Received

Brisbane Olympics organisers are distancing themselves from Victoria's shock decision to ditch the Commonwealth Games, saying the two events are completely different.

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews on Tuesday blamed cost blowouts as he pulled the plug on hosting the 2026 Commonwealth Games.

It triggered immediate calls for Queensland to rethink its commitment to the 2032 Olympics, which the state's premier was quick to reject.

Annastacia Palaszczuk insisted Queensland had "done our sums" and was on sound financial footing, which she said was "very different" to Victoria.

Ms Palaszczuk said Games funding had already been secured through a $7 billion state and federal deal.

She also said the 2032 Olympics would be completely different to previous Games.

"It is a completely different scenario to the previous Olympics, the Tokyo Olympics, where they had to build big, big venues," Ms Palaszczuk said.

"We don't have to do that."

Unveiling the Olympic Rings and Paralympics Agitos, Brisbane Games chief executive Cindy Hook said the 2032 event would be cost-neutral to the taxpayer.

"I'm confident that we are going to work hard to maximise our commercial success and then live within our means to deliver a balanced budget," she told reporters in Brisbane.

Ms Hook rejected suggestions preparations were on shaky ground, saying the situation was poles apart from Victoria.

"We have a long runway and more time than they did to plan," she said.

"That time, if used well, will be very much to our advantage."

© AAP 2023

Two government agencies are being taken to court in a bid to force them to reveal the full suite of climate harms caused by the fossil fuel projects they fund.

Those behind the landmark case say victory would give taxpayers far greater transparency about how Export Finance Australia (EFA) and the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility are spending their money as the planet warms dangerously.

It's a first attempt to force compliance with environmental laws requiring all government agencies to report annually on how their activities accord with the principles of ecologically sustainable development.

That includes the precautionary principle, the effect of their activities on the environment - including communities and people - and what steps, if any, they are taking to minimise harm.

Human rights and environmental organisation Jubilee Australia has brought the case, which was filed in the Federal Court of Australia on Tuesday.

It says Australia's export credit agency, EFA, and the $7 billion fund for infrastructure in northern Australia both provide taxpayer-subsidised finance for risky new fossil fuel and related projects.

"The real environmental impacts of their activities are enormous and taxpayers deserve to know," says Jubilee's executive director Luke Fletcher.

"Over the past decade they have given over $1 billion to some of the most polluting fossil fuel projects in the world that will lock in fossil fuel dependency for decades to come and undermine Australia's climate commitments under the Paris Agreement."

He says despite the passage of new climate change laws, both agencies can still support major fossil fuel projects and infrastructure.

Examples include a $164.2 million loan to the Ichthys LNG plant and a $254.7m guarantee for the Gladstone LNG terminal that opened up exports.

"Perversely, they continue to fail to adequately report on how the fossil fuel projects they have made possible impact our climate," Dr Fletcher says.

"There are very real fears that without clearer climate commitments, EFA and NAIF could fund infrastructure in Darwin designed to support a massive expansion of fossil gas such as Middle Arm.

"Or to subsidise some of the world's largest fossil fuel companies such as TotalEnergies and ExxonMobil's Papua LNG project in Papua New Guinea, similar to what EFA has previously done."

David Barnden is the principal lawyer at Equity Generation Lawyers, which is representing Jubilee in the case.

He says the group asked the firm to trawl through the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, leading to the identification of one provision that's never before been used in a climate action case.

"It appeared to us that the agencies weren't doing a good enough job to inform the taxpayers, which is essentially what this section (of the Act) is for," he said.

"And in terms of environment it's quite a broad definition, which does include communities and people.

"This action could set a precedent for other government entities to report the true impacts of their activities."

The case names five respondents - the two agencies, their current chairs, and one former NAIF chair - as those ultimately responsible for meeting reporting requirements.

Northern Australia Infrastructure Fund declined to comment because legal proceedings are underway.

AAP has also sought comment from the EFA.

Lawyers say a decision in the case could be about a year and a half away.

© AAP 2023

Luckless Gold Coast defender Lachie Weller will undergo a second reconstruction after injuring his right knee two weeks ago.

Weller went down in the dying stages of the Suns' round-17 defeat to Port Adelaide, and missed last Saturday's win over St Kilda.

Gold Coast on Tuesday confirmed Weller would need more surgery, after playing nine games this season on his return from the torn anterior cruciate ligament he suffered in June last year.

"After subsequent scans and consultations, the decision has been made for Lachie to undergo a second knee reconstruction," Suns football performance manager Wayne Campbell said.

"It's bitterly disappointing news for Lachie and it's important now that, as a club, we provide him all the support he needs."

The Suns will work with Weller to determine a recovery timeline once he has had surgery.

© AAP 2023