Clarence Valley Local Government Election 2012: Meet the real Andrew Baker

On 14 August 2012 The Daily Examiner published a letter to the editor by Judith Melville of Yamba which called on all seventeen candidates at the 8 September 2012 Clarence Valley local government election to answer seven questions before polling day.

The seven questions are set out below along with the personal response of one of those candidates, property and land developer Andrew Baker of Maclean.

This candidate clearly indicates that he will not give an undertaking to protect the Clarence River system from over exploitation. Further he gives no undertaking to support the stand of local communities in relation to high risk mining in the Clarence Valley or within the river catchment area.

Mr. Baker also implied that he does not belong to any interest group - yet last year the Maclean Chamber of Commerce successfully nominated him as its preferred delegate on Clarence Valley Council's Business Rate Review Advisory Committee.

Finally, he mocks the idea that climate change is a real and present problem facing Valley residents and ratepayers and, flatly refuses to rule out having private meetings with land developers and mining corporations if he becomes a councillor. The latter refusal clearly placing him at risk of breaching Clause 9.7 of the Code of Conduct if he is elected to Clarence Valley Council.

Q1: If elected will you oppose any move by state or federal governments to further dam and divert water from the Clarence River catchment, including the granting of water extraction rights for mining operations or other large-volume water users?

Andrew Baker: Should such a proposal become real, I will look at the merits and disadvantages of the specific proposal before attempting to arrive at a position. To do otherwise is in my view both lazy and dangerous.

Q2: If elected will you oppose coal seam gas and antimony mining, as well as any open-cut mining within the Clarence River catchment?
Andrew Baker:  My consideration of any issue that requires a decision from me will commence with an open mind and NO pre-commitment to applicant or interested person/group.

Q3: If you undertake to oppose such water diversion/extraction or mining will you publicly oppose any political party policy which supports it, even to the point of repudiating the policies of a party of which you are a member?
Andrew Baker:  Not really applicable as I have no undertaking to give in advance of proper consideration. I have no party membership. I have no interest group to answer to so my considerations will always be open-minded to the best of my ability.

Q4: Do you accept that human-induced global warming and subsequent climate change is real?
Andrew Baker:  I accept that a great fear of these issues is real. I’m still waiting for my great fear of the similarly frightening Y2K Bug to subside before I adopt any new fears.

Q5: Are you willing to adopt realistic, long-term mitigation or adaptation measures to support Clarence Valley communities in the face of increased severe weather events, continuous coastal/estuary erosion and possible loss of agricultural productivity?
Andrew Baker:   The political temptation is to answer with some nice-sounding motherhood statement testifying to my overwhelming love of all motherhood questions. However, my answer is; I will consider, to the best of my ability, any specific proposal for mitigation or adaption measures on the merits of the proposal. My consideration will include at least receiving advice of the likely cost, likely benefit, ability of the residents and ratepayers (or others) to pay, and the risks of doing or not doing the proposal.

Q6: Will you give an undertaking to resist any move by the NSW Government to subject the Clarence Valley to yet another forced amalgamation in order to form an even larger local government area not centred within the valley?
Andrew Baker:  I am unimpressed with the benefits of the most recent amalgamation. While I am aware of some benefits from that amalgamation, the Clarence Valley has yet to have Council leadership capable of ensuring the financial efficiencies and Increased levels of management professionalism so willingly held up as great benefits prior to the amalgamated Council. For now, I am opposed to further amalgamation but not to the extent of denying an future possibility it the right circumstances.

Q7: Can you assure Clarence Valley residents and ratepayers that as a councillor you will never meet privately with any representative or agent of a land/property developer, mining corporation or energy company or give a general/specific undertaking that you will look favourably on their proposals or will further their consultation or negotiations with any tier of government, other businesses or communities in Northern NSW?  

Andrew Baker:   Such an undertaking is impossible to genuinely give. Or honour. Should it be possible to give or honour such undertaking, I wouldn’t give it anyway. While I have no doubts about my integrity and my ability to deal with people at face value, I do understand the great fear within a few in our community. I’m not about to give some silly undertakings simply to attempt to calm the raging fears of a few. Similarly, I will give no undertakings to not meet with any person or group. I enjoy gaining considerable insight and perspective from a wide and sometimes odd variety of people.