Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Biden Hired a Hell of a Lot of People Who Look Nothing Like Him

News Feed
Wednesday, September 4, 2024

From the moment, a month ago, that Kamala Harris became the Democrats’ presumptive nominee for president, she has been derided by Republicans as a “DEI hire” and “DEI vice president.” Besides being willfully ignorant of what DEI actually is and how it works, this an obviously racist attempt to demean a barrier-breaking Black woman. The absurd implication is that President Biden only chose Harris as his running mate in 2020 because of her race and gender—rather than, say, her impressive experience as San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, or U.S. senator. But there is an accidental truth buried in this GOP lunacy that Democrats ought to celebrate. Harris does owe her historic status as the first female, non-white major-party presidential nominee in part to the old white man who selected her as his vice president and then, in ending his campaign precisely when he did this summer, paved the way for her to assume the top of the ticket. And while she’s the most high-profile example, Harris is just one of a long list of women and people of color whom Biden has put into positions of authority in the executive and judicial branches. In fact, somewhat under the radar, Biden has appointed what experts say is the most diverse high-ranking administration and judiciary in history. This may be his most enduring legacy—and he was able to accomplish it in part because he’s a white man, which neutralizes the right’s favorite racist dog whistles. Harris won’t be so lucky. Today, two-thirds of Biden’s 15-member Cabinet are non-white or female; if you include the acting secretaries of labor as well as housing and urban development, the Cabinet is majority-women. Nearly two-thirds of Biden’s confirmed, lifetime judicial appointees are women, according to tallies by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and nearly two-thirds are people of color—judges and justices who will have an impact long after Biden leaves office.There are also numerous firsts: Biden appointed the first Muslim woman to a federal court and the first Native Hawaiian woman ever to serve as a lifetime judge. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland is the first Native American to serve as a Cabinet secretary. Karine Jean-Pierre is the first Black female White House press secretary. And, most prominently, Ketanji Brown Jackson is the first Black female Supreme Court justice.Previous Democratic presidents have pledged to appoint a Cabinet and senior staff that look like America. But Biden actually delivered.“What he has done is historic. What he has done is unprecedented,” civil rights leader Ralph Neas, former director of the Leadership Conference, told me. “Joe Biden has literally changed the face of the federal government’s leadership. Such achievements have been talked about for decades. But Joe Biden was the one who did it.” While Biden’s hiring accomplishments haven’t gotten much attention, they are very much by design, says Jessica Fulton, vice president of policy for the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. The Biden-Harris transition team in 2020—for which Fulton volunteered—set very public goals for hiring a team that was diverse in every way, not just their race, gender, or ethnicity, she told me. (Notably, more than 40 percent of Biden’s confirmed, lifetime judicial nominees have been people with experience as public defenders or civil rights advocates, the Leadership Conference said.) And then the Biden administration partnered with organizations and initiatives committed to diversity to help identify qualified candidates who otherwise might not be on the administration’s radar screen, she said. It’s not about racking up diversity statistics for its own sake; it’s about bringing a different perspective to roles that affect marginalized communities, Fulton noted. Having Cecelia Rouse, who was, from 2021 to 2023, the first Black woman to chair the Council of Economic Advisers in its 75-year history, or Shalanda Young, the first Black woman to head the Office of Management and Budget, provides a minority experience to jobs more often held by white males. Ditto Reta Jo Lewis, the first Black woman and person of color to head the Export-Import Bank, and Michael S. Regan, the first Black man to head the Environmental Protection Agency. Biden is even outpacing Barack Obama’s two-term record on diversity in the Cabinet and courts: Obama successfully appointed 16 women to Cabinet or sub-Cabinet positions during his eight years while Biden has successfully appointed 13 in less than one term, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. A then-record 42 percent of Obama’s judicial picks were women, according to a Pew Research Center analysis, less than Biden’s majority-female slate of court picks. Pew calculated that 36 percent of all of Obama’s judicial appointees were non-white; a Washington Post analysis in May shows the reverse for Biden: 36 percent of his overall judicial selections are white.And of course, it was Biden who made the historic pick of Jackson to the high court. It was something civil rights advocates had hoped Obama would do but understood why it would have been risky (and he did pick two women, one of whom is the first Latina on the court). While the American public elected a man who could bring his own Black experience to the job, they didn’t always want to hear it. Witness what happened when Obama had the nerve to express his personal reaction to Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, the late Black Harvard professor, being arrested by local police after he entered his own home (a neighbor had reported a possible burglary). Obama said the Cambridge police “acted stupidly,” rightly noting that “you probably don’t need to handcuff a guy, a middle-aged man who uses a cane, who’s in his own home”—but the backlash was loud enough that he hosted an awkward “beer summit” at the White House with Gates and the arresting officer. “It’s hard for a person of color, who was a first, was a trailblazer, to make an appointment like that” to the Supreme Court, Montré Carodine, a University of Alabama School of Law professor, told me. “Biden has the privilege of not having to think about that.”One of the reasons Biden has not gotten much credit from the progressive community—or criticism from the right, except for endorsing Harris for the nomination—is that he is white and male.“There was always this expectation that Barack Obama [was] going to favor Black people,” said Christopher Stout, an Oregon State University professor and author of the book The Case for Identity Politics: Polarization, Demographic Change, and Racial Appeals. “All African American candidates have to be really careful in how they talk about race,” and definitely in how they put people of color in positions of power, he added. “Whites don’t have the same fear that [Biden] is going to favor African Americans, because he’s one of them.”In other words: If Harris wins the White House this fall, and then attempts to do Biden one better in the diversity of her appointments, rest assured that Republicans will be in hysterics over her “DEI” picks.

