants’ level, which include sulphur and lead. This Act is also enforced by DSEWPC (McGrath, 2011). Moreover, McGrath (2011) argues that Commonwealth protects its environmental by enforcing the National Environment Protection Council Act 1994 (Cth). The Act is among the reciprocal laws existing between the Territories and States, and Commonwealth, which establishes the National Environmental Protection Council. The council is currently operational under the unity of Environment Protection and Heritage Council. The council has developed certain National Environment Protection Measures objectives in order to safeguard certain elements of the environment. Besides, the DSEWPC manages this Act. Another Commonwealth legislation concerned with environmental protection entails the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 (Cth). The Act has developed a national mechanism of reporting abatement actions, greenhouse emissions, and energy production and use by firms, which lays the basis for future reactions to climatic changes. Companies with the greenhouse emissions, energy use, or consumption more than the particular threshold are compelled to account for their emissions, energy production, and energy use. Nevertheless, the system of reporting is technical and complex. Besides, it does not place a certain cost for any greenhouse pollution (Hunt, 2009). In addition, there is the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) is a Commonwealth legislation concerned with the ecological and conventional laws and culture of the Torres Strait Islanders and Aboriginal as regards land tenure. The Act is a reaction to the identification of native title created by Common Law, as seen in Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1. This Act has three functions including the validation of past government acts influencing native title; providing statutory identification of native title, and a mechanism of registering the rights of native title; as well as establishing a Future Acts Regime in order to enable the incorporation of native title with the government decision-making process. The administering body of the Act is the National Native Title Tribunal, while the Federal Court establishes the native title determinations. The Offshore Minerals Act 1994 (Cth) regulates the mining of marine in Australian sea. The Act adopts a conventional licensing and exploration regime. The DRET enforces the Act (McGrath, 2011). In addition, there is Commonwealth legislation entailing Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (Cth), which is charged with licensing gas and petroleum gas extraction from the ocean floor and pipelines in the Australian waters. However, this excludes the Territory and State coastal waters. The Act was created in place of the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1967 (Cth). It is also charged with the licensing of greenhouse storage in the country’s waters. Nonetheless, the mining of gas and petroleum is illegal in the GBR Marine Park that mostly extends to the east coast of Queensland. DRET is also the Act’s administering body. Another environmental control act under commonwealth laws is the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Management Act 1989 (Cth) that controls the manufacturing, utilization, exportation, recycling, as well as disposal of the substances that can deplete the Ozone layer. The Australian maritime Safety Authority administers the Act (McGrath, 2011). Protection of Moveable Cultural Heritage Act 1986 (Cth) is another Commonwealth legislation that controls export and import of safeguarded objects of national importance for artistic, archeological, historical, ethnological, literary, technological, or scientific purposes. More so, Commonwealth protects the environment by enforcing the Water Act 2007 (Cth), which controls the Murray-Darling River Basin. While operating with together with the Water Act 2000 (Qld) and State waters legislation, the Act creates a water charges, water market, and water-trading framework in the Basin. It specifically addresses the over-allocation of water for irrigation. Queensland law McGrath (2011) says that this entails legislation and a secondary law created and enforced by the local governments and government of Queensland. The local governments are responsible for the preparation and administration planning schemes to regulate land development in their areas. The first Constitution Act 1867 (Qld) offers the foundation for the Queensland Parliament to enact laws, which include legislation controlling human effects on the ecosystem. Clean Energy Act 2008 (Qld) is another legislation concerned with regulating the energy use among medium-sized firms in the region. The law requires these businesses to identify ways of minimizing the amount of energy consumed in order to enhance energy conservation and energy effectiveness (McGrath, 2011). Additionally, McGrath (2011) asserts that Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 (Qld) is responsible for appropriate planning processes of the regional and State in Australia. It is charged with providing principles, policies, and vision necessary for coastal growth. It also regulates issues regarding quarrying, dredging, tidal works, and canal building among others along the coastal zone, especially those areas prone to erosion. Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld) is a vital constituent of the Queensland ecological legislation. Its main objective is to safeguard the environment in the context of environmentally sustainable growth. To succeed, the Act has various tools including policies, and measures of environmental protection. In addition, there is a Geothermal Energy Act 2010 (Qld), which regulates the discovery and production of Queensland geothermal energy. The Act is in charge of providing authorities called geothermal tenures for discovery of and production of geothermal energy. Mineral Resources Act 1989 (Qld) is another legislation that controls extraction of iron ore, ore, and other minerals by mining royalties and tenures. For instance, Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004 (Qld) control the mining of gas and petroleum separately (McGrath, 2011). Brief history about Great Australian operations PTY LTD Great Australian Operations Pty Ltd is an Australian based mining company, which was started in 2008. The company’s main activities involve extraction and exportation of copper minerals. The firm has leased 10,000 hectares of its land in Cloncurry, North West Queensland. It has a number of mines including the Flamingo Copper Mine, in Mount Isa, and Black Fort. Additionally, there are gold mines called Gilded, Jessievale, and Mt. Freda. Recently, the company faced a court case regarding its violation of environmental protection laws. According to the case, the firm was found to be transporting contaminated storm water to some ponds during wet season in 2008 and 2009. Because of pipe damaging, highly acidic water flowed to the Coppermine Creek of Cloncurry River, and thus contaminating it. Consequently, there was a damage of the aquatic life, fish, and vegetation around the river, and the company was fined $135,000. The court also found that various environment