Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Environmental Defenders Office did not breach funding rules while opposing Santos gas project, review finds

News Feed
Friday, May 17, 2024

The Environmental Defenders Office did not breach the conditions of its $8.2m in federal funding according to a government review of the legal firm’s conduct.The environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, requested the review after a federal court judgment in January made sharp criticisms of the EDO’s conduct in a legal matter against Santos.The case, brought by Tiwi Island traditional owners, argued Santos had not properly assessed submerged cultural heritage near an area it proposed to construct a pipeline for its Barossa offshore gas project off the Northern Territory.The traditional owners sought an injunction on pipeline works until the gas company submitted a new environmental plan and it was assessed by the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (Nopsema).The case was dismissed in January and the judgment by Justice Natalie Charlesworth made adverse findings against the EDO that one of its lawyers and a cultural heritage consultant engaged in a form of “subtle coaching” in a meeting with Tiwi islanders. Charlesworth also found that evidence from one expert witness involved “confection”.Following the judgment, the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, vowed to defund the EDO if the Coalition won the next election.The former prime minister, Tony Abbott, cut the EDO’s funding in 2013, ending 20 years of Commonwealth funding for the public interest law firm. The funding was restored by the Albanese government.Plibersek’s department sought independent legal advice on whether the conduct described in Charlesworth’s judgment breached the EDO’s grant conditions.The business grants hub within the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, which administers the grant agreement, also assessed whether any possible fraud had occurred in relation to the grant agreement.“The legal advice was that the comments in the judgment do not provide a reasonable basis to conclude that the EDO had breached the terms of the grant agreement,” the final report states.skip past newsletter promotionOur Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionThe business grants hub also found the EDO “has been compliant with the grant conditions to date” and there was no evidence indicating possible fraud.The report says, based on this advice, the department of climate change, energy, environment and water had concluded the EDO was not in breach of its agreement.But the department did find further steps should be taken and said it was working with the business grants hub to implement “additional assurances” in relation to the grant agreement and to negotiate some variations to “expressly clarify the standards expected by the Commonwealth of the EDO”.The EDO chief executive, David Morris, welcomed the review’s findings.“We are proud to deliver high-quality legal services under the terms of the Federal Government’s grant agreement, and to represent those seeking to exercise their right and to protect nature and the climate,” he said. ”Without federal support, many Australians would be unable to access the legal system or participate fully in environmental decision making.”

Tanya Plibersek ordered investigation after judge accused law firm of ‘subtle coaching’ of Tiwi Island traditional owners during legal challengeFollow our Australia news live blog for latest updatesGet our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcastThe Environmental Defenders Office did not breach the conditions of its $8.2m in federal funding according to a government review of the legal firm’s conduct.The environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, requested the review after a federal court judgment in January made sharp criticisms of the EDO’s conduct in a legal matter against Santos.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup Continue reading...

The Environmental Defenders Office did not breach the conditions of its $8.2m in federal funding according to a government review of the legal firm’s conduct.

The environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, requested the review after a federal court judgment in January made sharp criticisms of the EDO’s conduct in a legal matter against Santos.

The case, brought by Tiwi Island traditional owners, argued Santos had not properly assessed submerged cultural heritage near an area it proposed to construct a pipeline for its Barossa offshore gas project off the Northern Territory.

The traditional owners sought an injunction on pipeline works until the gas company submitted a new environmental plan and it was assessed by the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (Nopsema).

The case was dismissed in January and the judgment by Justice Natalie Charlesworth made adverse findings against the EDO that one of its lawyers and a cultural heritage consultant engaged in a form of “subtle coaching” in a meeting with Tiwi islanders. Charlesworth also found that evidence from one expert witness involved “confection”.

Following the judgment, the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, vowed to defund the EDO if the Coalition won the next election.

The former prime minister, Tony Abbott, cut the EDO’s funding in 2013, ending 20 years of Commonwealth funding for the public interest law firm. The funding was restored by the Albanese government.

