Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Once again, the government will not be supporting these amendments by the Greens for very similar reasons that I have outlined before. The Senator asked how the government has formed its views about the particular provisions in this bill. As I indicated earlier, the government, with advice from the department, investigated similar arrangements both here and overseas but in particular here of course. For the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, many of the provisions are very similar to that act and its investment mandate.

I once again make the point that these kinds of exclusions or restrictions are not in that legislation or mandate. We do not see a reason to duplicate those provisions in this particular facility. As I said, any projects requiring or triggering the EPBC Act would need those approvals before receiving finance from the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility. While the government does have a view on setting up one-stop shops and making sure we reduce and eliminate any unnecessary regulation on the approval of major projects in this country, the appropriate place to debate the level and extent of those bilateral agreements is in the context of our environmental laws and the EPBC Act in particular, not in this legislation itself; although keeping in mind that bilateral agreements themselves have been a provision of the EPBC Act for some time—not inserted by this government but a policy that we have adopted and have a mandate for from the Australian people. So once again, the government will not be supporting these amendments because we see them as unnecessary and because they duplicate provisions that already exist in the legislation.