Exclusive: new documents raise questions about ministers’ previous statements on the land clearing saga

This article is more than 11 months old

This article is more than 11 months old

The former environment minister Josh Frydenberg sought urgent information about an investigation for land clearing brought by his department against a company in which fellow minister Angus Taylor and his relatives held an interest, new documents show.

A week after parliament resumed in February 2017, and shortly after his department began an investigation into clearing of critically endangered grasslands at the Taylor family-owned property, Frydenberg’s office contacted the environment and energy department saying it required “urgent talking points” because the case had been raised in parliament.

But Hansard transcripts for that time show no record of the matter being raised in either the House or the Senate chambers, raising the possibility it was discussed with Frydenberg by an unnamed person privately.

Timeline Angus Taylor grasslands saga Show Hide Former environment minister Greg Hunt declares Southern Highlands temperate native grasslands critically endangered. Normal farming practices, such as grazing, are permitted, but not clearing. Poisoning of grasslands is alleged to have occurred near Delegate in southern NSW shortly after a company, Jam Land Pty Ltd, purchased the property, prompting complaints from a neighbour. NSW environmental authorities investigate. Federal environment department investigates under the Environmental Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act because grasslands are federally listed. Department becomes aware of the familial connection between Jam Land director Richard Taylor and the then cities minister, Angus Taylor, through a media search. Taylor says he got complaints from the farming community in his electorate about the endangered listing of native grasslands. Parliament resumes for 2017. Environment department officials met with Jam Land to discuss potential contraventions of EPBC Act and possible offsets. Grasslands compliance action is allegedly raised in parliament (no record of this in Hansard for the House or Senate). Department says minister’s office sought urgent talking points about the compliance action involving Jam Land. Department provides a dot point briefing, released to Guardian under freedom of information with redactions of all material relating to “an ongoing investigation”. Taylor says he had a detailed conversation with unnamed farmer from Yass and that prompted him to seek a meeting on the grasslands listing. Environment officials meet with representatives for Jam Land at the site Environment minister Josh Frydenberg’s office phones for information regarding the listing of grasslands. “He (the staffer) started quizzing me on the changed definition … He made the point that for farmers in the Monaro this is the ‘number 1 issue’ of concern,” bureaucrat Geoff Richardson writes. The minister’s office requests that the department meet with Taylor to answer the technical aspects of the listing outcome. The bureaucrats say they they need to know any sensitivities “including any compliance action (that we would of course stay out of completely).” Bureaucrats from the environment department meet with Taylor in his Parliament House office to discuss the grasslands listing. A compliance branch officer attends at the request of Frydenberg’s office. Taylor says only the policy was discussed. No notes were taken.

Frydenberg asks his department if he can make changes to the grasslands listing to weaken the protections. He’s told it can’t be done without making reasons public and would be against a recent scientific assessment. No changes are made. Senior bureaucrat Stephen Oxley writes a note that Frydenberg was keen to "accommodate Angus Taylor's requests" and sought a guide on what he would have to do if he wanted to change rules governing the clearing of the grasslands

More contact from the environment minister’s office about the compliance action on Jam Land. Richard Taylor does an interview on ABC Rural blasting the listing of the grasslands, saying it’s unworkable. More contact from the environment minister’s office on the Jam Land compliance action. Frydenberg and the deputy secretary of the department, Dean Knudson, meet with Nationals MPs. Federal government commissions former National Farmers’ Federation chair Wendy Craik to undertake a review of how the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) affects farmers. More contact with the minister’s office about the compliance action. senior bureaucrat Stephen Oxley writes a note that Frydenberg was keen to "accommodate Angus Taylor's requests" and sought a guide on what he would have to do if he wanted to change rules governing the clearing of the grasslands



The new documents also raise serious questions about public statements made by both Frydenberg and Taylor about the nature of their interactions over the grasslands saga.

Both ministers have insisted there was nothing untoward about Taylor’s interest in the grasslands and it was confined to briefings about policy related to their listing as critically endangered.

Josh Frydenberg backs Angus Taylor's account of grasslands meeting Read more

In a statement to parliament in July, Taylor said farmers raised concerns about the listing with him in late 2016 and early 2017 and, specifically, that he sought a briefing after he had a conversation with a farmer near Yass on 21 February 2017.

But an email, obtained by Guardian Australia under freedom of information laws, along with replies to questions on notice from a Senate committee, show Frydenberg’s office was asking about the compliance matter almost a week before that date.

Jam Land, part owned by Taylor and his family, was the only company under investigation for alleged illegal clearing of grasslands at the time. About 30 hectares of the critically endangered grassland known as the natural temperate grassland of the south eastern highlands had been allegedly poisoned at a property in Delegate, New South Wales, in late 2016.