From the moment, a month ago, that Kamala Harris became the Democrats’ presumptive nominee for president, she has been derided by Republicans as a “DEI hire” and “DEI vice president.” Besides being willfully ignorant of what DEI actually is and how it works, this an obviously racist attempt to demean a barrier-breaking Black woman. The absurd implication is that President Biden only chose Harris as his running mate in 2020 because of her race and gender—rather than, say, her impressive experience as San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, or U.S. senator. But there is an accidental truth buried in this GOP lunacy that Democrats ought to celebrate. Harris does owe her historic status as the first female, non-white major-party presidential nominee in part to the old white man who selected her as his vice president and then, in ending his campaign precisely when he did this summer, paved the way for her to assume the top of the ticket. And while she’s the most high-profile example, Harris is just one of a long list of women and people of color whom Biden has put into positions of authority in the executive and judicial branches. In fact, somewhat under the radar, Biden has appointed what experts say is the most diverse high-ranking administration and judiciary in history. This may be his most enduring legacy—and he was able to accomplish it in part because he’s a white man, which neutralizes the right’s favorite racist dog whistles. Harris won’t be so lucky. Today, two-thirds of Biden’s 15-member Cabinet are non-white or female; if you include the acting secretaries of labor as well as housing and urban development, the Cabinet is majority-women. Nearly two-thirds of Biden’s confirmed, lifetime judicial appointees are women, according to tallies by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and nearly two-thirds are people of color—judges and justices who will have an impact long after Biden leaves office.There are also numerous firsts: Biden appointed the first Muslim woman to a federal court and the first Native Hawaiian woman ever to serve as a lifetime judge. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland is the first Native American to serve as a Cabinet secretary. Karine Jean-Pierre is the first Black female White House press secretary. And, most prominently, Ketanji Brown Jackson is the first Black female Supreme Court justice.Previous Democratic presidents have pledged to appoint a Cabinet and senior staff that look like America. But Biden actually delivered.“What he has done is historic. What he has done is unprecedented,” civil rights leader Ralph Neas, former director of the Leadership Conference, told me. “Joe Biden has literally changed the face of the federal government’s leadership. Such achievements have been talked about for decades. But Joe Biden was the one who did it.” While Biden’s hiring accomplishments haven’t gotten much attention, they are very much by design, says Jessica Fulton, vice president of policy for the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. The Biden-Harris transition team in 2020—for which Fulton volunteered—set very public goals for hiring a team that was diverse in every way, not just their race, gender, or ethnicity, she told me. (Notably, more than 40 percent of Biden’s confirmed, lifetime judicial nominees have been people with experience as public defenders or civil rights advocates, the Leadership Conference said.) And then the Biden administration partnered with organizations and initiatives committed to diversity to help identify qualified candidates who otherwise might not be on the administration’s radar screen, she said. It’s not about racking up diversity statistics for its own sake; it’s about bringing a different perspective to roles that affect marginalized communities, Fulton noted. Having Cecelia Rouse, who was, from 2021 to 2023, the first Black woman to chair the Council of Economic Advisers in its 75-year history, or Shalanda Young, the first Black woman to head the Office of Management and Budget, provides a minority experience to jobs more often held by white males. Ditto Reta Jo Lewis, the first Black woman and person of color to head the Export-Import Bank, and Michael S. Regan, the first Black man to head the Environmental Protection Agency. Biden is even outpacing Barack Obama’s two-term record on diversity in the Cabinet and courts: Obama successfully appointed 16 women to Cabinet or sub-Cabinet positions during his eight years while Biden has successfully appointed 13 in less than one term, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. A then-record 42 percent of Obama’s judicial picks were women, according to a Pew Research Center analysis, less than Biden’s majority-female slate of court picks. Pew calculated that 36 percent of all of Obama’s judicial appointees were non-white; a Washington Post analysis in May shows the reverse for Biden: 36 percent of his overall judicial selections are white.And of course, it was Biden who made the historic pick of Jackson to the high court. It was something civil rights advocates had hoped Obama would do but understood why it would have been risky (and he did pick two women, one of whom is the first Latina on the court). While the American public elected a man who could bring his own Black experience to the job, they didn’t always want to hear it. Witness what happened when Obama had the nerve to express his personal reaction to Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, the late Black Harvard professor, being arrested by local police after he entered his own home (a neighbor had reported a possible burglary). Obama said the Cambridge police “acted stupidly,” rightly noting that “you probably don’t need to handcuff a guy, a middle-aged man who uses a cane, who’s in his own home”—but the backlash was loud enough that he hosted an awkward “beer summit” at the White House with Gates and the arresting officer. “It’s hard for a person of color, who was a first, was a trailblazer, to make an appointment like that” to the Supreme Court, Montré Carodine, a University of Alabama School of Law professor, told me. “Biden has the privilege of not having to think about that.”One of the reasons Biden has not gotten much credit from the progressive community—or criticism from the right, except for endorsing Harris for the nomination—is that he is white and male.“There was always this expectation that Barack Obama [was] going to favor Black people,” said Christopher Stout, an Oregon State University professor and author of the book The Case for Identity Politics: Polarization, Demographic Change, and Racial Appeals. “All African American candidates have to be really careful in how they talk about race,” and definitely in how they put people of color in positions of power, he added. “Whites don’t have the same fear that [Biden] is going to favor African Americans, because he’s one of them.”In other words: If Harris wins the White House this fall, and then attempts to do Biden one better in the diversity of her appointments, rest assured that Republicans will be in hysterics over her “DEI” picks.

