Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

As I have indicated to Senator Colbeck several times in this debate, the EPBC Act is not worth the paper it is written on, because it relies entirely on the discretion of the minister. Senator Colbeck would know as well as I do that it requires that the oil companies refer a matter to the minister under the EPBC Act. The minister then decides whether it is a controlled action that he or she needs to consider. Then, if it is a controlled action, the minister decides the action that needs to be taken. On every single occasion the position of the developer has been upheld, with the one exception where the courts intervened in Queensland on the bats case in relation to the wet tropics. On every other occasion the developers have won out. So please do not cite the EPBC Act as some sort of guarantee for the marine environment, because it has not been to date and it certainly will not be under this legislation.

Also, I understood you to say a moment ago—and I want clarity on this—that the Department of the Environment and Heritage virtually has a veto. I want to know whether, in this legislation, it is specifically stated anywhere that the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, the Department of the Environment and Heritage, the National Oceans Office or the minister responsible for the National Oceans Office has a veto. Is it specifically stated anywhere that they have a veto over the release of new acreage?