Peacock: Approval still in question

Paul Oosting

JIM PEACOCK: Yes, we found that the work that had been done for Gunns by consultants and others, was inadequate in our view, and we couldn’t recommend to Minister Turnbull that things should proceed, until such time as a quality analysis was carried out, and then that the Commonwealth Department of Environment was able to accept the findings as being conducive to a go-ahead.

MEDIA RELEASE 8 October 2007

PULP MILL APPROVAL STILL IN QUESTION – PEACOCK

Chief Scientist says “any major concern could negate the go ahead”

Chief Scientist Dr Jim Peacock said today that construction on the Gunns’ pulp mill should not proceed until further environmental analysis is undertaken and accepted by Federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Commonwealth Department of Environment and Water Resources.

Being interviewed on Across Australia by Charles Wooley, Dr Jim Peacock said:

CHARLES WOOLEY: Now you’re worried a little bit about insufficient modelling of current flow, and where some of the more toxic effluents might end up, aren’t you?
JIM PEACOCK: Yes, we found that the work that had been done for Gunns by consultants and others, was inadequate in our view, and we couldn’t recommend to Minister Turnbull that things should proceed, until such time as a quality analysis was carried out, and then that the Commonwealth Department of Environment was able to accept the findings as being conducive to a go-ahead.
CHARLES WOOLEY: Well does that mean that the go-ahead still depends on this being done? And being done to your standards, and to your acceptability?
JIM PEACOCK: Well not to my acceptability, but to the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Water Resources, and the Minister, of course.
CHARLES WOOLEY: So in a sense, the door isn’t closed yet on this proposal, or isn’t fully open yet, depending on which side you take?
JIM PEACOCK: Well that’s right, I think the- –
CHARLES WOOLEY: I don’t think that’s been reported, I think we’re hearing it’s going ahead.
JIM PEACOCK: It’s very clear in our report, and there are some aspects of our recommendations that must be undertaken and approved before any construction takes place, and there are other aspects, including the modelling and so on, that because of the time frame involved in the field measurements and observations that would need to accompany the modelling, it will take a year or possibly even 18 months, so that could be carried out during the time in which construction of the mill was going ahead, if the proponents choose to go ahead with that construction.
CHARLES WOOLEY: But they would do so at their hazard?
JIM PEACOCK: Yes.
CHARLES WOOLEY: Because it might yet be found, by the scientists who look into this, and evaluate it, that even though the mill is three-quarters built, that the dioxin problem is such that it cannot go ahead?
JIM PEACOCK: Well, I wouldn’t like to be specific about dioxin, but any major concern, yes, it could negate the go-ahead.