A lawyer by background, I have spent most of my career in planning and environment law across private practice, government policy and corporate projects, including the $20B Queensland Curtis LNG project and Queensland’s emerging CSG-LNG industry.

I have advised on resources and environment law, worked at senior levels of government helping to develop and implement policy, engaged closely with regulators and led strategies to fast-track major projects delayed by federal approvals.

At Santos, my focus is managing above ground risks and delivering quality approvals and access outcomes. The most significant reform to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act) in decades are being implemented in stages, with the main provisions commencing by 1 December 2026. They are the biggest immediate challenge in this space.

We’ve been promised a regime that’s “better for the environment, and better for business”. But, both industry and government have a role to play in making this a reality. Complexity is growing with the new National Environmental Standards, updated state bilateral agreements, NOPSEM declaration pathway and regulations all being developed at once but also all dependent on each other. Without seeing the whole framework, it’s hard to be certain of the environmental benefit or whether the regime will be “better for business” in practice.

There is, however, a genuine opportunity for a reset. The new National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) has signalled an impartial, evidence-led and accountable approach. Realising it depends on getting the regulations right.

This reset is imperative to improve productivity and break what has been coined a ‘cycle of despair’. Without clear timeframes, organisations feel compelled to apply for approvals too early, before they have the necessary detail; requests for information stop the clock and the inefficiency perpetuates itself. A mutual commitment model offers a way out: proponents do more upfront work, including early pre-lodgment engagement, genuine avoidance analysis and well-developed offset strategies, while regulators commit to a faster, more predictable back end.

While policy is necessarily influenced by politics, in environmental regulation stakeholder interests are more aligned

than they may appear. Achieving good environmental outcomes that are also good for the economy serves both regulators and industry and will only become more important as the challenge of climate change coincides with increased demand

for energy. At the ER Law Annual Conference in Adelaide on 22 October, I will offer a practical perspective on current environmental laws, the imminent EPBC Act changes, and what proponents can do now to prepare.