Thomas Moore Bondi Beach
If the required modelling subsequently shows the mill will have unacceptable environmental outcomes – especially on our beaches and in coastal waters – it beggars belief that any Federal politician would, or even could, shut down a newly built $1.7 billion mill with the fate of a vast corporation at stake. Malcolm Turnbull is playing a dangerous game with Tasmania’s coastal environment. This week, Australia’s Chief Scientist, Dr Jim Peacock, publicly confirmed on national radio that if Gunns chooses to begin construction before they finish the required modelling they do so at their hazard and that “any major concern . . . could negate the go-ahead.”
…
Here is a question for you. If it was the NSW Labor Government circumventing due process, ignoring “critical deficiencies” in environmental assessments, and fast-tracking a development that would dump 23 billion litres of industrial effluent 2.7kms off THIS BEACH do you think Malcolm Turnbull would ignore clear advice on the threat to THIS BEACH? Do you think Malcolm Turnbull would approve the development regardless just because of “lawyers words” about federal jurisdiction and that THIS BEACH was on the wrong side of some line on the map?
Bondi Pavilion Speech – October 14, 2007
By: Dr. Thomas Moore – Science Advisor, Surfrider Foundation Australia (Northern Tasmania)
First, let me say – thank you all for coming today to listen.
It’s been a long journey . . . and I don’t just mean the flight up from Tassie. It’s also been a sometimes heartbreaking and life-sucking journey I never intended to take.
When Tasmanian members of the Surfrider Foundation Australia began this odyssey, 23 months ago, we did not set out to protest in the streets or man the barricades in an attempt to stop any mill at any cost. The Surfrider Foundation Australia is not opposed to downstream processing of forest products in Tasmania – we are not against jobs and appropriate, sustainable development.
Instead, as stake holders and ocean advocates, we engaged Gunns and all political parties in open dialogue. We also armed ourselves with knowledge on the environmental science and economics that underpin Gunns’ industrial plans, and aimed to hold the corporation and the Government to their promise – “the world’s greenest pulp mill” – a development the community could be proud of; one that WOULD NOT sacrifice the marine environment, other industries, coastal amenities, and risk human health for the sake of shareholder profit or votes.
Unfortunately I don’t have time to fully cover our sad and frustrating experience with the Tasmanian RPDC process but let me just say we participated fully and in good faith but ended up appalled and outraged at the corruption of due process and the bastardization of what was meant to be an independent, rigorous, bilateral, and fully transparent scientific assessment.
In Tasmania, we have been unjustly accused of “scare-mongering” and spreading “nonsense” by pro-mill politicians. We have been belittled and ridiculed by the usual suspects in State Parliament for simply taking a proactive and informed approach to this issue.
You’ve already heard about how Lennon Labor and Gunns dumped Tasmania’s independent planning umpire, the RPDC, and bungled the State assessment. It should tell you something very important that a man with Dr. Raverty’s background is here today talking to you.
I’m here today as a surfer, an oceanographer, and as someone who calls Tasmania home – to hopefully CUT THROUGH some of “spin” surrounding this issue, to hopefully give you some answers, and to ask a few questions as well.
The Federal Environment Minister’s approval of Gunns’ Tamar Valley pulp mill has NOT resolved uncertainties about the fate of toxic effluent in Bass Strait, the effect on the coastal environment, marine industries and the potential health impact on recreational users of the coast.
The scientific report commissioned by Minister Turnbull confirms what SFA, as well as government and independent scientific consultants, have been saying since September 2006 regarding the inadequate and unrealistic hydrodynamic modelling undertaken by Gunns.
Not surprisingly, the Peacock Panel report confirms that Gunns has not done its ‘hydrodynamic homework’, has not provided the necessary baseline data and analysis that would enable the Federal Minister to make a fully informed decision on the pulp mill. Even more alarming is that the Chief Scientist’s report clearly states that the Federal decision ignores independent advice regarding the threat of pollution on Tasmania’s beaches and in State waters.
It is difficult to comprehend how the Minister could approve the Tamar Valley mill without a precise scientific understanding of the effects of dumping over 23 billion litres of industrial effluent per year along our wild, pristine coastline.
Minister Turnbull has granted Gunns’ approval to commence construction before the necessary hydrodynamic and sediment modelling work has been done. The proponent has been given a passing grade, yet they haven’t finished their homework. This is unacceptable to all Australians who value the marine environment and their right to clean beaches and coastal waters.
The Peacock Panel found that, “construction and operation of the proposed mill poses some residual risks and uncertainties” and that, “aspects of the submitted preparatory biological and hydrodynamic assessments for mill establishment and operation were inadequate.”
According to the report, the missing modelling is, “essential to reliably define the extent of mixing and dispersion of dissolved and particulate contaminants, and any likely depositional zones in sediments where contaminants, in particular dioxins and furans, might accumulate to levels of concern . . .”
Malcolm Turnbull has told Australians that construction of Gunns pulp mill can go ahead despite this uncertainly and risk because he has imposed so-called ‘safeguards’. It is difficult to see how this could be the case.
If the required modelling subsequently shows the mill will have unacceptable environmental outcomes – especially on our beaches and in coastal waters – it beggars belief that any Federal politician would, or even could, shut down a newly built $1.7 billion mill with the fate of a vast corporation at stake. Malcolm Turnbull is playing a dangerous game with Tasmania’s coastal environment.
