Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I asked a question in our discussion of this legislation on 1 December about the line of argument that if we make climate change a trigger, the minister will have to say no. I asked:

Does that mean that we can expect him to say no from now on to all the other actions that are considered under the current triggers?

I was interested in whether the minister’s opposition to the climate change trigger meant that he would have to say no to a whole lot of coalmining proposals and whether that in fact extended to other developments—for example, on Christmas Island. He did not answer the question. In fact, he turned it around to ask the ALP. I am quite happy to ask the ALP that question at some stage in the future, but I actually wanted to know what the government thought about it. I also wanted to find out whether that means that the answer on anything related to matters of national environmental significance will be no. And, specifically, I ask: does that mean the minister will be saying no to mining on Christmas Island?