Plibersek’s department sought independent legal advice on whether the conduct described in Charlesworth’s judgment breached the EDO’s grant conditions.

The business grants hub within the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, which administers the grant agreement, also assessed whether any possible fraud had occurred in relation to the grant agreement.

“The legal advice was that the comments in the judgment do not provide a reasonable basis to conclude that the EDO had breached the terms of the grant agreement,” the final report states.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

The business grants hub also found the EDO “has been compliant with the grant conditions to date” and there was no evidence indicating possible fraud.

The report says, based on this advice, the department of climate change, energy, environment and water had concluded the EDO was not in breach of its agreement.

But the department did find further steps should be taken and said it was working with the business grants hub to implement “additional assurances” in relation to the grant agreement and to negotiate some variations to “expressly clarify the standards expected by the Commonwealth of the EDO”.

The EDO chief executive, David Morris, welcomed the review’s findings.

“We are proud to deliver high-quality legal services under the terms of the Federal Government’s grant agreement, and to represent those seeking to exercise their right and to protect nature and the climate,” he said.

”Without federal support, many Australians would be unable to access the legal system or participate fully in environmental decision making.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

How the Government Shutdown Could Affect Environmental Agencies

If a shutdown continues, it could interrupt the Environmental Protection Agency’s work and pull workers from maintaining national parks.

If a shutdown continues, it could interrupt the Environmental Protection Agency’s work and pull workers from maintaining national parks.

Government

Nearly 90 percent of EPA furloughed as government shuts down

About 89 percent of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) workforce is being furloughed as the government shuts down, according to contingency plans that were posted online this week. According to the plan, just 1,734 of the EPA’s 15,166 employees are slated to continue working during the shutdown, which began Wednesday. The plan also gives a window...

About 89 percent of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) workforce is being furloughed as the government shuts down, according to contingency plans that were posted online this week. According to the plan, just 1,734 of the EPA’s 15,166 employees are slated to continue working during the shutdown, which began Wednesday. The plan also gives a window into the degree of staffing losses at the EPA in recent months, as the agency had 17,080 employees at the start of the year.  During the furlough period, the agency will no longer carry out most civil inspections related to potential violations of environmental law.  It will also no longer conduct most of its research or issue new permits or grants. Some hazardous waste cleanup will be halted if there is no imminent threat to human health and property. The EPA will still continue emergency and disaster assistance, hazardous waste cleanup where there is an “imminent threat to human life" and criminal investigations. The Trump administration’s plan is similar to the most recent contingency plan issued by the Biden administration in September 2024. Under that plan, 1,734 employees out of 16,851 would have been expected to continue working. Under the Biden-era plan, civil inspections, issuance of new grants and permits, research and some hazardous waste cleanup also would have ceased. Marc Boom, a former EPA senior policy adviser during the Biden administration, said during a press call ahead of the shutdown that if one occurs “nobody will be holding polluters accountable for what they dump into the air we breathe and the water that we drink.” But Boom also said the Trump administration is making the problem worse. “Over the past 9 months, the White House and EPA leadership have already been shutting down the agency from within,” he said. “They've clawed back hundreds of community grants, rolled back protections against forever chemicals and pesticides, relaxed enforcement for polluters … and they've shuttered key programs like the Environmental Justice Office, the Office of Atmospheric Protection and now, they're closing down EPA's scientific backbone, the Office of Research and Development.” The EPA has said that its actions are in support of a deregulatory agenda that seeks to boost the U.S. economy.

Government
Chemicals
Waste

What is fracking and why is it controversial?

The government says it plans to pass legislation to permanently ban fracking for shale gas in England.

