Key facts
- Queensland and the Northern Territory reject federal AI data centre renewable energy mandate.
- States argue federal proposals are underdeveloped.
- States claim federal plans give too much power to Canberra.
- Federal government intends to proceed with nationally consistent regulations.
- Australian government may seek up to $150,000 in legal costs from Rex Patrick.
- Rex Patrick is fighting to access Aukus agreement documents.
- Crossbench MPs, unions, and transparency groups criticize the government's legal cost stance.
- Critics call the government's stance a breach of model litigant rules.
Queensland and the Northern Territory have rejected federal government plans to mandate renewable energy use for AI data centres. The states argue the proposals are underdeveloped and give too much power to Canberra, while the federal government intends to proceed with nationally consistent regulations. The federal government's proposed mandate aims to ensure that new AI data centres are powered by renewable energy sources. However, Queensland and the NT have voiced strong opposition, citing concerns about the lack of detail in the proposals and the potential for overreach by the federal government. They advocate for state-led approaches rather than a top-down federal mandate.
In a separate but related development concerning government transparency, the Australian government is insisting that former senator Rex Patrick could be liable for up to $150,000 in legal costs if he loses his legal challenge to access documents related to the Aukus agreement. This potential cost has drawn widespread criticism from crossbench Members of Parliament, unions, and transparency advocacy groups. These critics argue that the government's stance is a breach of the model litigant rules, which require government legal actions to be fair, just, and not unduly delay or obstruct legal processes. The legal battle centres on Patrick's attempt to obtain information about the Aukus security pact.