protection laws were violated including Water Act 2007 (Cth), Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981, and Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. As a result, the firm faces several charges and close monitoring for some years to come. One of the main legislations imposed on the company by the strict Australian legal system is Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Mining industry case What was the issue? In this case, the issue involves the Great Australian operations Pty Ltd, which is an Australian company dealing in the extraction and exportation of copper minerals. The case facing the company entails the violation of environmental protection and conservation laws. Being a mining company, the Great Australian Operations Pty Ltd violated the environmental protection laws by allowing the transportation of contaminated storm water to certain storm water ponds in the region. In the course of doing this, the pipes transporting these contaminated storm water were damaged; hence, letting out highly acidic water into the river. According to the case, the acidic water had serious effects on the vegetation, fish, and other aquatic life dwelling in the affected river. Who was the plaintive? In this case, the plaintiff is the Australian government, as it seeks to get legal remedy or damages for the violations of environmental laws by the mining company. The company was accused for which Act? Great Australian Operations Pty Ltd was accused of violating a number of environmental protection laws. The company’s actions led to the violation of the Water Act 2007 (Cth), Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981, and Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. To start with, the firm is said to have breached a Commonwealth legislation regarding the Water Act 2007 (Cth), which is helped in the establishment of the Murray-Darling Basin. The Act also oversees the protection of the various rivers including MacIntyre, Warrego, and Condamie-Bolonne, which form the basin’s catchment. This Act is enforced by DSEWOC, and operates in collaboration with the Water Act 2000 (Qld) to establish water market, water charges, as well as the water trading in the Basin. The Act’s main concern is to handle the over-allocation irrigation water in the region. The charges came to effect, since the company had carelessly transported highly acidic water to storm water ponds, hence causing contamination of river water. Despite no damage on water, the leaking of the contaminated storm water in the river negatively affected aquatic life, vegetation, and fish. Another Act in which the company is charged for is the Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981. Here, the fact that the company’s actions led to the leaking of contaminated storm water. This leaking of contaminated water to the river amounts to dumping. This act regulates incineration or dumping at the ocean of wastes, radioactive, and radioactive material. Therefore, the company can be charged for violating the Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981. Another Act for which the company was charged is the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (McGrath, 2011). Some of the objectives of the Act are the provision of environmental protection, especially issues of national environmental importance; conservation of Australian biodiversity; provision a streamlined national environmental; and controlling the global movements of animals and plants wildlife products, and specimens obtained or made from wildlife. The Act is also aimed at promoting ecologically sustainable growth via the conservation and utilization of natural resources sustainably. The company is charged for violation of this Act because of the contaminated water caused death of vegetation, aquatic life, and fish. As the law concerns the protection and conservation of wildlife and natural resources, the company’s carelessness in transporting contaminated storm water implied to breaching of environmental laws. Therefore, the company is liable for the violation in a court of law, as per the Australian legislation. What decision came out? Following the company’s violation of the environmental protection laws, the court found the company to be guilty of breaching the various acts including Water Act 2007 (Cth), Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981, and Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. As a result, the court placed serious restrictions on the company’s operations, and ordered for further investigations on it. The court determined that the company had really violated the aforementioned laws; and imposed a fine of $135,000. This was meant to serve as a lesson to other companies, and to the company itself, as regards environmental conservation and protection. Conclusion Clearly, Australian government has a well defined and strict environment legal structure. This implies that it is highly committed towards the protection and conservation of the environment by emphasizing on sustainable use of it. The Australian environmental laws are divided into Commonwealth law, International laws, and common laws among others. Some of the main environmental laws in the Australia include the Water Act 2007 (Cth), Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981, and Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, whose key role is to regulate the use of environmental resources to create a sustainable and safe environment. In the case of the Great Australian Operations Pty Ltd, its operations led to violation of the aforementioned environmental laws among others. The company was charged for transportation of contaminated storm water to pounds. In the process, the pipe burst, and thus causing the leaking of highly acidic water into the river. Consequently, the company’s careless action led to death of vegetation, aquatic life, and fish around the river. According to the court, the company was found guilty for the violations, and given a fine of $135,000. References Anton, D. (2011). Environmental protection and human rights. Cambridge New York: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 56-75. Australian Government (2012). Environmental protection. Australia.gov.au. Retrieved on September 13, 2012 from http://australia.gov.au/topics/environment-and-natural- resources/environmental-protection Australian Government (2012). Water legislation, Department of Sustainability, environment, Water, Population and Communities. Retrieved on September 13, 2012 from http://www.environment.gov.au/water/australia/water-act/index.html Hunt, M. (2009). Mining law in Western Australia. Sydney: Federation Press. Pp. 26-40. McGrath, C (2011). Synopsis of the Queensland Environmental Legal System. Pp. 1-50. http://www.envlaw.com.au/sqels5.pdf Murchison, K. M. (1995). Environmental Law in Australia and the United States: A Comparative Overview. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, 22 (3), 1- 60. Legislation Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 Environmental (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld) Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Water Act 2007 Water Act 2007 (Cth) Environment Act 1993 Read More