The Sydney Morning Herald
· collected 2026-10-08 · by Michael McGowan
One Nation proposes giving politicians power to approve coal mines instead of independent assessments as part of efforts to reverse planning reforms designed to limit corruption risks. This follows a High Court ruling that declared invalid an expansion of a Hunter Valley coal mine, highlighting potential legal challenges for other approvals. Rob Stokes, who established the Independent Planning Commission in 2018, criticized One Nation’s proposal, while Mike Newman argued ministers should be responsible for decision-making to avoid bureaucracy and promote investment predictability.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-10-08,
using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the
same event (that is the story summary below).
One Nation would scrap independent assessment of major new coal mines and hand decision-making power back to politicians as part of the resurgent right-wing party’s plan to reverse decades of planning reforms designed to limit corruption risk by removing ministerial power over major projects.
asserted
Nation → scrap → projects
The High Court on Wednesday issued a seismic judgment in which it declared a major Hunter Valley coal mine expansion invalid, forcing NSW planning authorities to reckon for the first time with the impact of Australian coal burnt overseas.
asserted
expansion → issue → coal
The ruling has potentially wide-ranging ramifications.
asserted
ruling → have → ramifications
The NSW and federal Labor governments have played down its significance, calling it a narrow ruling that won’t impact other mine approvals.
asserted
that → play → approvals
However, environmental groups are already privately discussing the possibility of further legal action, including against the massive Hunter Valley Operations coal mine expansion approved last week.
asserted
groups → discuss → expansion
One Nation, which has taken an aggressively pro-coal stance as it seeks to win seats in the Hunter Valley at the state election in March, says it would deal with the issue in part by scrapping the Independent Planning Commission (IPC) entirely and giving approval power to ministers.
asserted
it → take → ministers
Such a move would undo decades of reforms, which have sought to remove the decision-making power for contentious projects from individual ministers after repeated corruption scandals.
asserted
which → undo → scandals
Rob Stokes, the former Coalition minister who established the planning commission in 2018, said of One Nation’s proposal: “The vested interests will love it.”
asserted
interests → establish → it
But Mike Newman, One Nation’s leader in NSW, said ministers should be “on the front line of decision-making”.
“We’re just forever tying ourselves in knots, adding more onerous layers of bureaucracy,” he said.
asserted
he → say → bureaucracy
“Ministers should be driving policies … if One Nation was elected, we are the representatives of the people, not the bureaucracy.”
asserted
we → drive → people
Ministers in a One Nation government would be “subject to KPIs and tasked with delivery”, Newman said.
asserted
Newman → task → delivery
They would be less susceptible to corruption because “they are not former politicians [and] don’t owe the unions”.
asserted
they → owe → unions
“If we continue to go down this path of more regulation in the way we are going, [we are going] to ruin predictability in the marketplace, which will only end up undermining long-term investment into our country,” he said.
asserted
he → continue → country
The IPC was established in 2018, replacing the previous Planning Assessment Commission introduced by the former Labor government, in response to a series of scandals over ministerial approvals for major developments.
asserted
IPC → establish → developments
It determines approval for certain major projects, including in cases where there are 50 or more public objections or an applicant has made a political donation.
asserted
applicant → determine → donation
The Minns government has made a series of changes to its functions, including increasing the threshold at which the IPC becomes the decision-making body in relation to mining projects, data centres or renewable energy.
asserted
IPC → make → projects
Stokes, the former planning minister who set it up, said the IPC had taken “backdoor politics out of big planning decisions, particularly in the resource sector”.
“The rent seekers and lobbyists hated it because they could no longer use media or threats to influence a decision on an individual project at a political level to get the outcome they wanted,” he said.
uncertain
he → set → outcome
“Removing the IPC will only slow down time frames for decisions through increasing the risk of expensive litigation, as well as returning to the bad old days of arbitrary decision-making through ministerial fiat.
asserted
Removing → remove → fiat
It can only reduce public confidence in decision-making.
asserted
It → reduce → making
“If you get rid of the IPC, it means justice will be less accessible for ordinary people, particularly in regional communities.”
asserted
justice → rid → communities
The High Court ruled on Wednesday that the IPC had failed to consider scope 3 emissions, caused by the burning of the coal, when weighing approval conditions to minimise emissions “to the greatest extent practicable”.
asserted
IPC → rule → extent
The decision, which related to MACH Energy Australia’s Mount Pleasant coal mine extension, raised the prospect of further legal challenges against other major resource projects.
asserted
which → relate → projects
Premier Chris Minns on Thursday played down the significance of the ruling, telling green groups not to get “overexcited” by what he described as a “very narrow, technical decision”.
asserted
he → play → decision
He played down the need for legislative changes to override the judgment, saying MACH still had approval to operate until 2032.
asserted
MACH → play → 2032
Noting One Nation’s stated intention to unwind the state’s wider framework of emissions regulation, Minns said such a move would damage “Australia’s reputation as both a mining economy and one that cares about the environment”.
asserted
that → note → environment
“I think you should be careful what you wish for,” he said.
asserted
he → think → what
“We can have both a growing mining sector and continue our very high, hard-fought-for reputation for the world’s best coal and an economy and a system that cares about the environment.”
asserted
that → have → environment
Get to the heart of what’s happening with climate change and the environment.
asserted
what → get → change
The Aporia
