NSW Coalition Government reveals its political sensitivity concerning the Gas Plan

The NSW Baird Government reveals its political sensitivity concerning its Gas Plan via this exchange in the letters section of The Daily Examiner, a regional newspaper in the Clarence Valley.

The first brief letter by a Lower Clarence resident elicited a misleading official comeback within days.

Letter to the editor published on 15 January 2015:

Gas Plan an insult

IT WILL take more than a picture of a young girl testing the waters of what seems to be a pristine dam, to convince the NSW taxpayers that their money is well spent on these full page NSW Gas Plan advertisements.

Such propaganda will not work as people are far too intelligent to be fooled into thinking we don't need to worry about CSG mining now that the NSW Government has created a website.

It is an insult to the intelligence of the community who have overwhelmingly voiced their opposition to unconventional gas mining in the Northern Rivers.

The "NSW Gas Plan" does nothing to stop landholders and communities being forced into giving access to their land against their will and has no improved safeguards for human health in the plan.

Every council on the North Coast has now asked for petroleum exploration licences to be revoked. It is obvious the Government is NOT listening to the voters of NSW and spending huge amounts of taxpayers' money to advertise something they do not support is disappointing to say the least.

Annie Dorrian

Iluka

                         

Letter to the editor published on 19 January 2015:

Gas Plan defence

I AM writing in response to a letter published in your newspaper (15/1) headed: "Gas Plan an insult".

The author claims that an advertorial outlining the NSW Government's comprehensive Gas Plan is an insult to the intelligence of the community.

It is unfortunate that the reader has interpreted the advertorials in this manner. The aim is to raise awareness amongst the community that this State, for the first time, has a plan for the safe and sustainable development of our local gas reserves.

The advertorials will hopefully stimulate people to try to learn more about the plan, the debate and the evidence we have in relation to the risks, the science, the industry and the actions being taken across Government, as we try to balance the economic, environmental and social needs of our State.

This includes a range of actions, which contrary to what is claimed in the letter, cover water, environment, community and landholders' interests.

For example, the use of evaporation ponds and BTEX has been banned. New guidelines for community consultation practices have been set. New codes/standards for well engineering and fracture stimulation practices have been set and peer reviewed by the NSW Chief Scientist and Engineer, Professor Mary O'Kane.

Groundwater studies have been completed on the Gunnedah, Gloucester and Clarence- Moreton basins, and the list goes on.

In total, more than 30 measures were introduced before the Gas Plan, and the Gas Plan itself adds a significant number of additional measures, including the NSW Government's acceptance of all of Professor O'Kane's recommendations.

The plan also outlines new measures aimed at ensuring community and landholders can share more directly in the benefits of gas exploration and development in their areas.

Again, the plan builds on advances already made in this area, such as the review of the arbitration system for land access agreements and the public commitments made by Santos and AGL not to seek access to a landholders' property if the landholder does not want them on their land.

So much has been done in recent years to better balance the economic, social and environmental issues of this industry. The advertorials simply aim to raise awareness of this fact and encourage people to learn more.

Lastly, it is also important to note that it is not correct to imply all people in NSW oppose this industry.

As with all industrial activities, there are those who support it, those who oppose it ... and those who are not interested in the debate or have not yet made up their minds.

Hopefully, for those who are curious about learning more, the Gas Plan will be a helpful place to start.

For more information, please visit gasplan.nsw.gov.au

Kylie Hargreaves

Deputy Secretary, Resources & Energy, NSW Trade & Investment

UPDATE

Bite back at Gas Plan propaganda in The Daily Examiner letters section on 23 January 2015:

Gas plan hard sell

THE NSW Government is spending thousands upon thousands of taxpayer dollars in advertisements to try to sell their so-called NSW Gas Plan to the residents of the Northern Rivers.

This is an obvious attempt to shore up votes for the coming State election in those seats where National Party candidates are most likely to suffer voter backlash from many disillusioned members of the community.

It is not a genuine attempt to inform, educate and consult.

Many citizens would like the right of reply to these advertisements but we do not have the vast amount of dollars required to buy the necessary newspaper space and radio time to counteract the misleading statements in this patronising propaganda.

The main avenue for us, the voters, to have our say regarding our concerns, is by writing letters to the editors of our local newspapers. We are grateful for this opportunity; however, there is limited space in the newspapers to publish our letters - certainly not a full page plus one bonus advertorial half-page.

So it is unjust and inappropriate that Kylie Hargreaves, deputy secretary, resources and energy, NSW Trade and Investment, should write a 457-word letter (19/1) to The Daily Examiner to refute the written opinion of a member of the public (15/1).

The Government is already bombarding us with advertisements - we open a newspaper or other local publication, we turn on the radio or, worst of all, in the privacy of our own home we log into our Facebook page to connect to our friends, and up pops a NSW Government Gas Plan ad.

Please, Ms Hargreaves, leave us at least one forum where we can have our say without interference from the Government.

And while I have this opportunity, may I point out the NSW Gas Plan is not about "Keeping our water pure", "Securing farming future" or "Protecting future generations."

It is all about ensuring that the gas industry proceeds throughout NSW.

Rosemary Joseph,
Bentley

NSW North Coast police make mockery of traffic accident attendance criteria

On 15 October 2014 NSW Police changed its criteria for attending traffic accidents.

Traffic and Highway Patrol Command - NSW Police Force:

Police on the NSW North Coast have apparently refined this criteria further.

On the morning of 13 January 2015 a Yamba resident, reporting what was a head-on crash on a badly cambered bend in a town road was told by police that only accidents where a person was injured would be attended by officers.

Apparently this is how local police are interpreting the NSW Government’s so-called drive to reduce red tape.