This week, Australia’s Chief Scientist, Dr Jim Peacock, publicly confirmed on national radio that if Gunns chooses to begin construction before they finish the required modelling they do so at their hazard and that “any major concern . . . could negate the go-ahead.”
The prudent course of action available to the Minister was to simply require the work demanded by Peacock be completed and assessed before approval. Why did we receive this ham-fisted approach instead?
No credible person can claim ‘science alone’ justifies approval for this mill, when the science clearly has not yet been completed.
Exactly two weeks ago at this time I was surfing a remote and magic point break not far from the location of the proposed effluent outfall. Exactly one week ago at this time I was at a backyard barbecue in Bell Buoy Beach – right at “ground zero” – watching young children play in the surf.
Let me read you part of what senior News Ltd journalist Sue Neales wrote in the Hobart Mercury on October 5th.
She said:
“Indeed, Dr Peacock’s report even suggested in places that he had not recommended measures that he thought might have been to the overall good of the Tasmanian environment, because they did not suit his narrow federal jurisdiction.
A perfect example is the length of the pulp mill’s effluent pipeline, which will extend 2.7km into the ocean off the Five Mile Bluff beach north of Georgetown.
Dr Peacock’s report says of this issue: “The Environment Department sought advice and our consultant advised that moving the outfall further offshore would increase the diffusion and dispersal of pollutants and reduce the chances of them being driven ashore. However the federal department is of the view that moving the outfall further offshore would proportionately increase the likelihood of negative effects in the Commonwealth marine areas.”
Sue Neales goes on to say:
In other words, don’t worry about the chances of pollution on Tasmania’s beaches and inshore waters, as long as it doesn’t affect the parts of Bass Strait that the Federal Government is responsible for, which start 5.6km offshore.”
Just this morning I was surfing out there amongst the breakers. Bondi is a beautiful, iconic beach.
Here is a question for you. If it was the NSW Labor Government circumventing due process, ignoring “critical deficiencies” in environmental assessments, and fast-tracking a development that would dump 23 billion litres of industrial effluent 2.7kms off THIS BEACH do you think Malcolm Turnbull would ignore clear advice on the threat to THIS BEACH? Do you think Malcolm Turnbull would approve the development regardless just because of “lawyers words” about federal jurisdiction and that THIS BEACH was on the wrong side of some line on the map?
Why has he done exactly that in Tasmania?
But this is not just Turnbull’s fault – what of Tasmania’s Lennon Labor government?
Let me quote senior journalist Sue Neales again from her October 5th article:
She says:
“For Premier Lennon to say Turnbull’s decision was “a victory for logic and reason over scare-mongering and fear campaigns” clearly shows he has not read the scientific detail of Dr Peacock’s report and its clear concerns about the impact of skimpy state regulations and controls.
Unfortunately, the irony is that without an equally tough stance from the State Government, Tasmanians cannot yet be assured that the Gunns’ pulp mill is world’s best practice in all respects and will have no adverse impact on their beloved island home.”
Speaking of the Labor party – WHAT ABOUT PETER GARRETT?
Where is Labor’s Shadow Environment Minister, Peter Garrett, in this story? Of course his electorate of Kingsford-Smith lies just next door, south of Bronte.
As a founding member of the Surfrider Foundation Australia and current patron of Surfing NSW, the former Midnight Oil front-man has taken a strong stand for Australia’s coastal environment and surf culture IN THE PAST. Peter once said:
“Our coastline stretches as a zone of beauty, community and productivity, and the surfing experience. . . is as much a part of the growing up of young Australians and of our culture as is any other activity. It is an integral part of the Australian way of life.”
Surfrider members have travelled from Tasmania to meet with Peter twice and we have handed him many letters and dossiers that outline our research and concerns in great detail. We have explained to Peter face to face what is a stake, what the facts are, and told the former President of the Australian Conservation Foundation in no uncertain terms that the Australian people have high expectations of him when it comes to protecting Australia’s coastal environment.
While Peter has given us roughly 45 minutes of his time to listen to our concerns – something the Surfrider Foundation greatly appreciates – sadly, he has been silent on the issue of Gunns proposed pulp mill and its potential impact on our coast. As opposition spokesman on the environment he has publicly backed the Liberal Government’s recent mill approval.
Geoffrey Cousins, one of Australia’s best known business and community leaders, has labeled Garrett “the shadow minister who doesn’t cast a shadow.”
Cousins also had this to say:
“I regard this question of the environment as much more important, quite frankly, than the result of the federal election. Because if that mill does pollute the environment, it’ll be decades if not hundreds of years before anyone can correct it.”
Why? Why is it left to a top business leader who just so happens to value Tasmania, its unspoiled environment, and prized “clean, green” brand to say these important words out loud? Don’t Turnbull, Garrett, Howard, Rudd or indeed George Newhouse value Tasmania?
If you feel strongly about this issue why not call and ask yourself?
On Monday morning pick up your mobile, hit Google to find electorate office phone numbers for the lot of them, and call to say that when it comes to this election you care about the environment and when it comes to the environment you care about Tasmania’s pristine coastline and beaches.
And while you have their staffers on the phone, after you have made sure to give your name and suburb so they can log your call – something which is actually quite important – remind them of one last thing, just for the record:
“There are millions of us across Australia – we love and value our coast, our bays, our beaches . . . . and we vote.”
Thank you for being here today to listen.
