Wednesday, 18 October 2023

Environment Legislation Amendment (Circular Economy and Other Matters) Bill 2023

Statement of compatibility

Steve DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh – Minister for Environment, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Outdoor Recreation) (11:15): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the Environment Legislation Amendment (Circular Economy and Other Matters) Bill 2023.

Opening paragraphs

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, (the Charter), I make this Statement of Compatibility with respect to the Environment Legislation Amendment (Circular Economy and Other Matters) Bill 2023 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with human rights as set out in the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview

The Bill amends the Circular Economy (Waste Reduction and Recycling) Act 2021 (the Circular Economy Act) and the Environment Protection Act 2017 (the Environment Protection Act).

The amendments to the Circular Economy Act –

a. provide for matters relating to the container deposit scheme, waste to energy scheme and the recovery of regulatory costs associated with those schemes; and

b. enable regulations to prescribe variable fees for determining an application or accepting a submission under that Act or the regulations, for example, based on the time taken to determine an application; and

c. make other minor and technical amendments to that Act.

The amendments to the Environment Protection Act –

a. allow the Environment Protection Authority to retain financial assurances in specified circumstances to protect the State from having to bear clean up costs; and

b. ensure that liquidators do not become personally liable for clean up costs incurred by the Environment Protection Authority when a polluting company becomes insolvent; and

c. make other miscellaneous amendments to improve the operation of that Act.

Human Rights Issues

The following human rights protected by the Charter are relevant for the Bill: the right to privacy, property rights, the right to a fair hearing, rights in criminal proceedings and the right to liberty and security of person.

For the following reasons, I am satisfied that the Bill is compatible with the Charter and, if any rights are limited, those limitations are reasonable and demonstrably justified having regard to the factors in section 7(2) of the Charter. 

Right to privacy

Section 13(a) of the Charter provides that a person has the right not to have their privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with. An interference with privacy will be lawful if it is permitted by a law which is precise and appropriately circumscribed and will not be arbitrary provided it is reasonable in the circumstances and just and appropriate to the end sought.

Litter enforcement officer

Clause 35(2) of the Bill engages, but does not limit, this right. It amends the definition of litter enforcement officer in section 3(1) of the Environment Protection Act to additionally include persons appointed under Part 3 of the Game Management Authority Act 2014 to be litter enforcement officers. The litter enforcement officers can request a person to provide their name and address, issue notices, require further information and have powers of entry and inspection in relation to non-residential premises, which are circumstances that are precise, reasonable and appropriately circumscribed to the right to privacy.

The new class of litter enforcement officer does not have any greater powers than existing litter enforcement officers. The powers of litter enforcement officers are subject to the existing safeguards within the Environment Protection Act that apply to protect the right to privacy, including parameters in relation to when and how the powers can be exercised.

The amendment will support the objectives for litter management under the Environment Protection Act. As authorised officers carrying out functions under the Game Management Authority Act 2014 regularly encounter illegal deposits of litter such as during events, hunting seasons and protests, empowering those officers to take action as litter enforcement officers, including by issuing infringement offences, is expected to deter littering.

Therefore, the right to privacy is engaged in circumstances that are precise, reasonable and appropriately circumscribed, and the right is not limited.

Property rights

Section 20 of the Charter provides that a person must not be deprived of that person’s property other than in accordance with the law.

Amendments in clauses 25, 27 and 38 and Division 1 of Part 3 of the Bill may engage this right.

Periodic licence fee

The amendments in clauses 25 and 27 of the Bill amend licence conditions to require the holder of a licence under the Waste to Energy Scheme established under the Circular Economy Act to pay a periodic licence fee. The new licence conditions would apply to any existing licence holders and be triggered by the making of regulations to prescribe the relevant fee. While it is possible for a natural person to hold a licence, licence holders are more likely to be corporate entities due to the nature of the operations that are licensed. Any limitation on a licence holder’s property rights would be in accordance with the law, as it would be in accordance with regulations made under the Circular Economy Act and would be for the legitimate purpose of recovering regulatory costs associated with the scheme from persons who are licensed under the scheme. Therefore, clauses 25 and 27 of the Bill do not limit property rights under the Charter.