Angus Taylor’s brother, Richard, is one of the directors of Jam Land and the minister himself holds an interest via his family company Gufee. Taylor told parliament in July that his indirect interest in Jam Land was declared in accordance with the rules through his family company.

Illegal land clearing under federal environmental laws can attract both civil and criminal actions. Penalties can be as high as $900,000 for an individual and $9m for a company. The courts can also order remediation of the land or payments towards conservation.

Three years on, the case has not concluded, with the department saying the investigation is “ongoing”.

The new information reveals Frydenberg’s office requesting information earlier than previously known and specifically on the compliance action.

It has come to light in response to questions on notice from a Senate committee examining Australia’s faunal extinction crisis and through Freedom of Information requests by the Guardian.

In response to the Senate committee, the environment department said Frydenberg’s office sought information about the “compliance action” against Jam Land on 15 February 2017.

It said it provided information related to the case to Frydenberg’s office on 15 February, 16 February, 21 February 2017 and March 7 and later that year on 28 July 2017, 3 August and 12 and 25 October.

“The department is not aware of what, if anything, the Office of Minister Frydenberg communicated to Minister Taylor in any of these instances,” the department said in its response to the committee.

An internal department email sent from the environment standards division on 16 February 2017, and obtained by Guardian Australia, shows staff were being asked to prepare advice about the listing of the grasslands after they were told by Frydenberg’s office a compliance case was raised in parliament.

“As discussed, it appears a NTGSEH (natural temperate grassland of the south eastern highlands) case was raised in parliament yesterday, and we have been asked to urgently draft some dot points about the listing,” (name redacted) says. “Can you please provide a point about the amount of engagement, consultation and education (particularly with the farming community) that was undertaken in the listing process”.

The email continues:

This is a handwritten note we got from a phone call with the Minister’s (Frydenberg’s) office”: “Possible compliance action. “South East Highland Grassland. “ - (Former environment minister Greg) Hunt made a change (listing status priority) “ - What was change, when, why, implications “ACT/NSW border”.

Guardian Australia has been unable to find any public record of the case being raised in the chamber.

The correspondence and requests for advice raise serious questions about whether Frydenberg’s office was in fact seeking information on a live case involving a colleague rather than responding to a matter before parliament, whether this was an appropriate use of public resources and what information on the ongoing investigation was relayed to Taylor, if any.

Guardian Australia has previously revealed that Frydenberg’s office sought a meeting with senior environment officials in March 2017 on Taylor’s behalf.

The meeting, between Taylor, Frydenberg’s office and senior officials, occurred on 20 March 2017. Both ministers and the department have repeatedly stated the compliance action was not discussed at the meeting.

When asked about the new earlier contacts, both men referred to their earlier statements and declined to answer a number of specific questions about what had prompted the interest in the case on 15 February.

In an interview with the ABC in September, Frydenberg said Taylor informed him of his family’s interest in Jam Land when he asked for the March meeting.

“I became aware (of the interest) when he asked me for a meeting. He was very up-front. And he said that there was a family company which was subject to a compliance issue. And that he had an indirect interest in that company,” Frydenberg said at the time.

“But he was seeking a meeting on the technical aspects of the listing and in those circumstances, as is appropriate, (there would not be) be any discussion of the compliance issue.”

Taylor told parliament in a statement in July that he had “never made a representation in relation to the compliance action”.

“I never would,” he said. “My focus was advocating for the interests of the farmers in my electorate and across the region.”

Frydenberg has refused to answer more specifically when he became aware of Taylor’s interest in Jam Land or exactly what was disclosed.

The ministerial code of conduct says “it is critical that ministers do not use public office for private purposes.”

The code also requires ministers to report any actual or potential conflict of interest arising from shareholdings to the prime minister.

Environment officials sensitive about Angus Taylor grasslands meeting, emails show Read more

Despite questions from the Guardian, neither minister has said whether they reported the potential issues arising from Taylor’s interest in a company under investigation to the prime minister.

The Guardian has learned, and documents released under FOI show, the department was acutely aware of the sensitivity of the legal case and the need to steer clear of talking about it when they met with Taylor.

In a separate question from the faunal extinctions committee, published late last week, the committee asked if Frydenberg or anyone in his office advised the department of Taylor’s interest when requesting department staff meet with him.

“No,” the department responded.

When asked about the interactions with the minister’s office in February and again in July, August and October about the compliance action, the department said: “The enquiries from the minister’s office were general in nature, including requesting updates on the investigation and provision of talking points.

“As the minister is responsible for administering the EPBC Act, the department routinely provides high-level updates on emerging or ongoing compliance actions to the minister’s office.”