Economy
The Pioneer Cup – Horse-trading for safe drinking water in Tasmania
What an unlikely trifecta of letter writers in last week’s North-Eastern Advertiser!
Mike Brewster, CEO of TasWater; Michael Ferguson, Tasmania’s Minister for Health; and Barry Jarvis, Mayor of Dorset.
But the punters lost out. Reading these letters, it is hard not to feel devastated for the residents of Pioneer. And personally, it was disappointing to be targeted by one of the letter writers – Tasmania’s Minister for Health, Mr Ferguson.
Minister Ferguson’s letter was, in my view, a deliberate spilling of ink, designed to confuse readers and to save his own skin in relation to the Pioneer water issue.
At Dorset’s public health meeting on February 26, Minister Ferguson confirmed to me the following:
• Minister Ferguson could not say when Pioneer’s rainwater tanks would arrive – so far it has been two years and four months with only lead-contaminated drinking water in the home.
• Minister Ferguson was unaware of the five month work delay which continues at Pioneer.
• Minister Ferguson was unaware that Pioneer’s rainwater tank contract holds a confidentiality clause within it.
• Minister Ferguson was unaware that this contract rules that TasWater may disconnect the reticulated service after five years – contrary to the town’s verbal agreement.
• Minister Ferguson was unaware that Pioneer’s residents, to access withheld lead results for the sediment in our dam, had no choice but to submit a Right To Information request to TasWater (via The Greens) – these results proved to be off the chart in relation to the Australian Drinking Water Health Guidelines.
• Minister Ferguson was unaware that Pioneer was intentionally disconnected from the Frome Dam in 2009/10 – and without the town’s knowledge or consent – during works for the Winnaleah Irrigation Scheme.
• And Minister Ferguson could not tell me why it is that the CEO of TasWater has not been sacked.
But in Minister Ferguson’s letter to the editor last week, he writes, ‘… it was disappointing to be misrepresented by Tim Slade’.
With all due respect, Minister Ferguson, it is the people of Pioneer who are being misrepresented. Wouldn’t you say? And if Minister Ferguson’s assistant recorded Dorset’s public meeting using her mobile phone (there were not any written notes made by the Minister or his assistant), then no doubt the Minister will make this audio available to any citizen who may wish to verify my account of the day.
With all due respect, Minister Ferguson, it is the people of Pioneer who are being misrepresented. Wouldn’t you say?
And if Minister Ferguson’s assistant recorded Dorset’s public meeting using her mobile phone (there were not any written notes made by the Minister or his assistant), then no doubt the Minister will make this audio available to any citizen who may wish to verify my account of the day.
Last year, the Tasmanian government, via the Office of the Minister for Health, e-mailed to me the following advice for Pioneer: (and I paraphrase:) The State government cannot help Pioneer, because it is only the local councils who have the power to oversee TasWater.
Minister Ferguson repeated this statement during our conversation on the day of Dorset’s public meeting – the only major comment or ‘commitment’ that the Minister made.
But the Health Minister’s shifting of the blame on to the councils is a bare-bones response, for it is certainly well within the powers of the State government to investigate TasWater’s handling of Pioneer. This can be done if the Premier chooses to initiate a full public inquiry into Tasmania’s councils – the sole shareholders of TasWater.
I can advise readers that last week I sent a letter to Premier Hodgman, to formally request a full public enquiry into Tasmania’s local councils (and TasWater), with regard to Pioneer’s lead-contaminated drinking water.
Tasmanians now have all the evidence we need.
In addition, the State government should legislate to make it compulsory for TasWater’s data to be published on a public website.
On the day of Dorset’s public meeting on February 26, the Minister for Health did not offer a future appointment to talk (and listen) to the residents of Pioneer, or me, to explore in more detail the history of Pioneer’s water crisis.
And the Minister did not commit to investigating that which I shared with him.
I was so disappointed …
In the few minutes granted to me by our Minister for Health, I was so disappointed to realise exactly how unaware he and his government are of the water problem at Pioneer.
The folk at Pioneer live with lead-contaminated drinking water every day, and they know the story like the back of their hands.
For the record, to respond to Minister Ferguson’s comments in his letter to the editor, my other communications with his office, in mid-2014, were dealt with by one of his assistants.
This assistant telephoned the public relations officer at TasWater – not the CEO, despite my request that he do so, in view of the obvious urgency of the problem. I was grateful for these calls, but they were merely a Band-Aid remedy.
Also, in 2014/15, I wrote to Minister Ferguson to inquire about Tasmania’s other water quality challenges. The Minister replied briefly by e-mail to some, but not all, of these important issues. For example, Minister Ferguson did not respond to my suggestion for a public website to publish Tasmania’s water data (as collected by TasWater).
And to correct Minister Ferguson – my only conversation with the Office of Ms Sarah Courtney was when I telephoned her a few days after Dorset’s public meeting.]
Finally – if I may reply to Mayor Jarvis’ letter to the editor last week. The Mayor queries if it was fair of me to write in my letter that, ‘None of Dorset’s elected councilors attended the meeting; and nor did Mayor Jarvis’.
I’d simply reply to Mayor Jarvis that surely at least one elected representative from the council – perhaps the Mayor – should have taken the responsibility … and attended.
Like a broken record, with the volume turned down low, the State government has said – over and over – that it is the responsibility of Tasmania’s local councils to discipline TasWater when they are not doing their job.
Mayor Jarvis’ schedule of other meetings on this day, as he outlines in his letter to the editor, is admirable – disability services is an important issue.
But as the sole legal overseers of TasWater, Tasmania’s local councils have failed, for far too long now, to embrace their fair share of the responsibility for the continuing health crisis at Pioneer.
TasWater promises to return to Pioneer to resume works in April or May, but readers will note that TasWater’s CEO, Mike Brewster, did not confirm this in his letter to the editor last week.
We can only maintain a positive attitude!
*Tim Slade lives in Pioneer …
• Dr Alison Bleaney, in Comments: DHHS – Public Health- has direct responsibility for Tasmanian reticulated drinking water quality. It appears the Local Council environmental health officer needs to inform DHHS that ‘Houston, we have a problem’, and then DHHS has responsibility for instigating further investigations and taking action to correct any problems and can direct TasWater to do so. To say it is the Local Council problem is perhaps technically correct but so disingenuous. DHHS do not wait for this line of command to be taken with contagious outbreaks, so why take this line of action other than to perhaps save their own skins/ jobs? Can you imagine the outrage that would have occurred when the lead poisoning story first leaked into the media if Pioneer had a population of 1 million? And yet our laws are the same. This unfolding long long story of poisoning of the reticulated water supply with no appropriate remedial action let alone honest information sharing is shameful. How many other similar stories are there? I shake my head in wonder and despair … it is 2015 isn’t it?
• Lisa Rime, in Comments: Like so many others, I’ve been following Pioneer’s water crisis from afar for quite some time. It’s frightening seeing such a shirking of responsibility from each of the powers involved, and even more, the blatant lack of care shown for the welfare of the residents affected. This is not the way a first world society should operate. It is weird and shameful.