Coal seam gas is very newsworthy at the moment with
politicians at all levels of government anxious to demonstrate that they are
(finally) listening to community concerns about this industry. Both the State
and Federal Governments have recently announced new measures to address some of
the issues identified by anti-CSG campaigners. Whether these
measures, most of which are directed to new rather than existing licences, will
have any real effect is questionable.
Clarence Valley Councillors, like their state and federal
counterparts, are well aware of community concerns. The previous Council passed
two resolutions expressing concern about coal seam gas mining. And on
Tuesday 12th March, with memories of the Glenugie vigil and blockade
still fresh, another motion was put to the Environment, Economic and Community
Committee of the Council.
Councillors Jason Kingsley, Craig Howe and Sue Hughes
moved that Council write to State and Federal Ministers and local MPs calling
for a halt to "CSG mining activity and all other forms of unconventional
gas mining including testing in the Clarence Valley" until the release of
findings of a number of inquiries relating to the industry's impacts on health,
water catchments and other environmental matters could deliver a guarantee that
there will be no detrimental impacts from this industry.
In
their motion the Councillors stated: "In light of recent
events there is increasing doubt as to the safety of CSG mining in both the
areas of human health and the Environment. NSW Health recommended no more CSG
expansion in Sydney until more studies can be undertaken into the effects on
people’s health. The NSW Government recently tightened restrictions on CSG
activity near dwellings, with the Deputy Premier stating that he would not like
it in his backyard and that there was a possibility something could go wrong.
"If it is good enough for Sydney and the
Deputy Premier, it is good enough for the residents and environment of the
Clarence Valley."
Questions about the motion were asked by
Councillors Challacombe and Baker.
Councillor Challacombe stated that he had no
problem with the motion "per se" but he wanted to establish that, if
the five criteria were met, the motion indicated that CSG mining could go
ahead.
Councillor Baker stated that he did not believe
that the motion indicated that this could happen and said that he would vote
against it. He spoke on a number of occasions during the debate and
claimed that the effect of the motion would be to create uncertainty, that the
level of community concern about the CSG industry has not really been tested,
and that dealing with this issue was beyond the area of Council's
responsibility. In addition he referred to the inconsistency of the other
levels of government which obtained benefits from CSG mining.
Councillor Howe stated that the effect of the
motion would be to create certainty as there was uncertainty now. He
acknowledged that, while Local Government had limitations in this matter,
Councils had a role in advocating for their communities. He pointed out
that the Department of Health concerns illustrated that there was doubt and a
health risk and that we should be wary of taking risks in this matter.
The Committee voted four (Howe, Hughes, McKenna,
Williamson) to one (Baker) for the motion.
It will be very interesting to see the vote at the
full Council meeting on Tuesday 19th March. Of particular
interest will be the vote of Councillor Challacombe, former President of the
Grafton Chamber of Commerce. Last year the Chamber came out in support of
CSG mining in the Clarence after it had been lobbied (and reportedly wined and
dined) by Metgasco, the CSG company involved in the test drill at Glenugie in
January.
Hildegard
Northern Rivers
GuestSpeak is a
feature of North Coast Voices allowing Northern Rivers residents to
make satirical or serious comment on issues that concern them. Posts of 250-300
words or less can be submitted to ncvguestspeak AT gmail.com.au for consideration.
No comments:
Post a Comment