Environmental Advocacy in Central Queensland (EnvA) has condemned the parliamentary committee’s recommendation that the State Development and Public Works (Critical Minerals) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 be passed, warning that the Bill could fundamentally undermine the rights of Queensland communities.
EnvA is calling on the Queensland Parliament to reject the Bill or make significant amendments to restore protections for landholders, local communities, councils and the environment.
The Bill has been promoted as legislation to support Queensland’s critical minerals industry. However, EnvA says the legislation goes far beyond critical minerals, creating sweeping new powers that could potentially apply to any project the Minister considers strategically significant.
EnvA Director Dr Coral Rowston said the Primary Industries and Resources committee’s recommendation was deeply disappointing given the serious concerns raised about the Bill during the inquiry.
“The committee simply made one recommendation – that the Bill be passed, despite opposition from many sectors of the community.
“This is not simply a Bill about critical minerals. It is a Bill that could fundamentally change the balance between government, developers and Queensland communities,” Dr Rowston said.
“We are particularly concerned that the legislation would give Ministers and the Coordinator-General greater powers while taking rights away from the very people who will have to live with the consequences of major developments.”
Community rights must not be sacrificed for faster approvals
EnvA is particularly concerned about proposed restrictions on appeal, review and notification rights.
The Queensland Labor Opposition’s committee comments highlight that a State Strategic Project declaration would not be reviewable under the Judicial Review Act, while other provisions could restrict merits appeals and potentially modify appeal and review rights under other legislation.
The Opposition has warned that the changes could disproportionately affect regional and remote Queenslanders who may not have the financial resources to pursue matters through the Supreme Court.
EnvA says this should be a major warning to the Queensland Parliament.
“A planning system cannot be fair if ordinary Queenslanders lose meaningful opportunities to challenge decisions that affect their homes, farms, communities and environment,” Dr Rowston said.
“Removing accessible appeal and review rights does not remove conflict. It simply removes the ability of communities to have their concerns properly heard.”
EnvA is also concerned that the Bill could allow decisions affecting communities to be increasingly concentrated in Brisbane, while the impacts and costs are borne by regional councils, ratepayers, landholders and communities.
Extraordinary powers without an identified problem
The Opposition has also highlighted that the Government has not demonstrated a clear problem with the existing approval system that requires the extraordinary new powers proposed by the Bill.
Existing legislation already provides the Government and Coordinator-General with substantial powers to facilitate major projects.
Yet the Bill proposes further powers including State Strategic Project declarations, compulsory acquisition, expanded infrastructure easements and modification orders that could switch off existing laws for individual projects.
EnvA says it is particularly concerning that such changes could occur through regulation rather than through the normal parliamentary process of amending an Act.
“The idea that a Minister or the Executive Government could effectively switch off or change the application of legislation for an individual project should concern every Queenslander, regardless of their views about critical minerals,” Dr Rowston said.
“Acts of Parliament should not be treated as optional rules that can simply be modified when they become inconvenient for a particular development.”
Private land and regional communities must not be sacrificed
EnvA is also alarmed by the proposed expansion of compulsory acquisition powers.
The Opposition has pointed to evidence before the committee that the Bill could allow private land to be compulsorily acquired and vested in a private company for a State Strategic Project.
For landholders, this is a profound issue.
“A family farm or other privately owned land should not be treated as an obstacle that can simply be removed to make a project easier or faster,” Dr Rowston said.
“If compulsory acquisition is going to be used, there must be a compelling public purpose, proper environmental assessment, procedural fairness and adequate time for affected landholders to understand and respond to what is being proposed.”
EnvA is equally concerned that regional communities could be left carrying the costs of development while decisions are increasingly centralised at the State level.
Local governments may be left responsible for roads, housing, water, community services and other infrastructure required to support accelerated development, without having a corresponding level of decision-making power or guaranteed resources.
“Central Queensland communities know all too well that the benefits of resource development and that the costs of development are not always shared equally,” Dr Rowston said.
“Regional communities should not be expected to simply absorb the impacts while decisions are made elsewhere and their ability to participate is progressively reduced.”
Critical minerals are important — but so are Queenslanders’ rights
EnvA supports the development of a clean economy and recognises that critical minerals will have an important role in the transition away from fossil fuels.
But EnvA rejects the suggestion that supporting critical minerals requires weaker environmental protections, reduced community participation or greater concentration of power in the hands of government Ministers.
“Queensland can support critical minerals without abandoning the principles of good planning, environmental protection, transparency and community participation,” Dr Rowston said.
“We do not accept that Queenslanders have to choose between economic development and their rights.”
EnvA is calling on the Queensland Parliament to reject the Bill or make substantial amendments to ensure that:
- affected landholders and communities retain meaningful rights to notification, participation, appeal and review;
- ministerial and Coordinator-General powers are subject to appropriate checks and balances;
- Queensland laws cannot be effectively overridden or modified for individual projects through executive regulation without proper parliamentary scrutiny;
- compulsory acquisition powers are subject to strong public-interest tests and appropriate environmental and procedural safeguards;
- local governments and regional communities have a genuine role in decisions affecting their regions and are not left carrying unfunded infrastructure and social costs;
- environmental, agricultural and cultural heritage protections are not weakened in the name of accelerated development; and
- major projects continue to be subject to transparent, accountable and evidence-based assessment.
Dr Rowston said the parliamentary committee’s recommendation should not be regarded as the final word.
“The Queensland Parliament still has an opportunity to listen to the communities that have raised these concerns.
“The Government should not confuse a desire for faster approvals with a mandate to remove community rights.
“EnvA urges every Queensland MP to consider what this Bill could mean for their constituents — particularly landholders, farmers, First Nations peoples and regional communities who may find themselves facing a major project with fewer rights to have their concerns heard.”
“Critical minerals and essential developments may be part of Queensland’s future. But stripping Queenslanders of their rights must not be.”
Read EnvA’s submission on the inquiry into the State Development and Public Works (Critical Minerals) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 here.
EnvA - CQ 