Dr Lee Coaldrake fined $5000 for Extinction Rebellion parliament protest

The wife of the man who led the Queensland government’s integrity review has been slapped with a fine 10 times what the prosecution requested for her role in a parliament protest.

The wife of the man who led the Queensland government’s integrity review has been slapped with a fine 10 times what the prosecution requested for her role in an Extinction Rebellion raid on Parliament.

Dr Lee Coaldrake, whose husband Peter Coaldrake is a former QUT vice-chancellor and led an integrity review for the state government, was fined $5000 fine for the November 2022 protest inside State Parliament.

The 71-year-old retired anaesthetist was one of 14 Extinction Rebellion protesters charged after they snuck banners bearing anti-coal slogans into Parliament under their clothes and unfurled them in the public gallery during Question Time on November 30, 2022.

Despite previously pleading not guilty to the 125-year-old offence of disturbing the legislature, Coaldrake suddenly pleaded guilty at the start of the hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Tuesday, turning the proceeding into a relatively short sentencing.

Prosecutor Marshall Bostock told the court that Coaldrake and the co-accused draped a banner over the railings while Parliament was in session and others chanted slogans.

“To her credit, when Dr Coaldrake was asked to desist and leave, she did so,” he said.

Mr Bostock said after recent legal discussions between the parties, a resolution had been reached, which led to Coaldrake changing her plea at this late stage.

Mr Bostock said the prosecution submitted a $500 fine was appropriate.

Magistrate Joseph Pinder said there was no legal precedent for this offence in Queensland and no comparable previous legal decisions to use as a reference point.

Lee Ann (left) and Peter Coaldrake outside court. Picture: David Clark

Mr Pinder asked why Coaldrake’s actions of deliberately disturbing the Parliament should not be considered similar to a contempt-of-court offence, noting that the courts sit regularly and are a branch of government and democracy, just like Parliament.

Defence barrister Holli Edwards, representing Coaldrake, referred to the human right to protest, and pointed out that the conduct was peaceful and posed no danger to others.

“Certainly the functions of Parliament are equally important, but are of very different in character. The circumstances of this case are that it [the offence] was during Question Time, rather than during debate about a particular Bill or a decision being made,” she said.

Ms Edwards said Coaldrake now understood the gravity and seriousness of her conduct and the difference between a lawful and unlawful protest. She submitted that Coaldrake could pay a substantial fine if Mr Pinder deemed it appropriate.

The court heard Coaldrake had two entries on her criminal history – one from May 2022 and the other from June 2024. She was on bail for this offence when she allegedly committed the unrelated offence in June 2024.

Mr Pinder said he presumed both historical offences were related to similar protest activities, noting one resulted in a $600 fine and no conviction recorded.

In sentencing, Mr Pinder said the charge of disturbing the legislature carried a maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment.

He described Coaldrake’s conduct as a premeditated, planned protest activity that lasted just over two minutes.

Peter Coaldrake meets with Premier Steven Miles.

“It is serious conduct because it undermines the Parliament and ultimately strikes at the very essence of our democratic process,” he said.

The magistrate noted in her letter of apology, Coaldrake acknowledged the “misguided and mistaken view” she previously held regarding unlawful protesting.

“You have an unremarkable and limited criminal history. But for those two entries, you are a person where any type of criminal conduct is wholly uncharacteristic,” he said.

However Mr Pinder concluded that a substantial fine was appropriate, handing Coaldrake a $5000 infringement notice. He decided against recording a conviction.

Outside court, Coaldrake – wearing blue earrings in the shape of the Extinction Rebellion logo – was supported by her husband, who stood by her side.

She said she would protest again, referring to the “global emergency” of climate change.

“My passion for dealing with this issue that we are handing on to our children and grandchildren won’t go away. I’ll just be doing it within the legal framework,” she said.

“This has all been about climate change. Australia has some of the best climate scientists in the world, we need to listen to their increasingly dire warnings.

“Think about the last year – the hottest year on record, the highest ocean temperatures on record, and the fifth mass bleaching event on our beautiful Great Barrier Reef.

“We are truly at a pivotal moment in our history, we are fighting for our children and grandchildren, they are depending on us. We must all act together.”

The Coaldrakes have two daughters and seven grandchildren together.