AgForce says significant changes to the State Development and Public Works Organisation (Critical Minerals) Bill come at too high a cost for agriculture.
The peak body strongly opposes expanded powers for compulsory acquisition, land access and infrastructure.
AgForce General President Shane McCarthy said the Bill in its current form is unworkable.
"As it stands, the Bill makes the interests of primary producers secondary to those of major project proponents," he said.
"The bill is not confined to Critical Minerals but could be applied to any project considered be a State Strategic Project, that is anything considered to be critical, essential or high priority to Queensland, whether that be private or public development.
"In practical terms, the imbalance would leave landholders powerless.
"Anyone who would otherwise be negotiating a project on a commercial basis could face the prospect of compulsory acquisition or statutory access if an agreement can't be reached.
"AgForce believes those powers must be a genuine last resort, not a tool to gain leverage during negotiations."
AgForce CEO Niki Ford said AgForce had made its concerns clear to the government during the submission process.
"Despite that, the Parliamentary Committee has recommended the Bill proceed without amendment," she said.
"We will not accept a framework that shifts the risk and cost of major project development onto the State's farmers.
"This Bill must be amended to ensure only projects demonstrating a compelling state interest are declared State Strategic Projects and that compulsory acquisition and statutory land access powers are last resorts.
"We also need meaningful negotiations before these powers are exercised."
AgForce is seeking the retention of appropriate review and appeal rights and the inclusion of sufficient opportunity for landholders to obtain independent professional advice.
"We also want to see reasonable costs covered by the proponent from the start of negotiations, not by the landholder," Mr McCarthy said.
"AgForce will not compromise on protecting the land-use rights of Queensland primary producers or allow decisions today to set precedents that undermine those rights into the future.
"We support the growth of the critical minerals sector and recognize its role in Queensland's future.
"However, we cannot have legislation that weakens the protections for agricultural land.
"Landholders are already negotiating against multinational companies with dedicated legal teams and significantly greater resources.
"Weakening the protections of process that provide balance in those negotiations risks creating an irreversible shift in landholder rights and the future of Queensland agriculture.
"The Bill must recognise agricultural productivity and long-term food and fibre security as strategic assets."
