Australia’s Federal Government is facing mounting difficulties in advancing its proposed rewrite of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act after the centre-right Coalition formally declared it will not support the reforms.

The legislation, long heralded as a major update to the country’s nature-protection architecture, has encountered firm opposition from the Nationals and many Liberals, who frame the initiative as a threat to jobs and a “green ideology”.

The Government’s plan includes key elements such as a national Environment Protection Agency (EPA), new legally binding national environmental standards and a strengthened “net gain” requirement for developers.

Environment Minister Murray Watt has set a target to introduce the reform bill by November, however the Coalition’s announcement of opposition this week underlines the scale of the challenge.

The Greens, who were also briefed on the draft legislation, described it as “worse than the status quo”, pointing to the fact that fossil-fuel projects will continue to be assessed without a full climate-impact trigger.

They argue that the disclosed version of the reforms fails to meet the needs of biodiversity protection and environmental justice.

Business and mining-sector voices have expressed reservations too, warning that unclear regulatory settings could deter investment in critical minerals and renewable-energy projects.

These dynamics come at a moment when Australia has just signed a major critical-minerals partnership with the United States, and clarity in approvals is seen by industry as urgent.

With the Coalition out of alignment and the Greens unsatisfied, the Government must now decide whether to seek support from the crossbench or attempt a deal with its former adversaries.

The success of the reform may hinge on the final architecture of the EPA, the definition of “unacceptable impact” and how “net gain” is enforced.

Given the breadth of reform and the political stakes, achieving a path through the Senate this year remains uncertain.

The failure to deliver could leave Australia with decades-old laws at a time of accelerating biodiversity loss and environmental change.