From the moment, a month ago, that Kamala Harris became the Democrats’ presumptive nominee for president, she has been derided by Republicans as a “DEI hire” and “DEI vice president.” Besides being willfully ignorant of what DEI actually is and how it works, this an obviously racist attempt to demean a barrier-breaking Black woman. The absurd implication is that President Biden only chose Harris as his running mate in 2020 because of her race and gender—rather than, say, her impressive experience as San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, or U.S. senator.

But there is an accidental truth buried in this GOP lunacy that Democrats ought to celebrate. Harris does owe her historic status as the first female, non-white major-party presidential nominee in part to the old white man who selected her as his vice president and then, in ending his campaign precisely when he did this summer, paved the way for her to assume the top of the ticket. And while she’s the most high-profile example, Harris is just one of a long list of women and people of color whom Biden has put into positions of authority in the executive and judicial branches.

In fact, somewhat under the radar, Biden has appointed what experts say is the most diverse high-ranking administration and judiciary in history. This may be his most enduring legacy—and he was able to accomplish it in part because he’s a white man, which neutralizes the right’s favorite racist dog whistles. Harris won’t be so lucky.

Today, two-thirds of Biden’s 15-member Cabinet are non-white or female; if you include the acting secretaries of labor as well as housing and urban development, the Cabinet is majority-women. Nearly two-thirds of Biden’s confirmed, lifetime judicial appointees are women, according to tallies by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and nearly two-thirds are people of color—judges and justices who will have an impact long after Biden leaves office.

There are also numerous firsts: Biden appointed the first Muslim woman to a federal court and the first Native Hawaiian woman ever to serve as a lifetime judge. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland is the first Native American to serve as a Cabinet secretary. Karine Jean-Pierre is the first Black female White House press secretary. And, most prominently, Ketanji Brown Jackson is the first Black female Supreme Court justice.

Previous Democratic presidents have pledged to appoint a Cabinet and senior staff that look like America. But Biden actually delivered.

“What he has done is historic. What he has done is unprecedented,” civil rights leader Ralph Neas, former director of the Leadership Conference, told me. “Joe Biden has literally changed the face of the federal government’s leadership. Such achievements have been talked about for decades. But Joe Biden was the one who did it.”

