Albanese government cuts environmental funding despite public support for nature protection

Anthony Albanese’s government took power in 2022 promising to end a decade of environmental neglect. Four years later the federal budget and the newly passed national environmental law reforms show the government is not delivering on that promise.

The failure carries direct consequences for Australia’s wildlife and ecosystems. Environmental funding is set to fall from 0.06 percent of the federal budget for on-ground nature programs to less than 0.04 percent in 2028-29. At the same time the government is shifting policy settings toward business priorities and expanding a nature repair market that remains unproven.

Surveys show 96 percent of Australians want stronger action on nature and 76 percent believe at least 1 percent of the federal budget should go to protecting and recovering it. The government has continued to ignore those views.

National environmental standards formed the core of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act reforms that followed the Samuel review. The standards were meant to set clear outcomes for regulated activities. The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water described them that way on its website from January 2023 until April 2025.

After striking a deal with the Greens to pass the EPBC reform bill in December 2025, the government has released only two national environmental standards for consultation and has finalised none. The department has changed its language, dropping references to clear outcomes and adding phrases that stress business demands such as giving companies clear rules and helping decision-makers stay fair and consistent.

Experts in biodiversity and environmental law have identified major flaws in the draft standard for matters of national environmental significance. The standard covers threatened species, world heritage properties, internationally important wetlands and the Great Barrier Reef. They say it will do little to protect nature.

Slow progress on the standards leaves the National Environmental Protection Agency poorly equipped to assess proposals, set approval conditions, and carry out compliance and enforcement work. More than three in four Australians already lack strong trust in any political party or candidate to protect the environment.

Nature markets have been promoted as a fix for environmental damage. Decades of claims have produced little evidence that they halt or reverse biodiversity loss. Threatened species and significant places exist in specific locations with specific needs. Australia now protects more land than before yet still fails to safeguard its growing list of threatened species and communities because their habitats remain unprotected.

After tens of millions of dollars spent on policy work, the biodiversity market register lists one project and has issued no biodiversity certificates. The government has allocated a further $36.9 million in the budget for the nature repair market and biodiversity offsets.

Optimism about these markets is premature. They carry risks of weak governance and could give governments an excuse to avoid direct conservation duties. Australia is a wealthy country that can increase direct investment in environmental protection and restoration. Most Australians support that step. The climate crisis and biodiversity loss will reinforce each other. A shrinking environmental budget that speeds up development approvals is the wrong response to these threats and will lock in Australia’s poor conservation record.

The Albanese government declared the environment was back. Australians were told to expect serious investment. Settling for the appearance of action would betray that public good.