What is fracking and why is it controversial?Esme StallardClimate and science reporter, BBC NewsGetty ImagesThe government says it plans to pass legislation to permanently ban fracking for shale gas in England.A moratorium on the practice was put in place by the last government but the debate has been reopened in recent weeks after the political party Reform committed to backing fracking if it came to power.The Scottish and Welsh governments continue to remain opposed to the practise. What is fracking?Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is a technique for recovering gas and oil from shale rock. It involves drilling into the earth and directing a high-pressure mixture of water, sand and chemicals at a rock layer, to release the gas inside.Wells can be drilled vertically or horizontally in order to release the gas.Why is fracking controversial?The injection of fluid at high pressure into the rock can cause earth tremors - small movements in the earth's surface.In 2019, more than 120 tremors were recorded during drilling at a Cuadrilla site in Blackpool.Seismic events of this scale are considered minor and are rarely felt by people, but they are a concern to local residents.Shale gas is also a fossil fuel, and campaigners say allowing fracking could distract energy firms and governments from investing in renewable and green sources of energy.Fracking also uses huge amounts of water, which must be transported to the site at significant environmental cost.What has the government said about fracking?Government policy on fracking has see-sawed over recent years. Former Prime Minister Liz Truss looked to reintroduce the practice, despite local opposition - but this was subsequently reversed by Rishi Sunak who introduced a moratorium.In October 2025, at the Labour Party Conference, Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the government would move to legislate against fracking, banning the practice permanently. This follows a commitment made by the Labour Party in its manifesto and further commitments by PM Sir Keir Starmer in September that the practice would be "banned for good".But Reform has said it would seek to allow the practice should it be elected, as part of its "war" on renewable developers.In his speech at the conference, Miliband said the practice was: "Dangerous and deeply harmful to our natural environment."The good news is that communities have fought back and won this fight before and will do so again," he added.ReutersAn anti-fracking protester writes messages on a wall in LancashireWhere has fracking taken place in the UK?Fracking for shale gas in the UK has only previously taken place on a small scale, due to the many public and legal challenges.However, exploration has identified large swathes of shale gas across the UK, particularly in northern England.More than 100 exploration and drilling licences were awarded to firms including Third Energy, IGas, Aurora Energy Resources and Ineos.Cuadrilla was the only company given consent to begin fracking.It drilled two wells at a site in Lancashire but faced repeated protests from local people and campaigners.In 2022, the Oil and Gas Authority told Cuadrilla to permanently concrete and abandon the wells.Could fracking lower energy bills?The UK can only meet 48% of its gas demand from domestic supplies (this would be 54% if it did not export any gas).Some MPs have claimed that restarting drilling at Cuadrilla's two existing wells could be done quickly, and would provide significant supplies.Cuadrilla claimed that "just 10%" of the gas from shale deposits in Lancashire and surrounding areas "could supply 50 years' worth of current UK gas demand".Energy experts dispute this, pointing out that the UK's shale gas reserves are held in complex layers of rock.Mike Bradshaw, professor of global energy at Warwick University, says estimates of how much shale gas the UK has are not the same as the amount of gas that could be produced commercially.But Prof Geoffrey Maitland, professor of Energy Engineering at Imperial College London, has said fracking could provide interim relief."Although shale gas will not provide an immediate solution to the energy security of the country, it could be used in the medium term to replace diminishing North Sea gas production and some gas imports," he said.Which other countries use fracking?It is thought that fracking has given energy security to the US and Canada for the next 100 years, and has presented an opportunity to generate electricity at half the CO2 emissions of coal.But the complex geology of the UK and the higher density of people makes extraction more challenging, according to experts.Fracking remains banned in numerous EU countries, including Germany, France and Spain, as well as Australia.Authorities in countries including Brazil and Argentina are split, with some banning the practice, and others allowing operations.

Government
Chemicals
Energy

Government shutdown means 90% of EPA staff won't be working

The EPA will pause research work, grants, permits and inspections while the government is shut down. Nearly all staff will stop working. Some may not be rehired.

