Senate debates

Friday, 10 November 2023

Bills

Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Amendment (Using New Technologies to Fight Climate Change) Bill 2023; In Committee

11:18 am

Photo of Peter Whish-WilsonPeter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Considering the decades the oil and gas industry has been out there drilling our ocean and blasting it with seismic guns, isn't it interesting that now we have this move to have this regulation put in place just in case someone wants to export their carbon dioxide pollution across boundaries or import carbon dioxide and stick it in a geological reservoir under the ocean, potentially where they have a depleted oil and gas well that they have to spend billions of dollars on decommissioning? Isn't it interesting that the minister's implying that it's better to get this done now, before the applications come in or just in case we have application, when we know, based on Minister Bowen's comments in the media, very clearly that Japanese investors and Santos are seeking this legislation to facilitate the Barossa oil and gas project?

Minister, you've also said repeatedly in your responses to questions in recent days that it's better to have a regulatory structure than not to have one and we might see activities in our oceans that aren't regulated. Could you explain how it would be possible for the Barossa project to proceed and build 100 kilometres of pipeline across Commonwealth waters to access the Bayu-Undan field in Timor-Leste without this legislation?

Are you saying they could just do that and that is why we need this? I am a bit confused.

Comments

No comments