The Queensland Renewable Energy Council has pointed to objections from groups including farmers, the resources sector and local governments as it seeks an overhaul of proposed State legislation governing green energy projects.
The State Development, Infrastructure and Works Committee is holding hearings on the relevant planning Bill in Brisbane today after sessions in Rockhampton and Biloela recently.
QREC chief executive officer Katie-Anne Mulder said the breadth and consistency of concerns raised in submissions to the committee revealed serious risks of regulatory overreach, unintended consequences, and damage to community trust in Queensland’s renewable energy rollout.
“We need planning laws that provide clarity and build trust—not confusion, delay, and unworkable precedent,” Ms Mulder said.
“As made clear by stakeholders across Queensland—farmers, councils, miners and legal experts—this Bill must be substantially amended or withdrawn.”
Deputy Premier and Minister for State Development, Infrastructure and Planning, Jarrod Bleijie has described the proposed reforms as addressing the social impact of large-scale renewable energy developments and putting communities first.
A new planning pathway will require major renewable programs to build social licence by demonstrating how projects will deliver long-term benefits for affected communities.
Proponents will be required to conduct a social impact assessment and enter into a binding community benefit agreement with the local government before lodging a development application.
The Queensland Law Society has expressed concern over potential legal and procedural impacts.
“The proposed process, including the requirement for there to be a completed community benefit agreement in place before an application is made, will lead to a number of issues for the relevant parties, including significant delays,” the QLS submission to the State Development, Infrastructure and Works Committee stated.
“These reforms are likely to adversely impact the renewable energy industry in Queensland in a way that is inconsistent with other types of development under the planning system.”
The QREC also highlighted a submission from the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies.
It included a comment that it was unclear why a restructuring of the planning system was necessary, given that the current Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process already provided a strategic and project-specific framework.
The Australian Energy Producers expressed concern over the lack of consultation on significant reforms.
“It is regrettable that a reform intended to embed consultation has been developed without engagement with industry prior to the Bill being introduced. This lack of early engagement means that key assumptions have not been tested, and practical implementation issues have not been explored,” the peak body said in its submission.