Senator McLUCAS (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing) (9:21 PM) —Thank you, Senator Milne. Amendments (4) and (5), as proposed by the Australian Greens, recommend that securities be lodged by the greenhouse gas injection licence holder to obtain a site closure certificate. The security will be held in perpetuity, and that is the difficult part of the amendments that you have proposed. The security would be to cover monitoring, remediation and repair of the site. It is our belief that this approach to long-term liability will not in fact deal with the question. It assumes that contingencies will definitely be required for mediation and repair.

Like you, Senator Milne, I come from an environmentalist background. I have seen many local government approvals of mining events where a bond has not been required. But can I say it is wrong to extrapolate that sort of thinking to geosequestration. CCS is a different kettle of fish to a development that has gone awry or a mine that cannot be fixed. That is why this legislation is so complex. That is why the process, particularly of the closure certificate, is so robust that it allows the minister at that point to require that funds be provided for the ongoing monitoring of the site for a period of 15 years. We know that there is a potential for a long-term liability. It is the reasoned judgement of the government that this is the way forward that will encourage and facilitate sequestration but at the same time protect our community, protect our environment and protect our economy from a liability into the future.

The legislation as drafted adopts a more proactive approach to long-term liability, particularly compared with what is applied to the mining industry. It is far stronger; it is much strengthened. I think you would agree that this legislation is far more robust than a local government act of any state legislature. It ensures that an operator must demonstrate that any injected greenhouse gas substance is stored in a safe and secure manner and that the highest level of confidence in the long-term behaviour has been obtained. In that situation a bond for remediation and repair would be superfluous, so we will not be supporting the Greens amendment.