Vehicle inspection notices

Clause 38 of the Bill inserts new sections 269A and 269B into the Environment Protection Act. New section 269A empowers the Environment Protection Authority (the Authority) to serve a vehicle inspection notice on a person who is the registered owner of, or is apparently in lawful possession of a relevant vehicle, requiring the person to make the vehicle available for measurement, inspection and testing to determine whether –

(a) the person has a contravened a provision of the Act or the regulations in relation to the relevant vehicle; or

(b) there is a risk of harm to human health or the environment from pollution or waste in relation to the relevant vehicle.

Relevant vehicle is defined to mean a motor vehicle or other vehicle used to transport reportable priority waste. Failure to comply with a vehicle inspection notice is an offence under new section 269B.

The issuing of a vehicle inspection notice may deprive a person of their property rights in the vehicle that is the subject of the notice, as the notice requires the vehicle to be presented for inspection at a specified time and location. The deprivation of the property is temporary and is subject to safeguards and parameters set out in the Environment Protection Act, including requirements in relation to the notice that must be provided and the ability for a person who is served with a notice to request an alternative time, place or period of inspection. Any deprivation of property is also for the legitimate purpose of enforcing other requirements in the Environment Protection Act or regulations and identifying vehicles that pose a risk of harm to human health or the environment. Therefore, any deprivation of property would be in accordance with the law and would not limit property rights under the Charter.

Refusal to release a financial assurance

Division 1 of Part 3 of the Bill makes amendments to the Environment Protection Act, to enable the Authority to refuse to release a financial assurance, if having regard to specified considerations, the Authority is satisfied it is necessary to retain the assurance as security for the cost of remediation or clean up where there is a significant risk these costs may otherwise be borne by the State or the Authority.

This engages property rights under the Charter in limited circumstances where a natural person has provided a financial assurance that is retained in circumstances that previously would not have resulted in the financial assurance being retained.

Under the Environment Protection Act, the Authority can require persons undertaking certain activities to provide a financial assurance as security for the costs of remediation or clean up in connection with the particular activity. Currently, section 231 of the Environment Protection Act provides that a financial assurance must be released by the Authority to the person who provided it in specified circumstances, including where a person no longer holds a permission, or where a notice or Order no longer applies to that person.

New sections 231C to 231F provide that, the Authority may refuse to release a financial assurance where:

(a) the reason a person no longer holds a permission, is that a liquidator has disclaimed the person’s interest in the permission, where the person is insolvent, or where the permission has been transferred, sold, revoked, surrendered or expired;

(b) the reason a site management order, or environmental action notice no longer applies to a person is, that a liquidator has disclaimed the person’s interest in land or premises to which the notice relates, where the person is insolvent, the land or premises to which the order or notice relates has been sold, or where an occupier of land sells, transfers or abandons their interest in the land;

(c) the reasons for which an environmentally hazardous Order was issued remain.

To refuse to release the financial assurance in these circumstances, the Authority must either be entitled under existing section 227 to make a claim on the assurance due to costs already incurred, or likely to be incurred, for clean up activities, or when the Authority is satisfied, having regard to the considerations set out in new section 231G, that it is necessary to retain the assurance as security for clean-up costs, where there is a significant risk these costs may be borne by the State or the Authority.

The considerations set out in new section 231G include the likelihood that clean up or remediation will be required, and if so, the nature and extent and cost of that clean up, the likelihood of a party other than the State or the Authority bearing those costs, the extent of the impact of the contamination, pollution or waste on human health or the environment, whether the full extent of contamination may not yet be known, and whether the person providing the financial assurance has previously failed to comply with the requirements of the Environment Protection Act or instruments made under the Act.

