logo
Waitsia gas project delays leave Kerry Stokes-backed firm exporting reserved WA supplies

Waitsia gas project delays leave Kerry Stokes-backed firm exporting reserved WA supplies

A gas development backed by media mogul Kerry Stokes has been tapping into Western Australia's domestic gas market to supply overseas customers amid long delays in the delivery of the plant.
At the time, the project was supposed to cost $700 million and be operational by late 2023.
Mr McGowan said unless Waitsia was exempted from the ban, "the project might not happen" and the gas may have stayed in the ground.
But almost two years after that deadline and with a construction bill running at almost double the original estimate, the project is still not ready.
In the meantime, the ABC can reveal the project's owners have been taking gas from the domestic market to supply their customers overseas.
Waitsia's owners are Beach Energy — the ASX-listed gas producer backed by Seven Group, the conglomerate controlled by Mr Stokes — and Mitsui, a Japanese trading firm.
Filings by Beach and public reporting of supplies to and from the Dampier to Bunbury gas pipeline — WA's main energy artery — suggest the partners have sent more than a dozen liquefied natural gas (LNG) cargoes since late 2023.
As much as 180 terajoules a day — or roughly 15 per cent of the gas used in the local WA market — has been diverted for export at times during that period, according to the Australian Energy Market Operator's gas bulletin board.
In its filings, Beach said the gas has been sourced via so-called swap arrangements, in which the company takes existing supplies from the domestic market on the promise it will return an equivalent amount later when Waitsia is up and running.
The gas is processed into LNG at the North West Shelf, a giant plant in the Pilbara where supplies have been dwindling for years.
While neither company would comment, Waitsia's backers have pointed out that prices for gas in WA's domestic market have been falling in recent times.
From as much as $11.60 a gigajoule in late 2023, according to Perth-based firm Gas Trading Australia, prices on the spot market had fallen to just $6 a gigajoule.
On the east coast, by contrast, prices were trading between $10 and $15 a gigajoule.
Peter Strachan, a veteran resources analyst, said the fact prices had been falling while Waitsia's partners were exporting domestic gas was nothing more than luck.
Mr Strachan said while there was nothing unlawful about what the partners were doing, it raised questions about the integrity of WA's domestic gas market.
"It's serendipity," Mr Strachan said.
"It might be good business operations, but I think it goes against the whole idea that the gas in Western Australia is for West Australians to consume.
"And that's whether it's today or tomorrow or in 10 or 20 years' time."
Under WA's laws, the market is supplied courtesy of a 15 per cent reservation policy on offshore fields.
It is also supplied by onshore fields.
Up until the exemption awarded to Waitsia, onshore projects had exclusively supplied the local market.
After years of chopping and changing policy, the WA government last year said it would allow onshore developers to export up to 20 per cent of their reserves but only until 2030.
By that time, the Australian Energy Market Operator has forecast that WA will enter a structural deficit of gas, sparking warnings that some users could be pushed to the wall.
Mr Strachan said some of the problems that had bedevilled Waitsia were beyond the control of its owners.
Chief among them was the collapse of construction company Clough in late 2022.
But he queried why Beach and Mitsui were being allowed to take relatively cheap gas from the domestic market to cover their position with buyers overseas.
"They had to find some gas from somewhere to meet those obligations they couldn't meet because their project was basically two years delayed," he said.
