Overview
A new law passed by the WA Parliament in late 2025 – the State Development Act 2025 (WA) (Act) – creates extraordinary legal powers for the government to fast-track handpicked projects and make ad hoc changes to the way our existing laws apply. 1
This legislation required multiple late-night sittings of the Legislative Council to debate amendments, and a last-minute recall of the Legislative Assembly for a single sitting day prior to Christmas.
While some amendments to the bill proposed by EDO and others to constrain these extraordinary powers and to protect community rights were agreed by the parliament, many others were not.
EDO’s clients are concerned that environmentally harmful projects (e.g., nuclear, fracking) could be deemed priority projects under the new legislation.
They worry, too, that the new powers could be used to undermine environmental protection processes.
Existing pieces of legislation currently used to protect waterways, endangered species, and cultural heritage could be overridden by the new Act.
EDO will continue to work with clients and civil society groups to maximise accountability, community rights, and environmental protection as the government implements the new Act over the coming months.
In the meantime, we have put together a recap, including analysis of amendments to the legislation and what we’ll be keeping an eye on.
The WA Government has also created a website and some resources about the Coordinator General and the powers in the legislation.2
Our work on the Bill
After the Bill was introduced to the WA Parliament in September, we responded to the significant community interest in the legislation and the legal risks we identified by:
- Providing independent, expert and free advice and information to numerous inquiries for legal assistance;
- Preparing an explainer3 with analysis of the key provisions of the Bill and our recommendations, which was tabled in parliament and informed the debate;
- Publishing a blog post4 to help people understand the legislation; and
- Following the long debates in the parliament – including one marathon sitting which lasted until 3am.5
We also welcome the important contributions from other experts including the Centre for Public Integrity6 and the WA Law Society7 raising concerns with Bill, along with other experts such as a former EPA Chair8 and a former WA Premier.9
Changes to the legislation
It’s important to note that the substantive provisions of the Act have not yet come into force. This will happen on a date to be set through a proclamation in the Government Gazette – likely early in 2026.
As set out in our explainer and blog post on the Bill, we had serious concerns about the risks posed to integrity in decision-making, public participation and democracy, and protections for the community and environment.
After days of debate in the parliament, we’ve broken down the amendments that were passed and those which failed.
Successful amendments:
- There will be a five-year review of the operation and effectiveness of the Act. This means there will be a formal opportunity to review how the legislation is working, although as this will not occur until 2030 it will be important to regularly scrutinise implementation of the Act and the exercise of new powers.
- There were two minor changes aimed at improving transparency:
- A new requirement for an authority failing to meet a timeframe notice to have to explain why, and say when they will complete the function that was the subject of the notice; and
- A new requirement to table timeframe notices in parliament (in addition to publishing in the Government Gazette).
There were several notable unsuccessful amendments, including:
- Two key proposed changes to the role of the Coordinator General, which would have mitigated some of the integrity risks in this position:
- Adding qualification requirements – leaving this key appointment at complete government discretion; and
- Adding provisions restricting the Coordinator General from acting in situations of conflict of interest. The Coordinator General is subject to ordinary public sector requirements, but there are no specific provisions to address the heightened risk of corruption inherent in this position with significant discretionary decision-making power.
- Several amendments attempted to add specifications on what types of projects can be given priority designation (i.e. those described in the Premier’s announcement of the Bill10 – renewables, manufacturing, defence), or excluding types of projects from priority designation (e.g. nuclear, fracking). As these were not passed, any type of project remains eligible for designation as a priority project.
- In response to the concerns around processes under the legislation, there were several unsuccessful proposed changes to processes including:
- Removing the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) from the scope of timeframe notices, leaving it open to the government to impose ad hoc time limits on these statutory decisions;
- Requiring that there be public consultation on proposed modification orders. There are no requirements to consult the WA community before the government issues notices under the Act (such as timeframe notices placing additional time limits on other decision-making processes) or modification orders that change the way existing WA laws apply to individual projects; and
- Ensuring the Premier cannot act unilaterally to exercise powers under the Act (where the Premier is also the Minister for State Development, which is the current situation).
- An amendment proposed to stipulate that modification orders cannot be used in a way that reduces protections for the environment and human health. As it was unsuccessful, this means that there are no constraints on using modification orders to weaken environmental protections. For example, orders could be used in relation to provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA) to remove requirements for the Environmental Protection Authority to assess and recommend conditions on projects, or even to exclude consideration of environmental impacts from approvals.
Issues to watch
From our analysis of the successful and unsuccessful amendments to the Act, we’ve identified some key questions to be asked as this legislation is implemented.
- Will the priority project designation boost WA’s energy transition and local manufacturing projects, as the government has said it intends? Or will the lack of controls on which projects can be given “priority” designation lead to bottlenecks, corruption risks and special treatment for projects which do not benefit the WA community?
- Will the new and changed processes resulting from the exercise of powers in the legislation mean agencies administering these processes be faced with new delays, confusion and heighted risks of legal errors?
- Will the new powers be used in ways that curtail public rights such as consultation and merits appeals?
- Will the new powers be used in ways that undermine environmental protection processes and outcomes? There are dozens of pieces of legislation that are subject to the Act, many of which contain important processes and mechanisms to protect the WA environment – such as protections for waterways and water resources, endangered species, national parks and nature reserves, and cultural heritage.
Our ongoing work
Once the legislation comes into force, we’ll be watching to see how the new powers created by the Act are used and responding to community enquiries for legal assistance.
We understand that the government will be providing more detail on the implementation of the legislation – including policies, development of formal Regulations sitting under the Act, and further information on how the Act would interact with the amendments to federal environmental laws. We’ll be keeping updated on these developments and any opportunities to address the integrity and environmental protection concerns that remain around this legislation.
Depending on how the powers in the Act are used, we’ll continue to consider whether there needs to be further scrutiny of this legislation through a parliamentary inquiry, or ultimately if there are critical amendments that need to be revisited by the parliament.
References
1. www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/law_a147499.html
4. www.edo.org.au/2025/10/21/anti-democratic-wa-bill-threatens-nature-and-community-rights/
8. www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-10/state-development-laws-wa-analysis/106119780
