Queensland mining bill would narrow objections and expand ministerial role

A Queensland bill would limit who can object to proposed mines and replace automatic Land Court referrals with a ministerial process. The government and mining industry say the changes would reduce vexatious claims and red tape, while farmers, environmental groups and lawyers warn they could weaken community participation and independent scrutiny.

Queensland Resources Minister Dale Last has introduced legislation that would change how objections to mining projects are made and assessed. The Mineral Resources Objections Reform and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2026 will now be debated by the Queensland parliament.

Under the proposed rules, objections would generally be limited to landholders directly affected by a project and people living within 125 kilometres of a proposed mine. Automatic referrals of objections to the Land Court would also end, with a ministerial referral process deciding whether an objection proceeds to court.

Mr Last said the bill would create a more efficient and targeted system while maintaining environmental protections. He said it was intended to stop “vexatious” claims being used to frustrate or delay project approvals, arguing the existing process had left projects including the New Acland mine without certainty for almost 15 years.

Opponents said the changes could make it harder for communities to challenge developments. Barrister and University of Queensland adjunct professor Chris McGrath said the reforms would undermine independent review and described them as another step in weakening laws that protect Queenslanders from harmful development. He also questioned whether a 125-kilometre limit recognised impacts that could extend beyond a mine’s immediate footprint.

Mr McGrath said the bill could restrict incorporated community groups from bringing objections to the Land Court. He pointed to the Oakey Coal Action Alliance, which represented landholders during the long-running New Acland mine expansion case, and said such groups could help protect landholders from potentially significant legal costs. OCAA president David Vonhoff called the proposed changes “very disturbing” and questioned why people living farther away should be excluded if they had legitimate concerns.

Queensland Resources Council chief executive Janette Hewson said the 125-kilometre limit was arbitrary and argued that objection distances should reflect scientific data and different impacts, such as groundwater and air emissions. She said the industry was seeking to remove duplicated red tape, not people’s rights, and criticised objections based on what she described as ideological concerns unrelated to a project. The bill follows other Queensland government measures aimed at accelerating resource and major-project approvals.