Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 22 September 2011, Senator Waters asked me a question about coal seam gas regulation. I seek leave to incorporate further information in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The answer read as follows:

Senator Waters: Given the minister's view that the regulation of coal seam gas mining is primarily a matter for state governments, is the minister alarmed at admissions made by the Queensland government's head of LNG enforcement last week that the coal seam gas industry will have aquifer and regional scale impacts, and that the Queensland government is only monitoring 10 per cent of coal seam gas wells for leaking methane and aquifer connectivity?

The Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities has provided the following answer to the honourable Senator's questions.

The separate roles and responsibilities of state and Commonwealth governments in regulating the coal seam gas industry are determined by legislation. The Commonwealth government is responsible for managing compliance with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

Compliance with the Queensland regulatory regime is a matter for the Queensland government. The statement the honourable senator refers to relates to matters of state responsibility and concerns wells that have been approved under state laws. None of the three coal seam gas projects approved under Commonwealth legislation has yet reached production.

In deciding to approve three coal seam gas projects, proposed respectively by Queensland Gas Company, Santos, and Australia Pacific LNG, the minister received detailed advice from Geoscience Australia and another independent expert on groundwater issues, including aquifer connectivity. That advice, and the conditions attached to the approval of those projects, addressed the question of regional impacts. The conditions require the companies to each submit detailed plans for the management of aquifers, groundwater and surface water for the minister's approval, and to undertake aquifer connectivity studies, and carry out ongoing monitoring and reporting of their activities throughout the life of their project. The conditions provide for precautionary drawdown thresholds, to provide an early indication of any unacceptable groundwater-related impacts. If those thresholds are exceeded, the companies must restore pressure, for example, by reinjection or other approved means.

The conditions also require the companies to contribute data to a regional groundwater model that will inform the adaptive management of these projects at both the project scale and the regional scale. The regional groundwater model is being developed by the Queensland Water Commission, with the involvement of the coal seam gas companies, independent experts and officers from the Commonwealth and Queensland governments.

Senator Waters: Mr President, I have a further supplementary question. Given the mounting scientific and community concern, and the inadequate state regulation of coal seam gas, will the government now adequately resource departmental monitoring and enforcement of those federal conditions, reconsider its refusal to add a water trigger to our environmental laws, and reconsider its refusal to impose a moratorium until the full impacts of coal seam gas are understood?

The Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities has provided the following answer to the honourable Senator's questions.

The Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities includes a dedicated compliance and enforcement branch for enforcement of federal conditions under the EPBC Act. Since the federal approval of three Queensland coal seam gas projects, the department has established an additional section dedicated specifically to monitoring compliance with the conditions attached to the minister's approval of coal seam gas projects.

The independent review of the EPBC Act, led by Dr Allan Hawke AC, considered but did not recommend a water trigger. Dr Hawke concluded that including water extraction or use as a matter of National Environmental Significance was not the best mechanism for managing water resources.

Under the EPBC Act, the Australian Government considers the impacts of proposals on defined matters of national environmental significance. The EPBC Act does not include a provision for the minister to refuse to assess and decide on proposals. The possibility of a general moratorium on coal seam gas would be a matter for state and territory governments, which have wider regulatory responsibilities for exploration and mining.