Expert gives his best tips for farmers dealing with CSG
NAVIGATING terms and agreements with coal seam gas companies can be a daunting task for landholders.
It’s hard to know what to believe and what your rights are when dealing with multi-national gas companies and complicated laws.
For the past eight years, lawyer from P&E Law, Lestar Manning, has been working with property owners to make sure they know their rights when it comes to their land.
This week, Rural Weekly sat down with Mr Manning to hear his message to farmers.
In his dealings between property owners and mining and gas companies, Mr Manning has come up with a series of lessons and warnings he calls ‘lessons from the trenches’.
Mr Manning helped central Queensland grazier Steven Swan battle CSG company Santos after construction of a pipeline trench where he was not satisfied by the conduct on, or rehabilitation efforts to, his land (see case study).
The case was dismissed by the Planning and Environment Court, but Mr Manning said they are waiting on a decision on an appeal to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Queensland.
Mr Manning listed a series of concerns.
Negotiations commence with the mining and gas companies having all of the information.
“Farmers will have limited knowledge and should expect access to documents to be restricted when there is any conflict,” he said.
Farmers are asked to sign “agreements” where they are not fully informed and an agreement can be coerced because of state government laws.
Environmental Impact Statements are prepared prior to major mining and gas projects, including construction of pipelines.
Farmers are asked to make submissions and those submissions should be considered.
“You cannot simply rely upon the EIA process to protect your interests or inform you as to what is to occur,” Mr Manning said.
“The language of the plans produced through the EIA process may be aspirational and not enforceable.”
Government may not implement the plans.
Following the EIA process, Environmental Authorities are issued with conditions that must be complied with.
Mr Manning said
Environmental Authority conditions may be read down to have little effect.
“Contractual condition may be read against you in interpreting the Environmental Authority conditions,” he said.
He also claimed that, in his experience, you cannot expect the government to help in a battle with a CSG or mining company.
“Government and proponents of major projects
will have access to all of the information,” he said.
“Government will exercise powers or grant powers that will require you to act against your interests.
“They are willing to change laws if they do not like the outcome.”
Mr Manning said that there are a number of important things to consider when developing an agreement with a gas company.
Set out specific terms for indemnity, breaches, full description of activities for which compensation is being paid, construction time limits, environmental insurance, and how long the agreement will last.
Make sure your agreement requires the provision of documents that relate to your land.
“The farmer should be able to say, ‘I want to see your daily work sheets, I want to see what’s happening to my land’,” Mr Manning said.
“It will make the companies more accountable.
“Make sure everything is in writing, even if it is by email, don’t make any handshake agreements.”
He also strongly recommended establishing time limits for activities to be completed.
“Most agreements do not have a set timeline with which activities must occur,” he said.
“If there is a rehabilitation requirement make sure to set a start date and a finish date.”