The New South Wales government has introduced legislation to allow the Mount Pleasant coal mine in the Hunter Valley to continue operating at expanded production rates, despite a High Court ruling that the expansion was invalid because planning authorities failed to consider the overseas emissions from exported coal.
Premier Chris Minns said the new laws would address the “unique legal uncertainty” arising from the High Court judgement, which in October found the mine's expansion approval was invalid. The High Court ruled that planning authorities had not considered the “Scope 3” emissions caused when the coal was burned overseas.
The mine, operated by MACH Energy, had been on track to extract 16.5 million tonnes of coal in 2026, but in the meantime had to rely on its original permit of 12.5 million tonnes per year. The legislation introduced on Tuesday would authorise “an increased annual production limit of 16.5 million tonnes until 2032… consistent with their current workforce and coal production profile,” Minns said.
“We’re committed to our plans in relation to renewable energy and climate change, we’re not walking away from it,” the premier told reporters. “But this is the biggest reform and revolution of energy markets in the state’s history, and I reserve the right to make an intervention to protect jobs and grow the economy where I think it’s warranted.” The government denied it was overturning the High Court decision, noting the bill requires coal exports to go to countries that are signatories to the Paris Agreement.
Legal experts and opponents criticised the move. Retired judge Anthony Whealy, now on the board of the Centre for Public Integrity, said the intervention was “reprehensible” and an attempt to override the “rule of law”. “The idea that a substantial mining venture can approach the government and say look, let’s go behind the court processes and sort this out between ourselves is a very dangerous precedent,” Whealy said last month.
Actor Michael Caton, who has emerged as a supporter of the protesters, was among activists and supporters who gathered at NSW parliament on Tuesday. “In the last 20 years, we have doubled coal production,” Caton said. “We’ve got less than 25 years to get rid of fossil fuels, but we’re doubling production of this mine up in the Hunter.” Caton, who said he had voted for the Minns Labor government, said: “If they keep this up, they won’t get my vote.”
Wendy Wales, president of the Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group (DAMSHEG), said she was disappointed the government was trying to pass legislation “ahead of a court process”. “This is a pretty dire situation, and everybody in New South Wales and Australia should be concerned,” she said.
The NSW Land and Environment Court is set to review the case in December. Debate on the bill has been adjourned in the lower house to a later date.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The intervention tests the balance between state government economic priorities and legal rulings on climate obligations, potentially setting a precedent for other mining approvals.
- The outcome affects jobs and coal production in the Hunter Valley, an area already facing transition pressures, while critics argue it undermines climate commitments.
- The December court review and parliamentary debate will determine whether the mine’s expansion proceeds legally or remains contested.
Background
The Mount Pleasant mine had its expansion approved in 2022, but legal challenges followed when the NSW Court of Appeal found the approval may have been invalid due to a failure to consider overseas emissions (Scope 3). In October 2026, the High Court upheld that view, ruling the expansion invalid. The mine continued to expand despite the legal uncertainty. The Minns government now seeks to bypass the court by enacting legislation that authorises the higher production rate.
Key Perspectives
Premier Chris Minns: Positioned the move as addressing “unique legal uncertainty” while reaffirming the government’s commitment to renewable energy and climate change, but argued intervention was warranted to protect jobs and the economy.
Retired judge Anthony Whealy: Called the intervention “reprehensible” and a dangerous attempt to go behind court processes, overriding the rule of law.
Actor Michael Caton: Highlighted the contradiction of doubling coal production when global efforts require phasing out fossil fuels within 25 years, and said he would withdraw his vote from the Minns government.
Wendy Wales (DAMSHEG): Expressed deep disappointment at the bypassing of the court process and said all Australians should be concerned.
What to Watch
- The December hearing in the NSW Land and Environment Court, which could rule on the validity of the original approval.
- The parliamentary schedule for debate on the bill, which has been adjourned to an unspecified later date.
- Any legal challenge to the new legislation itself, potentially on constitutional or rule-of-law grounds.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 12 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedThe NSW government intervened to allow the Mount Pleasant coal mine expansion despite a High Court ruling against it.Latest business news: “The NSW government has introduced laws to allow a Hunter Valley coal mine to continue operating at expanded production rates, despite a High Court ruling against it.”
- SupportedThe government introduced laws to authorise an annual production limit of 16.5 million tonnes until 2032.Latest business news: “Mr Minns has said the bespoke laws introduced on Tuesday would authorise "an increased annual production limit of 16.5 million tonnes until 2032… consistent with their current workforce and coal production profile".”
- SupportedThe High Court found the expansion invalid because planning authorities had not considered emissions from coal burned overseas.Latest business news: “In October, the High Court delivered its own decision that the expansion was invalid, because planning authorities had failed to consider the "Scope 3" emissions caused when the coal exports were burned overseas, when it approved the mine.”
- SupportedThe mine was on track to extract 16.5 million tonnes in 2026 but had to rely on its original permit for 12.5 million tonnes a year in the meantime.Latest business news: “In the meantime, the mine has to rely on its original planning permit, which allows for only 12.5 million tonnes of coal to be extracted per year, 4 million less than the 16.5 million tonnes it was on track to extract for 2026.”
- SupportedMinns said the laws would address “unique legal uncertainty”.Latest business news: “Premier Chris Minns said the new laws being introduced would address the "unique legal uncertainty" arising from the High Court judgement.”
- SupportedMinns told reporters, “We’re committed to our plans in relation to renewable energy and climate change, we’re not walking away from it.”Latest business news: “"We're committed to our plans in relation to renewable energy and climate change, we're not walking away from it," he told reporters on Tuesday.”
- SupportedMinns said he reserved the right to intervene to protect jobs and grow the economy.Latest business news: “"But this is the biggest reform and revolution of energy markets in the state's history, and I reserve the right to make an intervention to protect jobs and grow the economy where I think it's warranted."”
- SupportedThe government denied it was overturning the High Court decision and said the bill would require exports to go to countries that are signatories to the Paris Agreement.Latest business news: “The government denied that it was in effect "overturning" the High Court decision, and said the bill would require the coal exports to go to countries that were signatory to the Paris Agreement.”
- SupportedLegal experts criticised the intervention as “reprehensible” and described it as an attempt to override the “rule of law”.Latest business news: “But legal experts have criticised the intervention as "reprehensible" and described the government's actions as an attempt to override the "rule of law".”
- SupportedWhealy said the government intervention was a dangerous precedent for a mining venture to go behind court processes and settle matters with government.Latest business news: “"The idea that a substantial mining venture can approach the government and say look, let's go behind the court processes and sort this out between ourselves is a very dangerous precedent, and that's exactly what appears to have happened here," retired judge Anthony Whealy, who is now on the board of the Centre for Public Integrity, said last month.”
- SupportedCaton said coal production had doubled in the last 20 years.Latest business news: “"In the last 20 years, we have doubled coal production," Caton told reporters at the event.”
- SupportedWales said she was disappointed the government was trying to pass legislation “ahead of a court process”.Latest business news: “Wendy Wales, the president of the Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group (DAMSHEG), who opposed to the mine, said she was very disappointed the government was trying to pass legislation "ahead of a court process".”