While Biden’s hiring accomplishments haven’t gotten much attention, they are very much by design, says Jessica Fulton, vice president of policy for the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. The Biden-Harris transition team in 2020—for which Fulton volunteered—set very public goals for hiring a team that was diverse in every way, not just their race, gender, or ethnicity, she told me. (Notably, more than 40 percent of Biden’s confirmed, lifetime judicial nominees have been people with experience as public defenders or civil rights advocates, the Leadership Conference said.) And then the Biden administration partnered with organizations and initiatives committed to diversity to help identify qualified candidates who otherwise might not be on the administration’s radar screen, she said.

It’s not about racking up diversity statistics for its own sake; it’s about bringing a different perspective to roles that affect marginalized communities, Fulton noted. Having Cecelia Rouse, who was, from 2021 to 2023, the first Black woman to chair the Council of Economic Advisers in its 75-year history, or Shalanda Young, the first Black woman to head the Office of Management and Budget, provides a minority experience to jobs more often held by white males. Ditto Reta Jo Lewis, the first Black woman and person of color to head the Export-Import Bank, and Michael S. Regan, the first Black man to head the Environmental Protection Agency.

Biden is even outpacing Barack Obama’s two-term record on diversity in the Cabinet and courts: Obama successfully appointed 16 women to Cabinet or sub-Cabinet positions during his eight years while Biden has successfully appointed 13 in less than one term, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. A then-record 42 percent of Obama’s judicial picks were women, according to a Pew Research Center analysis, less than Biden’s majority-female slate of court picks. Pew calculated that 36 percent of all of Obama’s judicial appointees were non-white; a Washington Post analysis in May shows the reverse for Biden: 36 percent of his overall judicial selections are white.

And of course, it was Biden who made the historic pick of Jackson to the high court. It was something civil rights advocates had hoped Obama would do but understood why it would have been risky (and he did pick two women, one of whom is the first Latina on the court). While the American public elected a man who could bring his own Black experience to the job, they didn’t always want to hear it. Witness what happened when Obama had the nerve to express his personal reaction to Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, the late Black Harvard professor, being arrested by local police after he entered his own home (a neighbor had reported a possible burglary). Obama said the Cambridge police “acted stupidly,” rightly noting that “you probably don’t need to handcuff a guy, a middle-aged man who uses a cane, who’s in his own home”—but the backlash was loud enough that he hosted an awkward “beer summit” at the White House with Gates and the arresting officer.

“It’s hard for a person of color, who was a first, was a trailblazer, to make an appointment like that” to the Supreme Court, Montré Carodine, a University of Alabama School of Law professor, told me. “Biden has the privilege of not having to think about that.”

One of the reasons Biden has not gotten much credit from the progressive community—or criticism from the right, except for endorsing Harris for the nomination—is that he is white and male.

“There was always this expectation that Barack Obama [was] going to favor Black people,” said Christopher Stout, an Oregon State University professor and author of the book The Case for Identity Politics: Polarization, Demographic Change, and Racial Appeals. “All African American candidates have to be really careful in how they talk about race,” and definitely in how they put people of color in positions of power, he added. “Whites don’t have the same fear that [Biden] is going to favor African Americans, because he’s one of them.”

In other words: If Harris wins the White House this fall, and then attempts to do Biden one better in the diversity of her appointments, rest assured that Republicans will be in hysterics over her “DEI” picks.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Greens promise to force government to spend 1% of budget on environment if they hold balance of power

The minor party makes pledge as Labor faces calls to explain its nature policy and plans for a federal EPAElection 2025 live updates: Australia federal election campaignPolls tracker; election guide; full federal election coverageAnywhere but Canberra; interactive electorates guideListen to the first episode of our new narrative podcast series: GinaGet our afternoon election email, free app or daily news podcastThe Greens have promised to push the government to boost environment spending to $7.8bn – 1% of the federal budget – next financial year if they hold the balance of power after the election.The minor party made the pledge as Labor faced calls to explain its nature policy after Anthony Albanese promised he would establish a federal environment protection agency (EPA) if re-elected. The prime minister said it would not be the “same model” as one his government abandoned in this term of parliament after a backlash from Western Australia, but released no details.Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter Continue reading...

