Mining in the Great Australian Bight would be banned
Senator Sarah Hanson-Young wants to make mining and drilling a crime in the national waters of the Bight, the big curve of ocean off Australia's south coast. The bill would also make the environment minister ask for the Bight to go on the World Heritage List.
Official name: Great Australian Bight (World Heritage Protection) Bill 2025
- Mining in the national waters of the Great Australian Bight would become a crime. It could mean up to 3 years in jail.
- Companies could face court fines of up to 50,000 penalty units. A penalty unit is a set dollar amount used for fines.
- Any permit or title that already allows mining there would stop working. A title is a legal right to mine.
- The minister would have to put the Bight forward for the World Heritage List.
Who it affects
- Oil, gas and mining companies: They could no longer search for oil or minerals or mine in the Bight's national waters. Permits they hold would stop working.
- Fishing and tourism businesses in South Australia and Western Australia: The bill aims to protect the sea they rely on from drilling and spills.
- Researchers: Work to study or protect the Bight would be allowed.
- Permit holders who lose out: They could claim fair payment from the national government. They could go to the Federal Court, a national court, if they cannot agree on an amount.
Drilling threatens the Bight
The Great Australian Bight is the big curve of ocean along the south coast of South Australia and Western Australia. Senator Hanson-Young wrote notes to explain her bill. They say the Bight is home to many sea animals and birds found nowhere else. Several kinds of whales have their young there. It is also home to the Australian sea lion.
The notes also say the Bight supports thousands of fishing and tourism jobs. They argue that drilling puts the sea at risk, along with the towns that depend on it. They say this is true even without an oil spill. They also point to the effect on the climate.
This is a private bill from Senator Sarah Hanson-Young. That means it did not come from the government. Its aim is to protect the Bight's environment and the industries that rely on it from mining.
Where the ban applies
The bill draws a map of the area it covers. The area runs west from off the south east of South Australia, at about 140 degrees east. It goes to 123 degrees east, off Western Australia.
It covers national waters. These start three nautical miles from the shore. A nautical mile is a measure of distance at sea. They run out to 200 nautical miles. That outer line is the edge of Australia's exclusive economic zone. That is the stretch of sea where Australia controls fishing and mining. Waters close to shore belong to the states and are left out.
The ban would beat any other national law. That includes the main national environment law, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. It also includes the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006. That law covers oil and gas at sea. The ban would apply to everyone in the area, including people who are not Australian citizens.
Mining becomes a crime
Mining operations means the same as in the main environment law. It covers any work linked to mining, looking for minerals or digging them up.
Doing mining work in the area would be a crime. It could mean up to 2 years in jail, a fine of 1,000 penalty units, or both. A penalty unit is a set dollar amount used to work out national fines.
There would be a more serious version of the crime. It covers mining that did serious harm to the environment or could have. It also covers mining done to make money. The penalty is up to 3 years in jail, 2,000 penalty units, or both.
Courts would weigh things like the size of the area harmed and how easily it is hurt. They would look at whether the damage can be undone and what it would take to fix. The notes say harm to local jobs and businesses should also count.
Research or studies done to protect the Bight would not be a crime.
Fines and enforcement
As well as the crimes, a court could order big fines without a criminal trial. For a basic breach, the fine is up to 2,000 penalty units for a person and 20,000 for a company.
For a serious breach, the fine goes up to 5,000 penalty units for a person and 50,000 for a company.
The head of the environment department could pick inspectors. They would use the usual national powers to watch and investigate. They could enter, search and take things if a magistrate gives a warrant. A magistrate is a court officer, and a warrant is a court's written okay. Inspectors could also hand out on-the-spot fines. The Federal Court could order a company to stop.
Any permit, licence or title that already allows mining in the area would have no effect. Say a company already held a permit to search for oil in the Bight. That permit would stop counting the day the law starts.
Compensation and World Heritage
The ban might take someone's property in a way the Constitution counts as unfair. The Constitution is the top set of rules for how Australia is run. If so, the national government would have to pay a fair amount. If the two sides cannot agree, the person can ask the Federal Court to set the amount.
The minister would have to write to the World Heritage Committee as soon as they reasonably can. This is the United Nations group that picks which places go on the World Heritage List. The request could cover more of the Bight than the area in the ban.
Waiting in the Senate
If passed, the whole law would start the day after it was signed into law. That is done by the Governor-General, the King's representative.
Senator Hanson-Young brought the bill into the Senate on 11 February 2025. The Senate is the second house of Parliament. The bill died when the last Parliament ended on 21 July 2025. It was put back on the Senate's list of business on 23 July 2025. So it is alive again.
It is still before the Senate. It would need to pass the Senate and the House of Representatives to become law.
Its journey through Parliament
| 11 Feb 2025 | Senate: Introduced and read a first time |
| 11 Feb 2025 | Senate: Second reading moved |
| 21 Jul 2025 | Senate: Lapsed at end of Parliament |
| 23 Jul 2025 | Senate: Restored to Notice Paper |