The Bill also provides for the following:

(a) timing and notification requirements for decisions to retain financial assurances;

(b) where the Authority has refused to release a financial assurance, that decision must be reviewed and remade within 5 years or other agreed period, or earlier if the Authority is notified of a significant change in circumstances;

(c) for each further review, the Authority must consider causation and remoteness of any detected pollution, unless there has been no material change in circumstances.

(d) that a person may apply at any time for the financial assurance to be released under existing section 232 (noting that an application after the Authority has refused to release the financial assurance will be subject to the same considerations undertaken by the Authority in making that refusal decision); and

(e) that each decision to retain a financial assurance is reviewable by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Accordingly, the power to retain a financial assurance is confined, subject to a number of protective parameters, and is justified having regard to the legitimate and important purpose of protecting the State, the Authority and the public from bearing the costs of clean-up or remediation caused by the person who gave the financial assurance.

Right to a fair hearing

Section 24(1) of the Charter provides that a person charged with a criminal offence or a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the charge or proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing.

Validation of existing agreements

New sections 191B and 191C inserted by clause 22 of the Bill may engage this right. The new sections validate existing agreements or purported agreements relating to the container deposit scheme between the State and the Scheme Coordinator and between the State and Network Operators. The legislative validation retrospectively applies amendments in the Bill aimed at providing clear legislative authority for some of the matters included in the agreements and validates any act or thing done or omitted to be done in reliance on the agreements. This validation in and of itself does not limit human rights. The validation ensures the lawfulness of the agreements freely entered into, to avoid and remove any doubt, confirming the agreement between the parties. The validation is specific as it is confined to the Scheme Coordinator Agreement and the Network Operator Agreements and is confined to a specific period of time. To the extent that the validation provisions retrospectively determine the rights of a party that initiates civil proceedings in respect of the agreements, the right to a fair hearing may be engaged. However, all existing agreements to be validated are between the State and corporate entities, therefore there is no limitation on Charter rights. Further, the amendments are reasonably required to provide certainty to all parties involved in the container deposit scheme and are not expected to have any adverse effect on any party as they are intended to give effect to the terms of agreements to which they have freely agreed.

Rights in criminal proceedings

Section 25(1) of the Charter provides that a person charged with a criminal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

Section 25(2) of the Charter provides minimum guarantees to which a person charged with a criminal offence is entitled. Relevantly for the Bill, this includes a person not being compelled to testify against themselves or confess guilt.

Clauses 37, 38 and 45 of the Bill engage these Charter rights.

Offence relating to vehicle inspection

Clause 37 of the Bill amends section 268 of the Environment Protection Act to provide that it is not a reasonable excuse for a natural person to refuse or fail to make a vehicle available for inspection under new section 269A if making the vehicle available for inspection would tend to incriminate the person. The amendment therefore limits the protection against self-incrimination.

The limitation is similar to the existing limitation in section 268(2) of the Environment Protection Act for requirements to produce documents. These limitations on the protection against self- incrimination are required for the purpose of enabling authorised officers to monitor compliance with the Environment Protection Act and the regulations, and to mitigate risks of harm to the environment and human health by the issuing of remedial notices under the Act following an inspection. In relation to the requirement for vehicles to be made available for inspection, the Environment Protection Act sets out a framework for how and when vehicles can be required to be made available for inspection.

Any limitation on this right is directly related to its purpose, which is to enable the Authority to monitor compliance with the Act or regulations, and address risks to human health or the environment.

There are no less restrictive means reasonably available to achieve the purpose of enabling authorised officers to have access to vehicles to undertake these inspections. The existing inspection powers in the Environment Protect Act have not been effective in enabling the Authority to undertake inspections as needed.

For the above reasons, I consider that to the extent that the amendment to section 268 imposes a limitation on the right against self-incrimination, that limitation is reasonable and justified under section 7(2) of the Charter.

