Energy Giants Probed on Commitment to Indigenous Cultural Heritage

Woodside's Cossack Pioneer oil production facility off the northwest coast of Australia. AFP via Getty Images

Major Australian petroleum producers have been pressured about whether they provide “adequate” consultation with Indigenous groups regarding new offshore oil projects.

The country’s Senate is investigating a bill imposing stricter requirements on energy firms to consider Indigenous cultural heritage.

Under the Protecting the Spirit of Sea Country Bill 2023, energy companies must obtain “free, prior, and informed consent” from Aboriginal groups before environmental plans—which are often implemented as part of a project—are accepted.

The consent must also be consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

It is worth noting that the bill covers a wide range of cultural heritage issues that could impact oil projects, including underwater, tangible, and intangible heritage.

Woodside Weathers Indigenous MPs’ Scrutiny

During an inquiry on Aug. 26, representatives from Australia’s Woodside and Santos were grilled about their engagement with traditional owners.

Greens Senator Dorinda Cox questioned why she did not see Woodside send delegations or conduct workshops during one of its projects.

Sharon Reynolds, the head of First Nations and Human Rights at Woodside, told the Committee her company did engage with the community.

“We had five of our team members who attended this year,” she said. “Although we don’t set up stalls there, we’re very much actively involved and have been attending that forum for a number of years.”

A Woodside logo is seen in Perth, Western Australia, on March 16, 2024. Susan Mortimer/The Epoch Times

Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe then questioned whether Woodside had informed the Indigenous community in Murujuga about the pollution damage caused by its gas project to the rock art in the region.

In response, Woodside Executive Vice-President Tony Cudmore said there had not been any “conclusive scientific evidence” about the impact of Woodside’s gas operation on the art.

Reynolds also noted that Woodside had made findings of its research available to the Murajuga Rock Art Monitoring Program, which was run by the Western Australian government and the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation.

Thorpe Alleges Bribery

At the same time, Thorpe raised allegations that Australian Energy Producers (AEP) and Santos had paid members of the Northern Land Council, which represents the Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, to travel to the Tiwi Islands to promote an oil project.

AEP General Manager Victor Violante denied the allegation, saying it was incorrect.

Meanwhile, Santos Group general counsel and Executive Vice-President Michael Abbott said his company did not pay the council members for their consent.

“From Santos perspective, we do pay appearance money for people to attend the consultation. That’s to compensate them … wherever we do the consultation on the Tiwi or elsewhere,” he said.

“I’m not aware of it [Santos] is having paid people to travel to Tiwi, other than consultants and advisors engaged in a professional capacity.

“They [the council members] are paid for their actual services but not for their consent or engagement other than the standard fees for people attending consultation sessions.”

Concerns About the Bill

While Woodside agreed to the idea of better consultation requirements, it was still concerned about the impact of a bill.

Vice-President Cudmore said the bill’s proposal to expand the definition of “traditional owners” and “knowledge holders” was too broad, and inconsistent with the principles of UNDRIP.

“It’s important, in our view, to ensure consultation respects and centres on collective cultural authority of recognised institutions representing traditional owners,” he said.

Furthermore, the vice president was worried that the legislation would make it more difficult for oil projects to be approved.

“We would note that the bill would prevent the acceptance of an offshore project proposal or an environment plan where an activity, or part of an activity, is undertaken in an area in proximity of underwater cultural heritage, regardless of whether the activity has any potential to impact this heritage.”

Meanwhile, Josie Alec, a representative from the Australian Conservation Foundation, stressed the bill’s importance to the Indigenous community.

“It would give a voice to the people. It would ensure and make people accountable for what they’re saying, [and] make the government accountable,” she said.

Alec also stated that the bill would make it easier for Aboriginals to have their stories heard and understood.