Senator BROWN (12:57 PM) —I thank the minister for that. Yes, I am very strong on the environment being given pre-eminence when it comes to environmental legislation. I would remind the minister that it is not unusual thinking. The World Trade Organisation legislation, which the government signed and put through this parliament in 1986, was made on the basis that economic considerations were paramount, and the environment and social justice were considered zip when it came to making decisions by that international body, with Australia's authority. So there is a precedent for not being across the board in an assessment of a piece of legislation. In this case, the environment should be seen as pre-eminent. That being said, can the minister tell the committee what the other considerations are—I know they will be listed on the web site—and whether these include the economic considerations and, of course, those political considerations which come down to lobbying from the pressure groups in Tasmania who are in favour of the dam, including both of the big political parties? I wonder if the minister could say how the financial assessment, which is the chief one of those other considerations, is being made by the department? Does it have expertise? Is the minister seeking other advice, or is he going to go on the advice of the planning commission in Tasmania or will he simply take the advice from the biased point of view of the Tasmanian government?