The Greens have promised to push the government to boost environment spending to $7.8bn – 1% of the federal budget – next financial year if they hold the balance of power after the election.The minor party made the pledge as Labor faced calls to explain its nature policy after Anthony Albanese promised he would establish a federal environment protection agency (EPA) if re-elected. The prime minister said it would not be the “same model” as one his government abandoned in this term of parliament after a backlash from Western Australia, but released no details.The Greens leader, Adam Bandt, said Labor had broken a promise to protect the environment and Peter Dutton “doesn’t even pretend to care”. Bandt said his party’s position was in line with expert calls for a large increase in spending on nature protection to prevent species going extinct and help halt a documented decline in environmental health across the country.Voting 101: The Australian election has been called, here’s what that means for you - videoThe Greens plan included $7.8bn funding in 2025-26 and an additional $17bn over the following three years. If delivered, the commitment would at least double government spending on nature, according to analysis by the Parliamentary Library.The party said the commitments should be paid for by increasing taxes on “big corporations and billionaires” – similarly to its other major platforms, such as adding dental to Medicare.Bandt said “far more public money is spent subsidising [nature] destruction than protection” and the Greens were “the only party with a comprehensive plan to address the biodiversity crisis”.“In a minority parliament, the Greens will keep Peter Dutton out and get Labor to act to protect and restore our precious natural environment,” he said.Australia has more than 2,200 native species and ecosystems listed as threatened with extinction. Scientists and conservationists have described it as a world leader in mammal extinction, and a global deforestation hotspot.Labor promised to revamp the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act – which has been widely criticised as failing business and the environment – and create an EPA in this term, but neither commitment was delivered.Last week it was accused of weakening nature laws after it joined with the Coalition to amend the EPBC Act to protect salmon farming in Tasmania’s Macquarie Harbour. The amendment was welcomed by the salmon industry, unions and the Tasmanian Liberal state government.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionAlbanese this week said a returned Labor government would consult the states and industry and conservation groups on new laws and a different EPA model. He said the final legislation would offer “certainty for industry … but also provides for sustainability”.The director of the Biodiversity Council, James Trezise, said the prime minister had not included any detail “beyond a loose commitment to further consultation”. He said the point of an independent EPA was “to deal with the influence of vested interests in decision making”, but that this seemed a “moot point” as vested interests “appear to have the ear of the PM, whether it’s around salmon farming in Tasmania or the design of a new environmental regulator”.Trezise said Labor should again back the recommendations of a review of the EPBC Act led by the former competition and consumer watchdog Graeme Samuel, particularly his call for the establishment of national environmental standards against which development proposals could be measured.Trezise said while Labor was yet to provide detail of what it would do, the Coalition had “so far presented no clear plan for the law reform or the environment, beyond slashing the public service in Canberra”.The Greens environmental policy wishlist includes reforming nature laws, banning native logging, spending $20bn on biodiversity restoration over the next decade and dedicating $5bn over four years to a new “protected areas fund”.

Australians want nature protected. These 3 environmental problems should be top of the next government’s to-do list

Three experts consider what’s required to protect and conserve Australia’s natural wonders, from fighting invaders to stopping habitat loss and saving species.

