No fighting funds for AgForce legal battle on GAB

And while AgForce will not be getting any money from the fighting fund, the National Farmers Federation and other industry bodies are stumping up an undisclosed amount to help pay AgForce's legal costs that could stretch into the millions.

In a written statement, National Farmers Federation CEO Tony Mahar said the AFFF was very supportive of the strong collaboration across a range of organisations to prevent damage to the Great Artesian Basin including AgForce.

"However, after considering the advice received, the AFFF does not believe legal proceedings are the preferred course of action at this stage," Mr Mahar said.

"As such, it has declined to act as an underwriter for the legal/court action already commenced.

"The NFF board strongly supported the industry wide approach. The NFF stands right behind AgForce's case and has committed funding because this is not just a Queensland issue."

Last Thursday, a directions hearing for the court case instigated by AgForce that challenges a provision under the EPBC Act took place in the federal court in Brisbane.

AgForce CEO Mike Guerin told Queensland Country Life he was disappointed that the request for underwriting support from the fighting fund had been declined.

Mr Guerin said he was very surprised that AgForce's application did not meet the criteria for the fighting fund as it was a very strong case and was critical it was dealt with at the federal level.

"The decision (of the federal government) of February 9, 2022, was wrong, the application should have been captured by current elements of the EPBC Act and that's what we're challenging in court," he said.

"AgForce is leading that because we have a strong belief in the strength of our case and the importance of having this dealt with at a federal level."

Mr Guerin said the organisation, however, appreciated the people who supported them, and for those who did not that was their decision.

"But, we are strongly of the view that it's important to prosecute - as you know AgForce remains the underwriters underwriting any difference (in legal costs), (and) the AgForce board is resolute in that and industry is strongly behind us," he said.

"We have many generous donors and we continue to seek more donations - and we are laser light in our focus on the court case in 10 weeks, the Senate inquiry where submissions are due in a couple of weeks and ensuring that the Glencore proposal itself doesn't pass the state process," he said.

Mr Mahar said he would not disclose how much the NFF or other industry bodies were putting up, but the fact that they were all contributing once again demonstrated the national significance of this fight.

The full hearing of the AgForce challenge is set down for August 1 and 2.

Mr Guerin said AgForce would proceed with the court case regardless of the outcome of the EIS decision at a state level on whether Glencore could proceed.

That decision as to whether Glencore, through its subsidiary CTSCo, can pump liquified CO2 waste from the Millmerran power station into the GAB at Moonie is expected to be handed down in early May by the state government.

AgForce's court action in the federal court involves challenging a federal decision of February 9, 2022, under the EPBC Act in which it claims the decision "was flawed" because the National Environmental Significance provisions of the Act were "not adequately considered" in the instance of Glencore and the GAB.

The AFFF is an independent entity, governed independently of the NFF and controlled by a board of trustees, three of which are independent trustees.