What’s Happening?
AgForce has called for amendments to Queensland’s proposed Critical Minerals Bill, with its concerns centred on landholder rights and agricultural protections.
The organisation supports responsible critical minerals development and other major projects that deliver genuine benefits for Queensland. However, it wants stronger safeguards within the proposed State Strategic Project framework.
The broader regime would apply to eligible private and public projects that meet statutory criteria. AgForce says the framework must allow appropriate development without weakening fair commercial negotiations or productive agriculture.
Why It Matters
AgForce’s main concern is whether the State could influence what would otherwise remain a private commercial negotiation. General President Shane McCarthy said landowners should retain a fair bargaining position when dealing with project proponents.
“The issue is the State should not be able to step into what would otherwise be a private commercial negotiation over someone’s land,” McCarthy said.
The organisation opposes extending compulsory acquisition powers to projects not currently considered matters of public or State interest. It says the presence of those powers could influence negotiations, even when formal acquisition does not occur.
“Compulsory acquisition must remain a genuine last resort for matters of State or Public interest,” McCarthy said. “Existing compulsory acquisition powers should not be expanded in a way that allows them to sit in the background of a negotiation and change the bargaining position of the landowner.”
“We do not oppose major projects, but we cannot condone circumstances where the State can undermine the commercial negotiation process or override key agricultural protections,” McCarthy said.
Local Impact
AgForce is also concerned that projects could access agricultural properties before practical farming protections are settled. Premature access could disrupt stock movement, cropping, water systems and the ongoing operation of individual businesses.
The organisation wants biosecurity, workplace health and safety, internal road access, water access and compensation agreed before practical access begins.
“Productive agricultural land is not simply land on a map,” McCarthy said. “It is where families operate their businesses and proper arrangements must be in place for on-farm safety, biosecurity, internal road access, water access and compensation before anything else proceeds.”
AgForce also wants professional advice funded throughout negotiations, rather than only during the final offer stage. Legal, valuation, agronomic and other expert advice should become a statutory entitlement for affected landholders.
The organisation says this support would help address the difference in resources between landowners and major proponents.
“Farmers and graziers should not be financially disadvantaged just because they are negotiating with well-resourced project proponents or government-backed interests,” McCarthy said.
By the Numbers
AgForce wants the final unconditional offer period increased sixfold, from 10 business days to 60 business days.
The proposed regime could grant four major powers, covering land access, enabling works, compulsory acquisition and modification of other legislation.
AgForce wants two protected land categories retained, Priority Agricultural Areas and Strategic Cropping Areas.
Zoom In
AgForce wants productive agricultural land, agricultural productivity, and food and fibre security recognised as important State interests. These interests should be considered alongside resource development whenever State Strategic Project powers are exercised.
It also wants existing protections for important agricultural areas retained. Greater parliamentary scrutiny should apply when project powers modify the operation of other legislation.
“Queensland should not have to choose between major investment and essential agricultural interests,” McCarthy said. “Agricultural land must not be made less strategically important because of the Bill.”
Zoom Out
The debate centres on how Queensland can support major investment while protecting its agricultural base. AgForce says responsible development remains possible when landholder rights and existing protections are respected.
However, the organisation warns that productive farmland may not recover after permanent loss or division.
“Productive farmland is finite,” McCarthy said. “Once fractured or lost, its productive use is gone forever. Practical, fair amendments must be made before this Bill becomes law.”
What To Look For Next?
AgForce is encouraging farmers, graziers and landowners to contact their local State MPs before the Bill proceeds. It wants agriculture fully represented while lawmakers consider the proposed legislation.
The organisation will continue seeking good-faith negotiations, funded professional advice and settled arrangements before project access occurs. It also wants compulsory acquisition kept as a genuine last resort.