The epithets used against environment groups have been extraordinary after a judge of the Federal Court set aside Environment Minister Greg Hunt's approval of the Adani thermal coal mine.
Words like 'vigilante litigation' and 'sabotage' have been flung around by the Coalition government as if it were the Mackay Conservation Group — not the Minister's office — who had failed to exercise due diligence.
The reality is that approval for the mine has merely been stayed. It is worth noting that the orders were made with consent of the litigating parties. The vehement reaction to the setback therefore raises perplexing questions. How can it be that taking recourse under the law makes vigilantes of activists? How can any law be found defective when it worked as it should?
It is a conundrum that has become pattern under the Abbott Government: things that aren't broken need fixing. Perhaps legislation has always been an instrument for ideological agendas, but the compulsion and ease with which the Coalition has taken to the law to restrict scrutiny doesn't bode well for us.
The rule of law rests on limiting power, on containing official discretion. The Attorney-General George Brandis' statement regarding the intent to repeal section 487(2) of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is worth reading in full in order to get a sense of what it might mean for this principle to be degraded.
His reference to 'a red carpet for radical activists' is misleading, given that the overall rate of environmental approval is 96.2 per cent. Since EPCB was enacted under the Howard government in 2000, only three projects out of 276 in the resources industry were knocked back.
Moreover, the variety of stakeholders opposed to or distanced from mining developments in the Galilee Basin belies the tree-hugging caricature that the Coalition imagines to be its arch-enemy. Earlier this year, 11 international banks ruled out funding for projects in the area. This was followed by an open letter from nine leading Australian scientists urging other companies to do the same or withdraw. Are these financiers and professors also conducting sabotage?
Wangan, Jagalingou, Juru and Birri traditional owners have challenged the Adani lease. Grassroots groups like Reef Defenders — a mix of local business owners, farmers, students, professionals and retirees — have also taken action. The degree of hostility that has met this cross-section of the Australian community is odd. Are their interests not legitimate? What else could be