Carbon-emitting mining tycoon Andrew Twiggy Forrest turns ‘green’

This publication is far from criticizing everyone who contributes to a greener world. Actually, Independent A.Australia has long advocated for climate action.

Nor do we condemn billionaires who want to give up some of their wealth for good rather than evil. After all, aren’t all obscenely rich people obsessed with simply accumulating more wealth and power?

But when a billionaire like this chooses offer with ‘See subsidies for diesel use removed for top 18 companies in mining’ and suggests this ‘Money will be directed to where Australians need it most’We need to ask the question that many people seem happy to overlook: From where?

Iron ore magnate Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest on recordThe latest national ad campaign dominating our television screens and broadcasts apparently wants to help ‘Reduce Australia’s dependence on fossil fuels’.

According to Fortescue Holdings websiteThe diesel tax refund should be limited to a “trivial” amount of only $50 million per company because [IA emphasis]:

Australia needs economic security as well as clean energy.

But we can’t get there while encouraging our biggest industries to keep burning. imported fossil fuels.

By capping this reimbursement, we can redirect the funds to help with living expenses or elsewhere. Clean and practical solutions such as mine electrification and renewable energy.

Simply put, this change will strengthen the economy, give ordinary AustraliansDirect investment in cleaner, locally produced energy.

Upper limit of diesel tax refund 50 million dollars:

Farmers, fishermen and small businesses remain untouched

Frees up funds to help Australians cost of living pressures

It paves the way for investment in cleanliness, domestic production energy and sustainable jobs

Provides assurance to big miners contribute their fair share

Helps reduce Australia’s dependency imported fossil fuels.

We hear you thinking that if Mr Forrest is so keen to help Australians with their living expenses, surely it would make more sense for his company not to charge (approximately) $305 million every year in the first place? As if taking this obscene amount of money wasn’t necessary.

Or, you know, could Twiggy contribute her company’s “fair share” by using those rebates to pay us all to “unlock locally produced clean energy” by, say, installing solar power for everyone who doesn’t have it?

Maybe if Forrest didn’t make like Kristina Keneally wrote in 2017 ‘…showed that he does not like paying taxes’:

‘FMG officials said at a Senate hearing in 2011 that the company paid no company tax (but it did pay $450 to $500 million a year in mining royalties).
Forrest and FMG in 2013 He challenged the mining tax in the high court. They lost.
In 2014-15 FMG generated sales of $9.1 billion on taxable income of $208 million and paid just $13.2 million in tax.’

There are plenty of options for someone with Mr. Forrest’s means.

Maybe if Andrew wasn’t actively and publicly engaged we would believe this sudden commitment to the environment. campaigned Along with her one-time friend and fellow billionaire Gina Rinehart, she “repealed the tax” in 2010, leading to the repeal of the carbon tax and the fall of the Rudd/Gillard governments. If he and Gina and their one percent friends hadn’t managed to destroy what was reasonable and fair carbon taxIf it did, we wouldn’t be in a position where it would even be necessary to advocate for fossil fuel companies to “contribute their fair share.”

This billionaire, whose personal fortune is probably around $33 billion, commented even though it wasn’t, welfare spending was “out of control.” I wish Twiggy hadn’t created a cashless system back then”healthy“With the approval of Tony Abbott, the welfare card, as it is known, term cardto “fix” this imagined problem control What poor people can spend their money on; that they are not allowed to spend on alcohol, cigarettes, or gambling, but that rich people like himself are still allowed to spend as much on drink and diversion as their money can buy.

What if taxpayers could likewise control how Andy’s companies spend the tax credits and various subsidies they receive from taxpayer funds?

Maybe if Andy didn’t displaced traditional owners need to pursue their own mining interests.

There’s also Forrest’s questionable “green” advocacy. Perhaps it would have been more convincing if he had not said that the 2020 wildfire crisis was not caused by climate change.

Or if he had announced he would donate $70 million to wildfire relief efforts but only $10 million had gone to the victims.

As Grant Turner wrote IA.:

When we look a little deeper into Forrest’s charitable donation, we see that this gift comes with conditions. Ten million will be spent on emergency aid for bushfire victims.
Another $10 million will go to Twiggy’s “army of sidekicks” – whatever that means.
And $50 million will go to his Mindaroo Foundation. This is apparently to allow researchers of his choosing to study “fire mitigation.”
A cynic might say that these hand-picked researchers are unlikely to find real answers, and that the suggestions they come up with will probably benefit Twiggy.

If only one of the above facts were true, we might not be so skeptical. But the sheer weight of all these facts makes it very difficult to believe that his latest move is anything but self-serving.

Even in 2025, Fortescue is still one of Australia’s biggest corporate polluters. stated it will:

‘…transitioning towards becoming an integrated green technology, energy and metals company…’

If Fortescue can truly achieve this and inspire others, then Independent A.Australia Will be the first to applaud Andrew Forrest.

But the question still remains. Why would Twiggy, who points to a wealth-happy person who has everything she could ever wish for (who could probably also give us all everything we could ever want) and who is definitely not green or particularly whose philanthropic background has never trickled down, suddenly wake up to the climate crisis and become a “green energy” advocate?

Watch out for billionaires carrying gifts.

The rich and powerful piss on us and the media tells us it’s raining. That’s the unfortunate truth about trickle-down economics, and it’s never been more pertinent than right now. ‘of the world’ top one percent “He has more wealth than 95 percent of humanity.”

This editorial was first published as part of the Independent Australia weekly newsletter. Subscribe to IA to access all of our work for as little as $1.15 a week and help power our journalism in 2026.

Follow managing editor Michelle Pini at Bluesky @michellepini.bsky.social and Independent Australia on Bluesky @independaus.bsky.socialX/Twitter@independentaus and Facebook HERE.