Middle Arm review looms
The Senate is set to investigate the controversial Middle Arm precinct development in Darwin Harbour.
The development gained attention due to revelations that the Albanese government was aware of its role as a “key enabler” for gas exports from the Beetaloo basin, despite being marketed as a “sustainable development precinct”.
The inquiry, which had been rejected twice before, was successfully initiated by Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, who said there is a need to reevaluate taxpayer support for gas expansion in light of climate concerns.
Pressure has been mounting on the government from both the Greens and the crossbench to withdraw the $1.5 billion financial support for the project.
Critics have raised concerns about the project's impact on health, climate, and cultural heritage. The Middle Arm development is slated to become a major centre for gas, petrochemicals, hydrogen production, critical minerals, and carbon capture and storage.
Traditional owners have expressed concerns about the impact of the project on Indigenous rock art near the development site.
The government's decision to back the inquiry coincides with increasing scrutiny of its approvals for fossil fuel projects, including a recent green light for a metallurgical coal mine expansion in Queensland.
Independent MP Monique Ryan, who supported health professionals protesting against the project, welcomed the inquiry, calling for the government to prioritise people's well-being over gas company profits.
The Senate inquiry aims to assess the intended uses of the Middle Arm site, funding commitments from federal and Northern Territory governments, and the project's consequences for climate, health, and cultural heritage.
The final report is expected by February 28, 2024.
The Middle Arm development, which has received $1.5 billion in federal funding, has been under fire from environmentalists and health experts who argue that it facilitates fossil fuel expansion.
While the Northern Territory government promotes it as a “low emissions” manufacturing hub, the original business case described it as a “new gas demand centre”.
This contradiction has fueled concerns and calls for greater transparency and accountability regarding taxpayer funding.