Christina ZdenekAustralia is a place of great natural beauty, home to many species found nowhere else on Earth. But it’s also particularly vulnerable to introduced animals, diseases and weeds. Habitat destruction, pollution and climate change make matters worse. To conserve what’s special, we need far greater care. Unfortunately, successive federal governments have failed to protect nature. Australia now has more than 2,000 threatened species and “ecological communities” – groups of native species that live together and interact. This threatened list is growing at an alarming rate. The Albanese government came to power in 2022 promising to reform the nation’s nature laws, following a scathing review of the laws. But it has failed to do so. If re-elected, Labor has vowed to complete its reforms and introduce a federal Environment Protection Agency, in some other form. The Coalition has not made such a commitment. Instead, it refers to “genuine conservation”, balancing the environment and the economy. They’ve also promised to cut “green tape” for industry. But scientific evidence suggests much more is required to protect Australia’s natural wonders. Fighting invaders Labor has made a welcome commitment of more than A$100 million to counter “highly pathogenic avian influenza”. This virulent strain of bird flu is likely to kill millions of native birds and other wildlife. The government also provided much-needed funding for a network of safe havens for threatened mammals. These safe-havens exclude cats, foxes and other invasive species. But much more needs to be done. Funding is urgently needed to eradicate red imported fire ants, before eradication becomes impossible. Other election commitments to look for include: increased biosecurity funding, to prevent new incursions long-term investment in eradicating major pests and weeds from key sites support for research into new tools to control invasive species such as feral cats, for which no broad-scale solution is currently possible no reversal or weakening of policies aimed at curbing invasive pests such as feral horses in national parks new laws to ensure threat abatement plans must be implemented adequate funds to manage invasive species across the expanded protected areas system to meet the key global commitment to nature conservation national coordination and leadership to stop the indiscriminate use of poisons that can spread through ecosystems and food-chains, killing non-target animals such as owls, quolls, Tasmanian devils, reptiles and frogs. Stopping land clearing and habitat destruction The states are largely responsible for controlling land clearing. But when land clearing affects “matters of national environmental significance” such as a nationally listed threatened species or ecological community, it becomes a federal matter. Such proposals are supposed to be referred to the federal environment minister for assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. But most habitat destruction is never referred. And if it is, it’s mostly deemed “not a controlled action”. That means no further consideration is required and the development can proceed. Only about 1.5% of the hundreds of thousands of hectares of land cleared in Australia every year is fully assessed under the EPBC Act. This means our threatened species and ecological communities are suffering a “death by a thousand cuts”. How do we fix this? A starting point is to introduce “national environmental standards” of the kind envisaged in the 2020 review of the EPBC Act by Professor Graeme Samuel. A strong Environment Protection Agency could ensure impacts on biodiversity are appropriately assessed and accounted for. Habitat destruction at Lee Point, Darwin. Martine Maron Protecting threatened species For Australia to turn around its extinction crisis, prospective elected representatives and governments must firmly commit to the following actions. Stronger environmental law and enforcement is essential for tackling biodiveristy decline and extinction. This should include what’s known as a “climate trigger”, which means any proposal likely to produce a significant amount of greenhouse gases would have to be assessed under the EPBC Act. This is necessary because climate change is among the greatest threats to biodiversity. But the federal environment minister is currently not legally bound to consider – or authorised to refuse – project proposals based on their greenhouse gas emissions. In an attempt to pass the EPBC reforms in the Senate last year, the Greens agreed to postpone their demand for a climate trigger. Key threats to species, including habitat destruction, invasive species, climate change, and pollution, must be prevented or reduced. Aligning government policies and priorities to ensure environmental goals aren’t undermined by economic and development interests is essential. A large increase in environmental spending – to at least 1% of the federal budget – is vital. It would ensure sufficient support for conservation progress and meeting legal requirements of the EPBC Act, including listing threatened species and designing and implementing recovery plans when required. Show nature the money! Neither major party has committed to substantial increases in environmental spending in line with what experts suggest is urgently needed. Without such increased investment Australia’s conservation record will almost certainly continue to deteriorate. The loss of nature hurts us all. For example, most invasive species not only affect biodiversity; they have major economic costs to productivity. Whoever forms Australia’s next government, we urge elected leaders to act on the wishes of 96% of surveyed Australians calling for more action to conserve nature. Read more: Protecting salmon farming at the expense of the environment – another step backwards for Australia’s nature laws Euan Ritchie receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Department of Energy, Environment, and Climate Action. Euan is a Councillor within the Biodiversity Council, a member of the Ecological Society of Australia and the Australian Mammal Society, and President of the Australian Mammal Society.John Woinarski is a Professor at Charles Darwin University, a director of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy, co-chair of the IUCN Australasian Marsupials and Monotremes Specialist group, a councillor with the Biodiversity Council, and a member of the science advisory committee of Zoos Victoria and Invertebrates Australia. He has received funding from the Australian government to contribute to the management of feral cats and foxes.Martine Maron has received funding from various sources including the Australian Research Council, the Queensland Department of Environment and Science, and the federal government's National Environmental Science Program, and has advised both state and federal government on conservation policy. She is a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, a director of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy, a councillor with the Biodiversity Council, and leads the IUCN's thematic group on Impact Mitigation and Ecological Compensation under the Commission on Ecosystem Management.

Why does Leonardo DiCaprio care so much about Australian wildlife?

The actor was an unlikely ally in this week’s fiery debate over an endangered fish – and is, an insider confirms, ‘very engaged’See all our Australian election 2025 coverageGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastWhen a fiery parliament debate erupted this week about Tasmania’s salmon industry, support for the endangered fish at the centre of the fight – the Maugean skate – came from an unlikely corner.Hours before the Albanese government’s controversial legislation to protect fish farming in the state’s Macquarie Harbour passed on Wednesday, global star Leonardo DiCaprio weighed in.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email Continue reading...

