Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Multicultural Engagement) Share this | Hansard source

I was listening very carefully, as someone speaking in the debate following!

I rise to take note, following Senator Sharma's very wide motion alluding to all the answers to questions, in relation to Senator McAllister's answer to the question in relation to the McPhillamys gold project. I want to put this in context for the people listening to this debate. There is a dispute at the moment with respect to Minister Plibersek, in her capacity as environment minister, exercising powers under section 10 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act, refusing approval for a $1 billion gold project called the McPhillamys gold project in regional New South Wales. In defending that decision, Minister Plibersek went on ABC AM:

Sabra—

a wonderful journalist—

just a couple of years ago, the previous Environment Minister, the Deputy Leader of the Liberals, Sussan Ley, made a very similar decision just down the road, about 50 kilometres away in Bathurst.

Now, when this was referred to earlier in the week, I assumed—in good faith—that Minister Plibersek was actually referring to a material project—a project comparable to a $1 billion gold project, but she was in fact referring to a go-kart track. It never even occurred to me that the comparison that Minister Plibersek was drawing was one that sought to conflate a decision made in relation to a $1 billion gold project with one in relation to a go-kart track. That was not disclosed by the minister when the minister made that comment on ABC AM. There is a reason, when you give evidence in court, that you've got to take an oath that you're going to give the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth—the whole truth, and that was not disclosed.

If we look at section 10(1)(d) of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act, it says that the minister must consider 'such other matters as he or she thinks relevant'. I say to the Australian people: how about these for relevant matters that should have been considered by the minister—the hundreds of jobs that would have been provided in regional Australia by this $1 billion project? How can you compare that and say it's a similar decision to one in relation to a go-kart track? How about a major project of this size acting as a foundation stone for the local regional community?

These projects have economic consequences that go beyond the fence of the project and could provide jobs and support for small businesses, for NGOs, for students to go to local schools et cetera. How about the hundreds of millions of dollars of royalties that would be generated by this gold project? There are at least 10 million ounces of gold in the ore body that this project would have mined, and now those hundreds of millions of dollars of royalties are forgone. How about the $192 million that had already been invested in relation to this project when it got to this late approval stage? Seven years! How can you possibly, in good faith, compare that to a go-kart track?

Lastly, what about sovereign risk? The most disturbing thing about this decision is that it says to mining companies all over the world that you could come to this country and spend $192 million of capital, get to the end of that process, and then have the rug pulled from under you. It's an absolute disgrace.