Clause 38 of the Bill inserts new section 269B into the Environment Protection Act, which makes it an offence for a person to fail to present a vehicle for inspection in accordance with a vehicle inspection notice issued under the Act unless the person has a reasonable excuse. As the Environment Protection Act does not specify a procedure for hearing and determining proceedings in relation to the offence, a summary hearing in the Magistrates’ Court would apply in accordance with section 52 of the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984. Section 72(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 applies to summary hearings of offences and requires an accused person to present or point to evidence that suggests a reasonable possibility of the existence of facts that would establish a reasonable excuse for the offence. Therefore, the offence created by the Bill may be viewed as placing an evidential burden on an accused person. However, in doing so, the Bill does not transfer the legal burden of proof. Once the accused has pointed to evidence of a reasonable excuse, which will ordinarily be peculiarly within their knowledge, the burden shifts back to the prosecution who must prove the absence of a reasonable excuse beyond reasonable doubt. Case law has held that an evidential onus imposed on establishing an excuse or exception does not limit the Charter’s right to a presumption of innocence, as such an evidentiary onus falls short of imposing any burden of persuasion on an accused.

Liability of officers of bodies corporate

Clause 45 of the Bill amends section 349 of the Environment Protection Act, which provides for liability of officers of bodies corporate. Section 349 deems officers of a body corporate to be liable if the body corporate commits an offence by contravening specified provisions of the Act and the officer failed to exercise due diligence to prevent the commission of the offence by the body corporate. The amendment removes section 290(1) from the list of specified provisions in section 349 as liability for officers of bodies corporate for offences under section 290(1) are covered in existing section 350 of the Environment Protection Act. This aspect of the amendment does not affect any Charter rights. The amendment also adds section 290(3) to the list of specified provisions in section 349. This aspect of the amendment may engage Charter rights in criminal proceedings as it operates to deem that a natural person has committed an offence against section 290(3) of the Environment Protection Act based on the actions of the body corporate. Section 290(3) makes it an offence for a person issued with an environmental action notice to fail to comply with reporting requirements specified in the notice. The prosecution is still required to prove the main elements of the offence committed by the body corporate and that the officer failed to exercise due diligence to prevent the commission of that offence. It is reasonable and appropriate for officers of a body corporate to be held liable in these circumstances, as officers of bodies corporate accept duties when they undertake such a position, including a duty to ensure that the body corporate does not commit offences. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the amendment made by the Bill is compatible with the rights under the Charter.

Right to liberty and security of person

Section 21(1) of the Charter provides that every person has the right to liberty and security.

Vehicle inspection notices

Clause 38 of the Bill may engage this right as it inserts a new offence into the Environment Protection Act for failure to comply with a vehicle inspection notice, which has penalties of up to 60 penalty units in the case of a natural person. The offence is required to deter non compliance with the requirements in the Environment Protection Act for vehicles to be made available for inspection to ensure the vehicles comply with requirements in the Act and regulations and identify risks to human health and the environment. The usual procedure requirements will apply to this new offence and the level of the penalty is consistent with other similar offences that already exist in the Environment Protection Act, for example, in relation to information gathering notices under section 255 of the Act. The new offence is therefore compatible with the criminal process rights set out in the Charter.

Conclusion

I am therefore of the view that the Bill is compatible with the Charter.

The Hon. Steve Dimopoulos MP

Minister for Environment

Second reading

Steve DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh – Minister for Environment, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Outdoor Recreation) (11:15): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard.

Introduction

Today, I introduce a Bill that amends the Circular Economy (Waste Reduction and Recycling) Act 2021 (Circular Economy Act) and the Environment Protection Act 2017.

The Victorian Government is committed to legislating a circular economy across the state, which will generate employment opportunities, help achieve climate change goals, and provide the Victorian community with a reliable recycling system. The waste and recycling system plays a crucial role in our cities’ and regions’ efficient functioning and liveability.

