Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Whish-Wilson, for moving your amendment. We appreciate your willingness to allow the chamber to consider these issues. I will be brief. The government is not intending to support the amendments which have been moved by the Greens on sheet 2142. I am happy to step through the basis for this.

In relation to amendment (1), we don't oppose the principle of the amendments that are moved today, but we consider that they are not necessary. Amendment (1) would have the effect of requiring the London protocol's risk assessment and management framework and the 2012 specific guidelines for assessment to be considered in the granting of a sea dumping permit. This duplicates requirements that are already established by the act. Section 19 of the act already requires the minister to have regard to international protocols, including the London protocol requirements. That includes the guidance documents that are referenced in the amendment that's before us at the moment.

So our first point would be that it's redundant and not required. There is also a risk of unintended consequences, because, if the London protocol publishes further guidance and updates existing guidance, the bill before us, the way it is constructed at the moment, would allow those updates to be incorporated into the government's policy approach.

In relation to amendment (2), again we don't oppose the principle of the amendment. The amendment would have the effect of providing a requirement for an agreement between the Commonwealth and each entity proposing to export the controlled material and a series of other matters. Again, this amendment duplicates requirements that are already established by the act. Section 19 of the act requires that the London protocol requirements, including the requirement for bilateral agreement or arrangement, need to be considered before a permit may be granted.

Amendment (3) has the effect of specifying the content of some permit conditions regarding monitoring, repair and mitigation measures should there be an environmental impact, establishing a financial assurance requirement on permits. Again, can I indicate that we of course understand the importance of ensuring that permits are issued with robust conditions to support ongoing monitoring, management and mitigation of any environmental risks and potential impacts. But these requirements, such as monitoring and the ability to mitigate potential damage, are already part of the sea dumping act and are standard conditions on any sea dumping permit.

To get the long-term management right, we will need to ensure that there is alignment across the various regulatory regimes governing these activities. Officials are working through this, and the government would support organising briefings for interested senators on this process. Existing requirements for offshore CCS projects are captured by the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The sea dumping act permits include a robust monitoring and compliance regime and long-term monitoring after sequestration activity has ceased. It's on that basis that we consider that it's not necessary to further amend the bill to secure this.

Finally, amendment (4) has the effect of advising that the proposed section 22 would apply to relevant permits granted on or after commencement. We oppose this, again, because it's not required. The provisions of the amendment act will apply regardless.

I thank Senator Whish-Wilson again for moving these amendments, but the government will not be supporting them.