Albanese government ‘twisted’ Indigenous group’s views in ‘future gas’ document, chair says
An Aboriginal corporation has accused the Albanese government of twisting and misrepresenting its clear position against developing more gas in its new Future Gas strategy document and said “they should take our quotes out of the report”.
The strategy document, launched on Thursday by the resources minister, Madeleine King, argues the fossil fuel is an important part of the transition to net zero emissions and that Australia will need new sources of it “to 2050 and beyond”.
Related: David Pocock fears Labor trying to work around First Nations consultation on offshore gas projects
The strategy was widely condemned as dangerous by a range of climate and conservation groups.
The government document includes highlighted quotes from the Nurrdalinji Native Title Aboriginal Corporation, saying that energy security is a “pressing issue” and loss of electricity supply made it hard to store medicine and food and “makes it hard to sleep and for children to turn up at school”.
The quotes follow a passage in the strategy that notes “remote communities are often powered by stand-alone diesel grids” and says that “those relying on them, disproportionately First Nations communities, note that the unreliability of these microgrids has adverse community effects”.
But the corporation’s quotes are selected from its much longer submission on the strategy, which says: “The answer for the problems of energy security in our communities is not gas but solar energy which is free, plentiful and does not cause further damage to the climate. This is where we want governments to concentrate.”
The submission from the corporation, a collective of 60 native title holders across the Beetaloo basin in the Northern Territory, also said the government should “rule out direct or indirect use of federal funds for gas-related industries”.
Samuel Sandy, chair of Nurrdalinji Aboriginal Corporation and a Djingili elder, told Guardian Australia the government’s treatment of its submission was “wrong and upsetting”.
“Again the government has not listened to what we’re saying,” he said. “This time they’ve gone one step further and twisted the things we’ve said, misrepresenting our view.
“Our message is we don’t want no fracking. We say over and over again that it’s solar, not gas we need to power remote communities which now use expensive and dirty diesel.
“They should take our quotes out from the report and rewrite it so it’s clear we say we want to protect our country and water from new gas drilling.
“Gas is yesterday’s fuel. The quickest, cheapest way to power our communities is renewables.”
A spokesperson for King said the quote was used in relation to energy security and how gas was used and the document linked to the corporation’s full submission “to ensure the full context of the quote is available”.
The spokesperson said the quote “references the fact that many remote communities in the Beetaloo basin rely on standalone diesel grids” and said the text before and after the quote “does not discuss the development of gas supply, but rather points to the use of renewables in micro-grids.”
A statement added: “We acknowledge that the corporation has concerns around specific gas projects and the document does not represent otherwise.”
Gavan McFadzean, of the Australian Conservation Foundation, said the strategy was “a blueprint for climate disaster and should be abandoned” and read “as if it was written by gas giants Woodside and Santos”.
He said: “This strategy is a kick in the guts to the millions of Australians who voted in the Albanese government in May 2022, believing it signalled a new dawn for climate action.”
Jennifer Rayner of the Climate Council said “Australia is already using less gas, so the suggestion we need more of it sounds like Scott Morrison’s ‘gas led recovery’, not Anthony Albanese’s ‘renewable energy superpower’.”
“More gas means more climate pollution and a more dangerous future, it’s that simple,” she said.
Louise Morris of the Australian Marine Conservation Society said the strategy’s timing – coming after the Great Barrier Reef had suffered probably it’s worst mass coral beaching event on record – “could not be worse”.
The strategy would usher in more destructive offshore gas drilling and seismic blasting which would affect the whole marine food chain, she said.