Since the launch of the Victorian Government’s circular economy plan, Recycling Victoria: A new economy in February 2020, the state’s waste and recycling sector has entered a period of dynamic and positive change.

The Circular Economy Act gave effect to important components of the circular economy plan, including the establishment of Victoria’s Container Deposit Scheme or CDS Vic. The Act also established the foundational powers and functions of the Head, Recycling Victoria (RV), a dedicated business unit within the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action.

Subsequently, the Environment Legislation Amendment (Circular Economy and Other Matters) Act 2022 was passed. This Act amended the Circular Economy Act to provide further key policy elements. It also established Victoria’s waste to energy scheme, which will introduce an annual cap on waste that can be processed in thermal waste to energy facilities in Victoria, and an associated licensing scheme. Recycling Victoria has since commenced the first stage of this licensing scheme, for existing waste to energy projects.

Significant progress has since been made towards delivering on the commitments in Recycling Victoria: A new economy, supported by the frameworks established in the Circular Economy Act. Some issues have been identified during the implementation of CDS Vic and the Waste to Energy scheme that need to be resolved to fully realise the benefits of these schemes to the community and the State. The Bill introduces amendments that address these issues to clarify and streamline the operation of the Circular Economy Act.

In particular, the Bill supports efficient operation of the Victorian Government’s flagship circular economy program, CDS Vic, which will commence on 1 November 2023. CDS Vic will allow Victorians to return their used drink cans, bottles and cartons for a 10-cent refund at various locations including shopping centres, collection depots, and over the counter refund points. CDS Vic will reduce Victoria’s litter by up to half, create new economic opportunities, generate 645 jobs and turn drink containers into new recycled products.

Specifically, the Bill will amend the Circular Economy Act to:

• clarify the cost recovery mechanism for CDS Vic to ensure the scheme regulator, RV, is able to recover all of its oversight and regulatory costs from the beverage industry,

• minimise operational risks for CDS Vic to support the scheme and to ensure it operates efficiently, as intended,

• provide for a mechanism to recover the costs of RV in administering the Waste to Energy scheme by enabling new periodic licence fees to be set,

• establish a Recycling Victoria Fund with Special Purpose Operating Accounts to support RV to recover costs and fund its operations under CDS Vic and the Waste to Energy scheme in a transparent and accountable way, and

• enable regulations to set variable fees for determining applications made or submissions received under that Act.

The Bill will also amend the Environment Protection Act to enhance its operation to better effect the intent of that Act. The Environment Protection Amendment Act 2018 took effect on 1 July 2021, repealing the Environment Protection Act 1970, amending the Environment Protection Act 2017 and introducing the new environment protection framework. The Environment Legislation Amendment Act 2022 included some amendments to the Environment Protection Act 2017 to ensure that it operates as intended following the commencement of the new framework. The Bill contains further amendments for this purpose.

The parts of the Bill that amend the Circular Economy Act will come into operation on the day after the Act receives Royal Assent. The amendments to the Environment Protection Act will come into effect on dates to be proclaimed, and at the latest by 1 October 2024.

Summary of the Bill

Cost recovery for CDS Vic

The Bill clarifies the mechanism to recover the costs of RV to enable it to regulate CDS Vic in full. The Circular Economy Act does not provide for RV to charge fees to cover the costs of acquitting all its statutory and contractual responsibilities to regulate and administer the scheme. The Bill will provide for a new cost recovery fee to be paid by the Scheme Coordinator to RV to manage the contractual framework and otherwise oversee the operation of CDS Vic. The concept of a cost recovery fee has been freely agreed between the Scheme Coordinator and the State in the Scheme Coordinator Agreement. This existing arrangement will be formalised and supported through the amendments contained in the Bill.

Under this new mechanism, the cost recovery fee will be passed through to first suppliers of beverages in containers approved as suitable eligible containers, through scheme contributions first suppliers are required to pay to the Scheme Coordinator.