"You would have thought if they were stuck and had to find gas, they could have … bought that gas on the open market from the North West Shelf or from Gorgon or from somewhere in Kuwait.
"But they might have made a loss doing that.
The DomGas Alliance, which represents some of Australia's biggest gas users such as Wesfarmers, Alcoa and Yara, was equally sceptical.
DomGas Alliance spokesman Richard Harris said taking gas from the local market to sell internationally flew in the face of WA's domestic policies.
"Domestic gas, when it's in the market in WA, is for WA use, not for export," Mr Harris said.
Mr Harris said it was true domestic users were currently enjoying a period of relatively subdued pricing.
But he said that reprieve was likely to be temporary.
What's more, he said it had been largely caused by the loss of some major gas customers, such as mining giant BHP's Nickel West division and an alumina refinery owned by Alcoa.
There had also been, he noted, a short-term bump in extra supplies from Woodside's Pluto project following scrutiny from a state parliamentary inquiry.
"All forecasts say that is just a short-term phenomenon," he said.
"Within a couple of years, we're going to be heading for a shortfall, and that's certainly what all the forecasts say by 2028, we're in for a significant shortfall of gas."
The WA government declined a request to be interviewed about the exports.
Instead, it issued a statement in which a spokesperson said Waitsia's export approval also came with a commitment to supply domestic gas.
The spokesperson also insisted swap arrangements pursued by Waitsia's partners would have little effect on the domestic gas market.
"No further swap arrangements are anticipated once the Waitsia gas plant is operational," they said.
"The export of these LNG cargoes does not impact the delivery of Waitsia's domestic gas commitment."
Shadow Energy Minister Steve Thomas was not as charitable.
Dr Thomas said the export of domestic supplies was clearly never intended by those who designed the state's domestic gas policy.
"I don't think the architects of the domestic gas policy ever expected that onshore domestic gas would have to be substituted into the offshore market to meet existing contracts," Dr Thomas said.
He argued the government had been so inconsistent in its management of domestic gas policies that they had been turned into a mess.
"So the domestic gas policy either stands up or it doesn't," he said.
Under the terms of the deal in 2020, the Waitsia partners were allowed until the end of 2028 to export 7.5 million tonnes of LNG.
Mr Harris from the DomGas Alliance noted that the project partners were fast running out of time in which to meet their export quotas.
Given the lucrative nature of the overseas LNG market, where gas can fetch far higher prices than from domestic buyers, he anticipated a push to extend the export approvals.
But he stressed it was something the alliance would oppose.
And he warned a failure to do so would risk higher gas prices and "mean the projects that we want to happen like critical minerals won't be able to find gas".
"They [Waitsia] were always given a timeline when they had to deliver their bargain to the state, which was to deliver gas into the domestic market in 2029," Mr Harris said.
"And that timeline should stick."
Peter Strachan agreed but wondered whether Waitsia would still have the reserves to supply the WA market after 2028, noting the project's partners had been progressively writing down their estimates of the gas contained in the field.
"Where they thought there would be gas they've drilled and 'oh, there's no gas'," Mr Strachan said.
"They're lucky now that they've actually got enough gas to meet their commitments. But where does that leave the local consumer?"
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Kmart denies sourcing any products from factories linked to forced labour in China
Kmart denies sourcing any products from factories linked to forced labour in China

