Dio Wang (WA, Palmer United Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment, Senator Birmingham. In my engagement with communities relating to the need to balance economic development with minimising environmental harm, community confidence is key to progress. Will the minister confirm that in his request for advice to the IECS dated 26 February 2015 relating to the Watermark project, he stated that the advice sought from IECS in April 2013, two months prior to the enacting of the water trigger amendment, met the legal requirements of the EPBC water trigger?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Wang for the question and, given the question contains some very specific informational requests, I thank him for the prior warning. As you, and I am sure many other senators, are aware, the Minister for the Environment, Mr Hunt, has stopped the clock on the Watermark coal project to seek further information from the Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development. This will ensure that the most up-to-date scientific information is utilised for the assessment of the project under our national environmental laws. This follows Minister Hunt taking the step of visiting the area and listening to the concerns of farmers—

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is the Barnaby bail-out scheme!

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You should try listening sometime too, Senator Cameron.

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my left! You should address your remarks to the chair, Senator Birmingham.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was saying, this follows Minister Hunt visiting the area and listening to the concerns of farmers, Indigenous leaders and others—wanting to ensure those concerns are respected and responded to by ensuring we provide the best available scientific information in relation to assessing this project under the national environmental laws. The minister's recent request for additional advice from the IESC in relation to the Watermark project is to ensure we have that most up-to-date scientific information. I am advised that the advice provided by the IESC—and this is directly relevant to your question, Senator Wang—in 2013 did meet the legal requirements for seeking advice under the EPBC Act.

Dio Wang (WA, Palmer United Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Could the minister explain how his advice could meet the legal requirements of the water trigger given that former Minister Burke wrote to the IESC on 12 March 2013 and withdrew any referral of the Watermark project to the IESC pending the amendment of the EPBC to include the water trigger in June that year?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Whilst, as I understand it, Senator Wang is correct about that letter, I am advised that an amended request by the then environment minister, Mr Tony Burke, was submitted to the IESC on 17 April 2013—after the original request had been withdrawn. The amended request included reference to the water trigger—because the water trigger legislation had been introduced into the parliament by that stage. The amended request was submitted to ensure that the IESC advice to be provided did include consideration of that water trigger then before the parliament.

Dio Wang (WA, Palmer United Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Will the minister confirm that he or his agency contacted the Watermark project manager in October 2013 to inform him that the project would be a controlled activity under the water trigger and that no further contact was made regarding the IESC until last week?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can confirm that Minister Hunt issued a notice on 24 October 2013—that was one of the first actions he took as the Minister for the Environment—notifying the proponent of the Watermark coal project, and of course the public, that the water trigger would be applied to the project. The notice was published on the Department of the Environment website, as is normal practice. No contact has been made with the IESC since they provided their advice, which again is standard practice. The project was going through the New South Wales approval system until the final Planning Assessment Commission report was provided to the Commonwealth on 29 January this year. That is when the Commonwealth assessment recommenced. As I indicated in answer to the first part of the question, subsequent to that the minister has taken the step of stopping the clock on this project to ensure that the most up-to-date and relevant IESC advice is taken into account so that we have the most robust scientific information to make an informed decision. (Time expired)

Dio Wang (WA, Palmer United Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to table documents related to my questions.

Leave granted.