CCWA Executive Director Matt Roberts said it was “a glaring example of how environmental protection laws have been eroded in Western Australia”.

“This is an anti-democratic decision by the EPA,” Mr Roberts said. “Of the 229 public submissions made, all but two of them called for the project to be assessed, yet the EPA ignored the public in favour of waving through a billionaire mining baron’s mega-polluting gas project.

“The Belisama project was referred in May 2026, with CCWA identifying key threats to endangered Carnaby's Black Cockatoos from native vegetation clearing, cumulative impacts to groundwater and concerns over climate polluting carbon emissions.

“Because the WA government has eroded our state’s environment laws and failed to set standards, there’s no longer a mechanism for the public to hold the EPA to account for poor decisions like this one.

“This government has removed appeal rights on EPA decisions on the level of assessment and has weakened the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Environmental Factor Guidelines to remove any obligation to reduce emissions. This is the type of bad decision you get when the laws are broken - West Australians and the WA environment deserve better.

“The WA Government removed the right of appeal for the public to challenge decisions to not assess projects in 2024. There is no oversight of how the EPA makes these decisions, cutting out the role of the Office of the Appeals Convenor who could have reviewed the decision.

“The Government has removed the checks and balances and taken away a critical element of public accountability.

“Our worst fears about the removal of those appeal rights are being played out in real time, with the EPA shirking responsibility for environmental assessment and completely disregarding the Greenhouse Gas Environmental Factor Guidelines.

“Just this month, CCWA launched an important report titled Back from the Brink which makes clear recommendations about what is needed to fix WA’s broken environment laws.

“This includes the call for public appeal rights to be reinstated, and for the EPA to assess greenhouse gases against a carbon budget.

“Adding 109 million tonnes of climate polluting emissions into the atmosphere is not going to get us to net zero.  That it’s not even being assessed by our independent environmental regulator – the EPA - is astonishing.

“Currently, the EPA doesn’t live up to its name. We need strong leadership from the EPA, so it can stand up to polluting proposals like this one from a billionaire mining baron. And at the same time, we need strong environment laws to hold the EPA itself to account.”

Mr Roberts said this proposal would produce 85, 900 tonnes of ‘Scope 1’ greenhouse emissions per annum and 2.15 million tonnes of emissions over the life of the project. It would also release 4.4 million tonnes of Scope 3 emissions each year - almost 109 million tonnes over the life of the project).

He said the decision report states: The EPA notes that scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions for the proposal are below the 100,000 tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2-e) per annum threshold that would typically warrant further assessment by the EPA.

“The complete deferral of key components of the project for assessment by the Department of Mines and Petroleum and DWER indicates a dangerous erosion of what the EPA sees as its responsibility in terms of environmental protection,” Mr Roberts said.

“The EPA is not considering what the likely impacts of a project will be on the environment; it’s considering which agencies can be responsible for licensing different components. This is not the role of the EPA and does not meet their purpose to ensure protection of the environment,” he added.

ENDS

Media contact: John Cooke – 0433 679 780