Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Milne, for your comment. This amendment goes to the management of the interaction between the petrol industry and the greenhouse gas industry. The concerns that you have about long-term effects on both the environment and human health and safety are shared. I think they are shared by every person in this chamber. But this particular amendment goes to the interaction between those two entities in terms of sequestration.

When the minister is making his or her decision about closure, that is the point where your concerns will be dealt with—where any significant adverse impact on the environment or the community is covered. Division 8, ‘Long-term liabilities’, 249CZN, ‘Closure assurance period’, sections 1C (iii) and (iv), specifically says that you cannot issue a site closing certificate unless that responsible Commonwealth minister is satisfied that:

… there is no significant risk that a greenhouse gas substance injected into the formation will have a significant adverse impact on the environment …

Then, in subsection (iv), the word ‘environment’ is replaced by ‘human health or safety’. It is our view that that is very strongly considered in the issuing of a closure certificate. So your concerns are shared and, we believe, are covered off by the legislation, which ensures that the closure certificate will protect not only the fact that the gases will be captured but also the long-term security of that capturing. Can I also indicate that the EPBC Act interrelates with this bill—which, hopefully, will become an act—and that is where issues of environmental regulation, as you are undoubtedly aware, will be covered.