The shutdown of the U.S. government could have ripple effects for human health and the environment as an already weakened Environmental Protection Agency will see nearly all of its staff furloughed and many of its operations paused. The first shutdown in six years went into effect late Tuesday and requires federal agencies to stop all nonessential work. Most EPA work is considered only partially essential under federal rules. Nearly 90% of EPA staff will be furloughed; only 1,732 of 15,166 employees will report to work, according to the agency’s most recent shutdown contingency plan, issued in September.Immediate environmental hazard work is likely to continue, but longer-term efforts such as research, permitting, writing new rules and pollution enforcement will largely freeze. Experts note that the shutdown comes as the agency already has seen significant cuts as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to restructure the federal government and save taxpayers money. About 4,000 EPA employees, or a quarter of its workforce, have been fired or have taken a buyout this year. “The shutdown has already been happening for months,” said Marc Boom, a former senior policy advisor with the EPA who now serves as senior advisor with the Environmental Protection Network, a bipartisan group of more than 700 former EPA employees based in Washington, D.C.Many activities will halt, including research and the publication of research results, and the issuance of new grants, contracts and permits, according to the agency. Critically, civil enforcement inspections — on-site visits to facilities to check their compliance with environmental regulations — will also cease. Whether cleanup work at hazardous waste areas known as Superfund sites will continue will be decided case by case. At sites where stopping would pose an imminent threat to human life, work will continue, but at others, it will pause, according to the agency.Preparing for, preventing and responding to environmental disasters such as oil spills and chemical releases, known as emergency response readiness operations, will not stop. Freezers, animals, plants and other assets in research labs will continue to be maintained. In a statement to The Times before the shutdown, EPA officials blamed Democrats for the quagmire and said the agency will continue to strive to meet its mission. The impasse came as Democrats demanded healthcare provisions in the budget while Republicans pushed for a short-term budget extension without policy changes.“Congressional Democrats are not only unwilling to vote for a clean funding bill, but their goal is to inflict as much pain on the American people as possible,” the EPA said. “Americans made their voices heard last November; Democrats must respect the will of the people. ... EPA will work to fulfill our statutory obligations, emergency response efforts, and Administration priorities.” But the agency has already lost considerable expertise through its staff cuts and restructuring, which have lessened its ability to respond to both emerging and existing threats, according to Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program. “The additional loss of people will essentially take us to a point where EPA will be almost unable to complete its mission,” Birnbaum said in a statement. Since Trump took office in January, the EPA has canceled hundreds of environmental grants; rolled back protections against pesticides, forever chemicals and fossil fuel emissions; issued exemptions for large polluters, eliminated its office of Research and Development and announced plans to repeal the endangerment finding, which affirms that greenhouse gases are harmful to human health and the environment, among other efforts.The furloughs at EPA could become permanent. A recent memo from the federal Office of Management and Budget directed federal agencies to prepare for mass layoffs in the event of a government shutdown, implying people may not be rehired.“If you’ve already cut the staff by 4,000 and more is to come from the shutdown and from further [reductions in force], then there will be even less protections,” said Vicki Arroyo, a former EPA associate administrator for policy who served under both the Biden and Reagan administrations. Arroyo recalled the challenges of maintaining the agency’s core functions during the last federal shutdown six years ago, when she was the only one of about 160 people on her team who remained at work. Duties such as economic analyses, permitting for energy projects such as offshore wind and National Environmental Policy Act reviews were among those to suffer, she said, and could be hit even harder this time around.“When EPA funding and staffing are undercut, it doesn’t just hurt these public servants, it hurts us all,” Arroyo said. “Without a functioning EPA, we can’t trust that the water out of our tap is safe ... and without EPA staff on duty, we can’t rely on EPA to monitor and protect air quality so that children without asthma and others with respiratory conditions are safe from pollution.” She and other experts also feared that less support and oversight from the federal government would result in diminished quality control at the local level, as many federal laws are delegated to states. In California, much will depend on the length of the shutdown, according to H.D. Palmer, spokesman for the California Department of Finance. A shutdown lasting only a few days would probably have minimal effect on the California EPA.Specifically, Palmer said many California environmental programs that were funded under the Biden administration should be able to continue even if there is a brief lapse in appropriations, such as brownfield project grants and the state’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund. However, a protracted shutdown could lead to delays in new project grants or permits being issued.“We’re going to continue to assess it depending on how long this thing goes on,” Palmer said. The EPA is not the only environmental agency that will face challenges. The U.S. Forest Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Park Service are also bracing for interruptions under the shutdown in addition to cuts this year.