ABC News

timea few seconds ago

  • ABC News

Kmart denies sourcing any products from factories linked to forced labour in China

An Australian-based Uyghur group has filed legal action in the Federal Court against Kmart, alleging the retail giant is sourcing some of its products from factories linked to forced labour camps in western China. Kmart has denied the allegations. Ramila Chanisheff, representing the Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women's Association (AUTWA), has sought documents from Kmart — requesting the retailer prove its public claims of operating a "sustainable" and "ethical" company, with products free from slavery or forced-labour. The court action is seeking preliminary disclosure of documents relating to Kmart's supply chains that could be linked to labour in the Uyghur homeland, now known as the Xinjiang. Australia, unlike the United States and some European nations, does not prohibit goods imported from China's Xinjiang region. The US has banned goods from that region since 2021, over credible evidence that many products are manufactured there using forced labour — particularly involving Uyghur Muslims and other minority groups. Jennifer Kanis, a solicitor from Maurice Blackburn representing AUTWA, said the legal case was designed to compel Kmart to, "prove their public position". By cross-referencing Kmart's supplier list with "numerous credible reports" connecting companies in the Xinjiang region to forced labour, the plaintiffs say they will allege they found a match for at least two factory suppliers. The application alleges at least two garment suppliers are linked to the use of Uyghur forced labour in the Uyghur region. In a statement, Kmart said it was disappointed AUTWA took this course of action and had invited the association to meet with them "several times" to understand their concerns. "Kmart has been in correspondence with the applicant's lawyers for over 12 months and has provided extensive details of our Ethical Sourcing Program," the spokesperson said. "For over 15 years, we have had in place an Ethical Sourcing Program, which helps us to identify and mitigate modern slavery risks, including the risk of forced labour, in our operations and supply chains. "Suppliers in the Kmart Ethical Sourcing Program are regularly monitored through activities including our site visits, audit programs and investigations if we receive any reports or complaints of concern." The spokesperson also said it was the first Australian retailer to publicly disclose its factory list on its website for transparency. Human rights groups and the United Nations have previously accused China of committing crimes against humanity and possible genocide against the Uyghur population and other mostly-Muslim ethnic groups in the north-western region of Xinjiang. The Chinese Government has repeatedly denied these claims. Freya Dinshaw from the Human Rights Law Centre, said alarm bells had been "ringing for a long time" regarding forced labour risks, especially in the Chinese garment industry, and pointed out that "85 per cent of the cotton in China comes from the Xinjiang region". Australian retailers, she said, "have been on notice for some time" regarding these risks. The allegations against Kmart also sheds light on the potential shortcomings of Australia's current Modern Slavery Act. Professor Justine Nolan of the Australian Human Rights Institute said while Australia was considered a leader when it introduced the Act in 2018, the law primarily imposed a mandatory reporting obligation for large companies (those with over $100 million in annual consolidated revenue) to identify modern slavery risks, but not an obligation to act on those findings. And a quarter of Australian companies were not complying with their basic reporting requirements, because there is "no significant enforcement framework," according to a Federal Government review led by John McMillan in 2023, "A non-compliance rate of 25 per cent just by false reporting or not reporting: that shows that the law that we currently have are not sufficient and that we really do need reforms," Professor Nolan said. She said other jurisdictions, such as the European Union and the United States, have moved further, adopting laws that mandated human rights due diligence and implementing forced labour import bans, which Australia lacks. A 2023 independent review of the Act confirmed deep inadequacies and found that "no meaningful change had been shown for people at the greatest risk of modern slavery." Last month the Australian Government released a consultation paper aiming to strengthen the Modern Slavery Act, focusing on streamlining existing mandatory reporting criteria (link here: "The reforms they are proposing are useful, not sufficient," Professor Nolan said. "We're still not tackling the root causes of the problem and we need to think about introducing an obligation to act, not just an obligation to report." Australia continues to import an estimated $27 billion worth of goods at risk of forced labour into the country every year with no laws that would prevent the importation of such goods, according to a 2023 report from human rights group Walk Free, an arm of Andrew Forrest's Minderoo Foundation. Ramila Chanisheff said if Kmart could prove beyond doubt that they were not linked to forced labour, the association would be satisfied. However, if links were found, AUTWA's call to action would be for Kmart to "divest" from those suppliers. "You can get your cotton from elsewhere," she said. Ms Kanis, said a successful outcome would be greater transparency and accountability in relation to being able to make claims about ethical sourcing, ensuring these were not "empty claims". Ms Chanisheff, who was born in East Turkestan/Xinjiang, but raised in Australia, still has family and friends in the province. She believes Australians do care about how their products and that "consumers can make a difference". Professor Nolan said without stronger laws, Australia risks becoming a "dumping ground" for goods made with forced labour if other countries implement effective import bans. She also noted a "willingness among Australian companies to go further" and align with global standards, but the current modern slavery law, introduced to federal parliament in 2018 is "not sufficient". "Seven years is a long time to wait for people who are working in modern slavery every day," she said. In a statement, the Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said the federal government "is committed to combating modern slavery" and "its immediate priority is implementing its response to the statutory review of the Act to strengthen its operation." Minister Rowland also said the public consultation process "will inform the development of balanced measures to support and incentivise Australian businesses to take actions to eliminate modern slavery risks and practices, and combat them in their supply chains."

We might be watching Albanese's 'big moment'
We might be watching Albanese's 'big moment'

ABC News

timea few seconds ago

  • ABC News

We might be watching Albanese's 'big moment'

Foreign Minister Penny Wong says the government understands the "urgency" behind the global push to recognise a Palestinian state, with there being "a risk there will be no Palestine left to recognise" due to the conflict in the region. Meanwhile, Home Affairs Minister Tony Bourke says he's 'in the business of stopping hatred from being imported to Australia," blocking dozens of visas from entering the country to "protect social cohesion". Are we watching an organised effort from Labor to gain permission to put Australia's foot on the accelerator in responding to the conflict? And Japanese shipbuilder Mitsubishi Heavy Industries will build the Australian navy's new $10 billion fleet of warships. More money for defence - but is it a good deal? Patricia Karvelas and Brett Worthington break it all down on Politics Now. Got a burning question? Got a burning political query? Send a short voice recording to PK and Fran for Question Time at thepartyroom@

‘A lot of money': Brutal reason you could be in for a tax bill this year
‘A lot of money': Brutal reason you could be in for a tax bill this year