When a fiery parliament debate erupted this week about Tasmania’s salmon industry, support for the endangered fish at the centre of the fight – the Maugean skate – came from an unlikely corner.Hours before the Albanese government’s controversial legislation to protect fish farming in the state’s Macquarie Harbour passed on Wednesday, global star Leonardo DiCaprio weighed in.“URGENT: This week the Australian government will decide the fate of Macquarie Harbour and has an opportunity to shut down destructive industrial non-native salmon farms, protecting the Maugean Skate,” he wrote in a post to his 60.4m Instagram followers.The shallow estuary off Tasmania’s coast was one of the most important places in the world, DiCaprio said, and “essential for the planet’s overall health and the persistence of biodiversity”.The actor regularly uses his platform to post about conservation concerns in many places around the world – and it’s not the first time he has highlighted the plight of Australia’s threatened species.Earlier this month, he warned clearing in Western Australia’s jarrah forests for bauxite mining, approved by the federal government, would affect species including the endangered woylie and the red-tailed black cockatoo.He has repeatedly raised awareness of threats to koalas, and last year, called on the Australian government to end native forest logging to protect the breeding habitat of the critically endangered swift parrot in Tasmania.He also drew attention to Guardian Australia reporting on land clearing in Queensland, writing in a post: “Australia has the highest rate of mammalian extinctions in the world … The only way to protect the hundreds of threatened Australian forest species is to end native forest logging.”But how involved is the actor and conservationist in the decision to post on these topics to his personal profile?More than people might expect, according to scientist Janice Chanson, the Australasian manager of Re:wild, the conservation organisation co-founded by DiCaprio.“He does 100% have the say on whether the post goes up,” Chanson said. “He is very engaged and he is very informed.”Re:wild, which works on conservation projects around the world, was founded in 2021 when Global Wildlife Conservation, a scientist-led environment organisation based in the United States, merged with the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation.DiCaprio sits on Re:wild’s board, whose membership includes Razan Al Mubarak, the current president of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). According to Chanson, DiCaprio “speaks to our CEO on a daily basis” and has attended many field trips.Re:wild has staff based in Australia, where it partners with other conservation organisations to support the creation of protected areas, land restoration and species recovery.The organisation regularly creates social media posts on local issues, which a US-based communications team passes on to DiCaprio “to choose if he wants to engage on that particular topic”, Chanson said.She said Re:wild’s Australian work focuses on two goals: ending native forest logging and helping Australia meet its commitment to zero new extinctions.“The Maugean skate is very much at the forefront of the zero extinction target,” she said.“Australia has made that commitment. We’re here to help Australia meet that commitment. Unfortunately what’s happening to the Maugean skate is flying in the face of that.”skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionBaby skates on verge of extinction in Tasmania hatched by scientists – videoFor months, Re:wild had been working to have the skate’s Macquarie Harbour habitat declared a key biodiversity area, a global program that supports identification and conservation of the world’s most important places for species habitats.It had posts prepared for a potential announcement. Then on 20 March, news broke that the Labor government planned to rush through legislation to protect salmon farming in the harbour, which threatens the skate’s survival, in the final week of parliament.Chanson said Re:wild decided to bring its posts forward, publishing an urgent message on its own Instagram account, and the communications team asked DiCaprio if he would share it on his own page.“The urgency came when we stressed it’s in parliament right now,” she said. She only realised he had acted on the request “15 minutes after he had posted”.The federal government has faced criticism during this term for delays to promised environmental law reforms that a statutory review five years ago found were necessary in response to the failure by successive governments to protect Australia’s unique wildlife and habitats.During debate over the Tasmanian legislation, Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young waved a dead salmon in the Senate, accusing the government of selling out its environmental credentials for “rotten, stinking extinction salmon” on the cusp of an election.Wrapped in plastic: Sarah Hanson-Young waves a dead salmon in Senate – videoThe passing of the bill drew condemnation from environment groups and prompted dismay from the Labor Environment Action Network.As the federal election was formally called on Friday, former Greens leader Bob Brown said the environment had become “the sleeper election issue, awakened by this week’s uproar in parliament”.“By ramming through protection for the polluting Atlantic salmon companies in Tasmania, both [Anthony] Albanese and [Peter] Dutton have catapulted the environment back into the headlines,” he said.

