Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026; Consideration in Detail

Opened the debate

Steggall moved amendments to prohibit the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility from providing grants to gas facilities, including pipelines, and to mandate consultation with First Nations Australians. Steggall argued that taxpayer-backed finance should not socialise risks for profitable fossil fuel industries while privatising returns, citing previous NAIF support for gas projects like the Hudson Creek Power Station. Steggall contended that funding new fossil fuel infrastructure in 2026 was not in the public interest and conflicted with the Climate Change Act 2022 and net zero commitments. Steggall also stated that current Indigenous engagement requirements were insufficient and often amounted to a tick-box exercise rather than genuine community consultation.

Government response

King opposed the amendments, stating that the NAIF Investment Mandate already requires proponents to develop Indigenous engagement strategies, which the government considered more effective than direct consultation by the facility. King argued that the bill strengthened board accountability and that the NAIF supported renewable energy and critical minerals projects aligned with net zero goals. King defended the inclusion of gas projects as necessary for grid stability and firming capacity during the transition to renewables, helping to contain price spikes. King clarified that the NAIF had made 37 investment decisions and progressed 32 projects, emphasising that public money was used to crowd in private capital rather than replace it.