The Bill will also remove the power to prescribe a fee for container applications to ensure these costs can be validly recovered through the cost recovery fee.

The cost recovery mechanism will ensure that the beverage industry will bear the scheme costs entirely, in line with the principle of ‘extended producer responsibility’. This means that first suppliers of beverages in the CDS will bear the entire costs for managing beverage containers across their lifecycle.

Minimising operational risks for CDS Vic

I would like to proceed to discuss some other important changes that are being made to support the implementation of CDS Vic. The Bill contains several amendments to mitigate operational risks that have become apparent during the implementation of the scheme and need to be addressed to ensure that CDS Vic operates as intended.

Firstly, the Bill clarifies that the Scheme Coordinator or Network Operator Agreement may contain matters that are not specifically listed in the Circular Economy Act, as long as they are consistent with the Act. This provides flexibility for those agreements to include other matters, as agreed between the State and a prospective Scheme Coordinator or Network Operator.

It is worth noting that the existing agreements with the current Scheme Coordinator and Network Operators have already been drafted with other matters included by agreement of the parties; the Bill provides clear legislative authority for that approach.

The Bill also provides for these amendments to be applied retrospectively to agreements with the existing Scheme Coordinator and Network Operators that were signed and executed in March 2023, to ensure that the agreements can be given effect as intended by the parties at the time they were signed.

Secondly, the Bill allows concurrent contracts between the State and both an incumbent and a successor Scheme Coordinator. Under the Circular Economy Act, there may be only one Scheme Coordinator at any time. This amendment will allow a successor Scheme Coordinator to begin its mobilisation activities while the incumbent delivers the Scheme Coordinator function to the end of its contracted term.

Thirdly, the Bill amends the definition of a ‘material recovery facility’ (MRF) in section 3 to include any facility prescribed by regulations. This amendment provides for participation in CDS Vic by certain recyclers, including bottle-crushing service operators, that do not fall within the existing definition of a MRF but for whom there is strong policy merit for inclusion in the scheme. This will allow prescribed facilities to receive refunds for containers collected and sorted through their facilities.

The Bill also contains some minor amendments and clarifications for CDS Vic that correct terminology, enable the State to step in to perform the Scheme Coordinator’s obligations under the Scheme Coordinator Agreement, such as in the case of performance failure, clarify supply arrangements for containers and allow notification processes and approval of eligible containers to operate more efficiently.

Cost recovery for Waste to Energy scheme

The Bill amends the Circular Economy Act to allow for periodic, recurring fees to be charged to waste to energy licence holders. The frequency and quantum of the fees will be set through subsequent regulations. Under the current framework, RV can charge one-off licence application and amendment fees, but no recurring fees that would cover the ongoing costs of the regulator’s monitoring, compliance and enforcement activities for the waste to energy scheme. Without an ongoing fee, the Victorian Government would need to fund these regulatory functions on an ongoing basis.

Creating an ongoing fee is consistent with the Victorian Government’s Pricing for Value principles, which support cost recovery for the provision of regulatory services to the extent that cost recovery supports efficiency, equity and fiscal sustainability.

Recycling Victoria Fund

To ensure RV can recover costs and fund its operations promptly and efficiently, the Bill establishes a Recycling Victoria Fund, which will include Special Purpose Operating Accounts for CDS Vic and the waste to energy scheme. Without these amendments, any fees paid to RV through CDS Vic and waste to energy scheme must go to the State’s consolidated revenue and RV would need to seek funding through annual State budget processes to recover its CDS and waste to energy related costs.

A dedicated account for CDS Vic will provide a transparent and accountable mechanism to demonstrate that funds collected from scheme participants are only used to recover the State’s costs in administering and overseeing the scheme.

This is important for extended producer responsibility schemes, such as CDS Vic, which is intended to function as a closed financial loop. The beverage industry participants funding the scheme will expect the industry contributions to be directed solely to the scheme. Creating a dedicated account for this purpose will assure the industry that the funds are being managed and used in line with their expectations.