Government
Animals
Energy

How a government shutdown impacts the EPA's mission to protect America's health

The Environmental Protection Agency faces challenges during a government shutdown. The agency's mission to protect health and the environment is at risk without a federal budget.

The Environmental Protection Agency faces challenges during a government shutdown. The agency's mission to protect health and the environment is at risk without a federal budget.

Government
Health

Suggested Viewing

Descended: The Fight for Harris Neck

The documentary film “Descended: The Fight for Harris Neck” explores an ongoing land battle in Harris Neck, Georgia. In 1942 the U.S. war department seized 2,687 acres of land from a self-reliant community of seventy-five African American families. Since 1962 the land has been a national wildlife refuge. The film seeks to answer the pivotal question: How has a community been shaped by its common goal to reclaim their land?

Social Justice
Government
Nature

THE SPRAYER

In the land occupied with the sprayers army, no one has the right to grow any kind of plants either in public or private. So many of the people and soldiers do not even know how a plant grows or looks like, until one day one of the soldiers finds a seed buried deep down in the dust and his curiosity is just the beginning of something extraordinary, something big, something revolutionary.

Plants
CO2
Animation

Gopher Games: The Fight to Save the Heart of Florida

As developers slowly squeeze every ounce of profit they can out of the Florida landscape, animals like the gopher tortoise and more than 365 creatures that rely on them are being driven to extinction. Developers have infiltrated every level of government in Florida including the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, an organization supposedly dedicated to protecting Florida's wildlife and wild places. Protections for the tortoise and other species is slowly being chipped away. But there's still hope that we can save this species, and ultimately, ourselves. This film was created on a budget of only $5,000 and using 100% volunteer work, and is a story from told from the collective hearts of thousands of people who care about gopher tortoises and supported the film throughout the production process.

Conservation
Animals
Government

The Green Amendment: New Mexico, Part One

Join Maya van Rossum, Founder of Green Amendments For The Generations, in her exploration of New Mexico’s biggest environmental issues and the role a NM Green Amendment could play in the fight for environmental justice with: Senator Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, legislative sponsor of the New Mexico Green Amendment; Emma Rose Cohen, CEO/Founder of the sustainable business Final; Beata Tsosie-Peña, Environmental Health and Justice Program Coordinator for Tewa Women United; Artemisio Romero y Carver, founding member of Youth United for Climate Crisis Action (YUCCA); and Dee George and Penny Aucoin, fracking waste accident victims impacted residents of Otis, NM.

Government
Activism
Documentary

Sounding the Alarm ~ America's Climate Crisis

"It's really hard being a fire family. Every day it's getting worse." -Brett, wife of Marin County Battalion Chief in California.Every day, Americans who live close to the land and sea face the dangers of climate change—from a firefighter in California, to a beekeeper in Arizona, to a climate refugee losing her home in Florida. The changing climate affects our food systems, water and way of life. These American families are in the trenches sacrificing everything while facing depression, PTSD, and suicide—collateral damage of a crisis unchecked. Award-winning filmmaker, Peter Goetz, captures America's faces and voices, shot in 2020 leading up to the presidential election. Goetz and the Biden campaign made history, producing the first national climate spot to run during a presidential election. But this film dives deeper into the American climate crisis to explore the lives of the people who are sounding the alarm, worried about their grandchildren’s future, asking, "If not us, then who?" This is a story of the resilience, perseverance, and ingenuity of the American people. Ever hopeful, they collectively take on a common enemy. As the young, Navajo solar visionary Brett Issac insists, "We've got to turn this train around before it's too late."

Climate
Crisis
Government

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.