Labor’s grassroots environmental group dismayed by rushed bill protecting salmon industry

The Labor Environment Action Network says it won’t ‘sugar coat’ its reaction after working ‘so hard’ on obtaining commitment for EPAGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastLabor’s grassroots environment action network has told its members it does not support legislation that Anthony Albanese rushed through parliament this week to protect salmon farming in Tasmania, describing it as “frustrating and disappointing”.In an email on Thursday, the Labor Environment Action Network (Lean) said it would not “sugar coat” its reaction to a bill that was introduced to end a formal government reconsideration of whether an expansion of fish farming in Macquarie Harbour, on the state’s west coast, in 2012 was properly approved.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email Continue reading...

Labor’s grassroots environment action network has told its members it does not support legislation that Anthony Albanese rushed through parliament this week to protect salmon farming in Tasmania, describing it as “frustrating and disappointing”.In an email on Thursday, the Labor Environment Action Network (Lean) said it would not “sugar coat” its reaction to a bill that was introduced to end a formal government reconsideration of whether an expansion of fish farming in Macquarie Harbour, on the state’s west coast, in 2012 was properly approved.Albanese had promised the amendment to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act to protect salmon industry laws in the remote town of Strahan after internal warnings the issue was damaging Labor’s electoral chances in the Tasmanian seat of Braddon, a seat the Liberal party holds on an 8% margin.An environment department opinion released under freedom of information laws had suggested the reconsideration could lead to salmon farming having to stop in the harbour, while an environmental impact statement was prepared.Lean’s national campaign organiser, Louise Crawford, told the group’s members the passage of the bill with bipartisan support on Wednesday night was “not an outcome we support”.“It is one of those incredibly frustrating and disappointing moments as a Lean member,” she said in an email seen by Guardian Australia. “We have all worked so hard on getting the commitment for an EPA [Environment Protection Agency] and environment law reform for such a long time when no other party was talking about it nor interested in it.”The reconsideration of the Macquarie Harbour decision had been triggered in 2023 by a legal request from three environmentally focused organisations to the environment minister, Tanya Plibersek. The request highlighted concern about the impact of salmon farming on the endangered Maugean skate, an ancient ray-like fish species found only in Macquarie Harbour.A Maugean skate in Macquarie Harbour. The species is listed as endangered. Photograph: Jane RuckertThe new legislation prevents ministerial reconsideration requests in cases in which a federal environment assessment had not been required and the development had been operating for more than five years. It was welcomed by the Tasmanian Liberal government, the Australian Workers’ Union and the West Coast Council that covers Strahan and surrounding areas.The government has dismissed conservationists’ and environment lawyers’ concerns that this meant it could be broadly applied beyond salmon farming in Macquarie Harbour, arguing it was “a very specific amendment” to address a flaw in the EPBC Act and that “existing laws apply to everything else, including all new proposals for coal, gas, and land clearing”.Crawford said Lean believed it was a “tight set of criteria” that did not apply to most major projects, including coal and gas operations, or to most developments that involved significant land-clearing. But she said the advocacy group would have preferred a solution that allowed the salmon farming to continue while an assessment was carried out.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“We do not think activities should be immune from reconsideration if evidence shows they need to be given a federal environmental assessment,” she said. “This underlines the importance of completing the full environmental reform process, and to having an independent regulator.”Crawford urged members to “dig deep” and resolve to help Labor craft improved laws and an EPA in the next term of parliament “despite what happened this week”. She asked them to campaign for a group of pro-nature Labor MPs who Lean has named “climate and environment champs” – including Ged Kearney, Kate Thwaites, Josh Burns, Jerome Laxale, Sally Sitou, Alicia Payne and Josh Wilson – so that the environment “has strong voices in caucus and the parliament”.She noted Albanese had committed to reforming environment laws and creating a federal EPA in the next term after shelving both commitments in this term. “This is Labor policy so should be delivered no question. We will continue to work to deliver this. It’s time. It’s more than past time,” she said.The Maugean skate has been listed as endangered since 2004. Concern about its plight escalated last year when a government scientific committee said numbers in the wild were “extremely low” and fish farming in the harbour was the main cause of a substantial reduction in dissolved oxygen levels – the main threat to the skate’s survival.The committee said salmon farms in the harbour should be scaled back and recommended the species be considered critically endangered.A separate report by the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies last month said surveys suggested the skate population was likely to have recovered to 2014 levels after crashing last decade. It stressed the need for continued monitoring.The government announced $3m in the budget to expand a Maugean skate captive breeding program.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.