News.com.au

time12 minutes ago

  • News.com.au

‘A lot of money': Brutal reason you could be in for a tax bill this year

A little-known tax return detail is seeing an increasing number of people hit with unexpected bills this year, with Australians warned that even past returns could come under scrutiny. Melbourne-based accountant, Michael Fox, first encountered this issue a few months ago, when he received a notice from the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) The message related to a review of the private health insurance information provided in one of his client's past returns, stating that client now owed money to the ATO. The tax bill was a result of the Medicare Levy Surcharge (MLS) being retroactively applied, despite the client believing they did not have to pay it at the time. The MLS is paid by Australian tax payers who do not have private hospital cover and who earn above a certain income. The aim of the surcharge is to encourage individuals to take out private hospital cover in order to reduce the demand on the public Medicare system. Since receiving this first notice, Mr Fox, the Principal of Michael Fox Arts Accountant & Valuer, is now dealing with about 20 cases all relating to this same issue. 'We're just getting these random notices, like, 'Oh, we've looked through your private health insurance information for the 2022 financial year, and we, we reckon you owe us $2000'. We get these notices and we're like, 'what the hell?'' Mr Fox told The accountant said people are getting 'trapped', with the issue arising when clients either get married or enter a defacto relationship and are required to include their 'spouse' on their tax return. For tax purposes, this not only includes legally married couples but also those who live together in a domestic relationship. Mr Fox said this can 'cause a complication' in situations where couples are not under a private health insurance family plan. To avoid the surcharge, every person in the household has to have an 'appropriate level' of private patient health cover. 'Quite often, what happens is that one might not be insured, the other one is insured, and all of a sudden, bingo, you've got a Medicare Levy surcharge problem,' he said. He believes the reason there has been a sudden influx in people being stung by the MLS is due to the ATO's increased use of sophisticated data matching programs. Data matching allows the ATO to retrieve data from a variety of third-party sources, including banks, financial institutions and other government agencies. In a recent blog post, Mr Fox claimed there are situations where both you and your spouse may have your own singles comprehensive private health insurance policies, and still trigger the surcharge. 'With sophisticated data matching by the ATO, they can now discover that you and your spouse both have singles cover and not family cover and issue amendments to prior year returns,' he said When it comes to the MLS, the threshold to trigger for the surcharge changes depending on your circumstances, with the rate varying between 1 per cent, 1.25 per cent or 1.5 per cent. For the 2015-26 income year, the MLS is triggered for a single person when they reach an income of $101,001 or more. For a family, it is triggered by an income of $202,001, with this threshold increasing by $1500 for each MLS dependent child after the first child. In a statement to an ATO spokesperson said that if your spouse and any dependants have an appropriate level of private patient hospital cover for the whole financial year, then 'it doesn't matter whether that private patient hospital cover is provided by a family or singles cover'. 'As couples do not necessarily lodge at the same time, our data matching programs will review returns after they have been lodged,' the spokesperson said. 'This review is to ensure the taxpayer, spouse and any dependants have the appropriate cover, including if this is through family or singles cover. 'The same data matching processes will occur when a taxpayer has lodged an amended tax return.' The spokesperson said there are some instances where the ATO has difficulty matching an individual taxpayer to a health insurance policy, with this often due a mismatch with the data provided to the health fund by the client or from the fund to the ATO. 'If the ATO is unable to match a health insurance policy to an ATO account, the individual may appear to not have appropriate cover,' the spokesperson said. Many of Mr Fox's clients who have encounted this issue surcharge issue have young families. One of those clients, Guy, who lives in Adelaide with his partner and two young children, copped a $2500 bill from the ATO this year. Shortly after lodging his return this year, he received a notice from the ATO that his 2022/23 tax return had been amended and he now had to pay the MLS, as his children were not covered by his private health insurance policy. Speaking to the 43-year-old explained that he and his partner have their own individual health covers and his children have been using the Medicare system. 'The system for kids is so good, so we just haven't seen the need for private health insurance (for them),' he said. Guy's children are aged 3 and 6 and, up until now, this has never been flagged as an issue when completing his tax returns, saying 'this is the first I have heard of it'. While he has received tax bills in the past given he runs his own business, this one left Guy 'surprised and disappointed'. 'It felt like they were scraping the bottom of the barrel,' he said. 'I think it was just that sort of feeling of like, with the cost of living being what it is, for the ATO then come and just put the their hand out for another pay out historically, and then having to factor that into a family budget.' Mr Fox noted that, as the ATO is going back through old returns, people are likely going to cop multiple bills. 'If you go back to 2022, they are going to be trapped for three years and that could be three times $2000 or $3000. That's a lot of money,' he said, adding there is now 'nothing (people) can do' as they weren't aware of the discrepancy at the time. Mr Fox said the 'fair thing to do' would be for the government to give an amnesty period for a year to allow people to get their affairs in order. 'I just don't think it's fair that they are going back using AI data matching to basically trap people,' he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store