1. Establishing a federal environment protection agency

The legislation will deliver on Labor’s main environmental commitment to establish a national EPA.

The government says it will be operational by 1 July 2026. The new agency will be responsible for enforcing the law and imposing penalties for environmental breaches, which will be higher than they previously were for the most serious offences. The EPA will also have the power to issue stop-work orders of up to 14 days where breaches are suspected.

The environment minister will have the option to delegate their power to decide if a project should go ahead to the new EPA, or to make the decision themselves. A similar set-up is already in place, where the minister can personally make the decision or delegate it to the environment department. It stops short of making the new EPA an independent decision-making authority.

2. Creating national environmental standards

The legislation gives the environment minister the power to create national environmental standards, the key recommendation of a 2020 review of the EPBC Act.

A lot of the power of these new laws to genuinely deliver for the environment hinges on the strength of these standards. So far, the government has released two draft standards for consultation: one on matters of national environmental significance such as threatened species and another on biodiversity offsets. Others, including a standard on First Nations engagement, are “under development”. A Senate inquiry examining the legislation will continue into next year so the proposed standards can be scrutinised.

3. Introduction of ‘net gain’ and ‘unacceptable impacts’ tests

The new laws require developers to show the damage their projects cause to the environment is compensated for with actions resulting in overall environmental benefit: a “net gain”. Projects that have “unacceptable impacts” will be refused.

But the devil will be in the detail here. In his Thursday press conference, the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, indicated concessions had been made to industry, noting that business called for a clearer definition of unacceptable impacts. Scientists and legal experts had also said the original definitions proposed were too vague.

The amended bills have tightened language to require that an unacceptable impact be certain to occur, rather than “likely”.

4. Ministerial discretion

Environment advocates and legal experts had expressed serious concern that the original legislation introduced to parliament gave the environment minister too much power to decide if developments went ahead, and what conditions were applied to protect threatened plants, animals and ecosystems.

Because of a key concession secured by the Greens, a widely criticised exemption that would allow the minister to approve a development in breach of nature laws if it was considered in the “national interest” cannot be applied to coal and gas projects.

But other concerns remain – in particular, that language saying the minister must only be “satisfied” a development complies with the law and meets certain environmental benchmarks has been retained throughout the legislation.

There is also a provision for the minister to make “rulings” about how standards or other elements of the act should be applied to particular proponents, actions or industries. Independent senator David Pocock and scientific experts including the Biodiversity Council have expressed serious concerns that this is an overreach.

5. Fast-tracked developments, state decisions

The new laws abolish some of the act’s old assessment methods and replace them with a streamlined 30-day project approval pathway. As above, the Greens secured agreement this pathway will not be applied to coal and gas projects. But it can be used for other projects that harm nature.

The government will also be able to transfer decision-making powers – about whether or not a development can proceed – to state and territory governments. This has been a major ask from industry. Under the deal with the Greens, there will be some limits on when and how these bilateral approval agreements can occur.

The government has agreed to retain responsibility for decisions under the federal water trigger and not delegate that power to states and territories.

6. Logging exemptions closed, land-clearing loophole restricted

Perhaps the biggest win from the deal is that the effective exemption from national laws granted to native forest logging operations covered by regional forest agreements will be removed in 18 months. Native forest logging operations will be subject to national standards, unacceptable impacts and net gain tests and will be monitored by the EPA.

The laws will also tighten an agricultural land-clearing loophole. Clearing of vegetation older than 15 years will no longer be exempt from assessment and approval under the EPBC Act. Additionally, any land-clearing within 50m of waterways in Great Barrier Reef catchments must be assessed.

7. Changes to the offset framework

Environmental offsets allow developers to compensate for damage they cause by restoring habitat for the same species or ecosystem elsewhere.

The government’s proposal to introduce a “restoration contributions fund” that developers could pay into, rather than finding and securing an offset themselves, has been retained. Guardian Australia understands there will be some restrictions on what species and “protected matters” can be offset through the fund, but details remain to be seen.

The new fund would also relax “like-for-like” rules that previously required offsets to deliver an environmental benefit for the same species or ecosystem affected by a development.