Similarly, a dedicated waste to energy account will enable RV to recover costs promptly and transparently show that fees recovered are directed and limited to the costs of administering the scheme. The account will hold funds from fees to be paid by licence holders in the Circular Economy Act, such as fees for processing licence applications and periodic fees.

Enabling variable fees to be set

The Bill includes amendments to enable regulations to set variable fees for determining applications made or submissions received under the Circular Economy Act. Variable fees may be set based on, for example, the amount of time taken to determine an application.

The amendments are based on similar powers in the Environment Protection Act.

Amendments to the Environment Protection Act

In addition to the Circular Economy reforms above, the Bill will introduce the following amendments to the Environment Protection Act to ensure the Act operates as intended.

The Bill amends the Act to provide that the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) is not required to automatically release a financial assurance when property or a permission is no longer held, or a notice or order no longer applies to the person who provided the assurance, following a liquidator’s disclaimer or other event, if environmental and financial risks still exist. This power is appropriately tempered and will protect the EPA, the State and Victorian taxpayers from bearing clean-up costs where remediation is still needed. The Bill will also amend the Act to clarify that liquidators cannot be held personally liable for site clean-up costs incurred by the EPA in relation to appointments relating to contaminated land.

The Bill will ensure that recipients of remedial notices can recover costs from polluters in all circumstances for which a notice can be issued. At present, a person issued with an environmental action notice, or site management order by the EPA cannot recover any costs from a person who caused the pollution except in the case of contaminated land. This does not support the ‘polluter pays’ principle specified in the Environment Protection Act.

The Bill will amend the Act to ensure the EPA can delegate its powers or functions conferred under other Acts. The Act currently does not provide for delegation of powers or functions conferred on the EPA under any Act, in contrast to the now repealed Environment Protection Act 1970. The need for the EPA Board to approve each time a power or function is exercised under other Acts is inefficient and inconsistent with the EPA’s governance model, where the Board only oversees decision-making.

The Bill will ensure that Game Management Authority (GMA) appointed authorised officers are litter enforcement officers under the Environment Protection Act and can take action to address any littering they encounter. GMA authorised officers regularly encounter litter but cannot take action without authorisation under the Environment Protection Act as litter enforcement officers.

The Bill will ensure that Protective Services Officers, who are members of the Victoria Police and already have powers under the Environment Protection Act as litter enforcement officers, also have the power to submit reports on noisy vehicles. This will significantly bolster the reporting of noisy vehicles to the EPA by regulatory authorities, thereby reducing the adverse impact of noisy vehicles on the community.

The Bill will ensure that the EPA can issue a notice in writing requiring a person to present a vehicle for inspection at a specified time and place, which will enhance the EPA’s capacity for effective regulation. The proposed amendment will include safeguards to ensure compliance with the new requirement is not unreasonable or onerous.

The Bill will empower the EPA to charge interest for late payment of fees under the Environment Protection Act. Currently, the EPA does not have the power to charge interest for late payment of fees such as annual fees for operating licences. This results in little incentive for licence holders to pay annual fees on time. As a result, the State is financially disadvantaged where licence holders are late in paying fees.

Finally, the Bill will make minor amendments to address unintended drafting errors, including consequential amendments following the making of the Environment Legislation Amendment Act 2022.

Conclusion

The introduction of CDS Vic on 1 November marks a key milestone in the government’s commitment to major transformational reform of the waste and recycling sector, built on community and industry consultation over many years.

The successful implementation of these reforms will not only support CDS Vic but also enhance the capabilities of RV as it works alongside stakeholders and the community to transition Victoria towards a circular economy.

I commend the Bill to the house.

James NEWBURY (Brighton) (11:15): I move:

That the debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned for two weeks. Debate adjourned until Wednesday 1 November.