Mr HUNT (Flinders—Minister for the Environment) (14:51): I am very happy to take this. Mr Albanese: He is not in charge of water anymore. Mr HUNT: I am in charge of EPBC approvals. Mr Albanese: Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER: The member for Grayndler will resume his seat. The minister has the call. Mr HUNT: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I am absolutely delighted to take this question because the first thing is that it contains an utterly false assertion. Ms Macklin interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Jagajaga will cease interjecting. Mr HUNT: The farmers of Australia have had, will continue to have and right now have the ability to make any representation under law through an appeal, whether it is under section 487 or it is under section 5 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act. Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Hunter has asked his question. Mr HUNT: It is also important to note that this provision, which you now want to criticise— Mr Perrett interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Moreton has been warned twice. Mr HUNT: was the very one that the entire Labor Party voted for in the Western Sydney airport bill. They voted for that same standing provision themselves, which they now want to criticise— Opposition members interjecting— Mr HUNT: as did you. Here he is, the— The SPEAKER: The minister will resume his seat. Mr Albanese interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Grayndler will not give directions. On a point of order? Mr Albanese: Yes, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: What is the point of order? Mr Albanese: The minister— The SPEAKER: No, what is the point of order? Mr Albanese: The minister is misleading the House. He knows Badgerys Creek has had two EISs— The SPEAKER: The member for Grayndler will resume his seat. Mr Nikolic interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Bass is warned. Mr HUNT: They are sensitive about the fact that they voted for precisely this provision. So that is the issue in relation to standing. Firstly, there was an utterly false statement. Right now, and under any proposed alternative, farmers have the absolute right to stand up for and challenge any decision. The second thing is in relation to the Shenhua decision. There were extraordinary provisions put in place, the most stringent in Australian history, and there are three further sets of reviews to be taken—three further sets of reviews which will be assessed. And these are standards above and beyond anything else that we have seen in Australian history. So, yes, sometimes as an environment minister you have to deal with the things which are placed before you in the docket. They are there on the list that is before you, and you have to deal with it not on the basis of politics but on the basis of the best available science. And there was not just one or two, three, four or five but six— Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Hunter will cease interjecting. Mr HUNT: different scientific reviews. There were six different scientific reviews which set out that the conditions were utterly acceptable. More than that, I approached the independent expert scientific committee and asked them for additional comments and additional advice and incorporated every one—every one—of their recommendations. That is the careful approach which we have taken. And I am utterly satisfied that, on the steps taken to date, no other environment minister in Australia could have come to a different conclusion on the law or the science. At the end of the day, the people elected this government to make decisions on the basis of the law and to make decisions on the basis of the science. As well as that, we have put in place three further review or plan mechanisms which will have to be fulfilled. (Time expired)