Now this would possibly be a worry-free policy adaptation if all accidents on the North Coast occurred through no fault on the part of drivers due to adverse road/weather conditions, but there is a glaring hole in how this three month old directive is being implemented on the ground.

In effect it means that it there will be drivers who were speeding and/or intoxicated who will escape being held legally accountable for their unlawful actions and the property damage they inflict, because North Coast police are refusing to come to crash sites unless they are specifically told a person has been injured.

If the person contacting police fails to mention a suspicion that a driver may have been drinking or speeding or the police fail to ask that question at the time, then dangerous drivers will begin to feel invulnerable – which may eventually have fatal consequences.

NSW Premier Baird, Energy & Resources Minister Roberts and local MPs Gulaptis, George and Page are spinning the Northern Rivers a dishonest unconventional gas tale

This is the advertisement which appeared in local newspapers this month spinning the pro-coal seam gas line that the NSW Baird Government and National Party MPs in North Coast electorates would like us to believe.

The NSW Gas Plan is the government’s new strategic framework to protect our water and environment while delivering vital gas supplies for the state.

Our water resources are protected through the most comprehensive regulatory controls for the gas industry in the nation.

The NSW government has introduced important protections, including an Aquifer Interference Policy, code of practice for well integrity and fracture stimulation and banned the use of harmful volatile organic compounds, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX chemicals), and evaporation ponds.

The NSW Gas Plan is the next step. It outlines the path to achieving a world class system to protect our water, environment, critical agricultural land and communities.

The NSW government has adopted all the recommendations by the independent NSW Chief Scientist and Engineer, Professor Mary O’Kane, to ensure the new regulatory framework for the gas industry is based on science and is world’s best practice.

This new science-based regulatory framework adopts a strong compliance and enforcement regime, enhanced environmental monitoring, improved protections and benefits for landholders and communities.

The NSW Gas Plan introduces a new strategic release framework, which is a system that puts the government back in control of the release of title areas for exploration. 

This will allow the government to identify the most appropriate areas for exploration through a careful examination of economic, environmental and social factors with community consultation conducted up-front. 

Exploration for gas will be done on our terms.

The Environment Protection Authority, Office of Coal Seam Gas and the NSW Office of Water all monitor and supervise gas operations to ensure companies comply with the high engineering and environmental standards which now apply in NSW.

The independent Environment Protection Authority (EPA) will be proactive and fearless in its new role as the lead regulator for compliance and enforcement of conditions of approval for gas activities.

A project to provide baseline information about the state’s groundwater has been started by the government. The Groundwater Baseline Project is mapping and gathering data on the water used by agriculture, industry and mining.

This will ensure we have the critical data to ensure the use of our water is sustainable and available for future generations, while ensuring any changes to our water supplies are detected early.

The first areas to be analysed are the Gunnedah, Gloucester and Clarence Moreton basins. More information on these and other water projects are available from water.nsw.gov.au 

The NSW Gas Plan signals a new era for the gas industry and NSW. 

The government’s new science based regulatory framework protects our precious water and environment, ensures communities have a voice and we have a world-class regime to secure vital gas supplies for the state’s manufacturers, businesses and households that rely on gas every day.

For more information, please visit gasplan.nsw.gov.au

This is the reality for the Northern Rivers – under the NSW Gas Plan coal seam gas exploration tenements cover most of its land mass and span all its major river systems.

NSW Government Trade & Investment: Energy & Resources mapping as of 8 January 2015
Click on map to enlarge

The state government’s pro-coal seam gas advertisement states that; This new science-based regulatory framework adopts a strong compliance and enforcement regime, enhanced environmental monitoring, improved protections and benefits for landholders and communities. Actually there is no new science-based regulatory framework in place. This is something the Baird Government says it will start to put in place at an as yet unspecified time, which may possibly be in the second half of 2015.

It asserts Exploration for gas will be done on our terms as though this is a new and innovative stance. Mineral and petroleum mining within the state has always been done on the government of the day’s terms. The government’s right to decide is found in the NSW Constitution and state legislation, particularly the Mining Act 1992.

It goes on to say that the NSW government has adopted all the recommendations by the independent NSW Chief Scientist and Engineer. In fact the current NSW Gas Plan clearly shows it has not. 

In particular it has not fully explained the rationale/need for CSG extraction beyond a cursory attempt to talk about non-existent gas shortages and, the advertisement avoids that issue entirely.

The Baird Government’s gas plan certainly doesn’t fully encompass this recommendation in the NSW Chief Scientist’s September 2014 Final Report of the Independent Review of Coal Seam Gas Activities in NSW:

Recommendation 3

That Government investigate as a priority a range of practical measures for implementation (or extension of current measures) to allow affected communities to have strengthened protections and benefits including fair and appropriate:

• land access arrangements, including land valuation and compensation for landholders

• compensation for other local residents impacted (above threshold levels) by extraction activities

• funding (derived from the fees and levies paid by CSG companies) for local councils to enable them to fund, in a transparent manner, infrastructure and repairs required as a consequence of the CSG industry.

Nor is there any adequate mention of this:

Recommendation 4

That the full cost to Government of the regulation and support of the CSG industry be covered by the fees, levies, royalties and taxes paid by industry, and an annual statement be made by Government on this matter as part of the Budget process.

In fact where the gas plan briefly speaks of royalties, it does so in terms of ensuring that these are favourable to the advancement of the commercial interests of mining companies.

As for the recommended appropriate and proportionate penalties for non-compliance, apart from one 21-word 'motherhood' sentiment, the concept of penalties is missing in action.

The Liberal-Nationals broadly-worded Gas Plan also appears to deliberately avoid this statement contained in the Chief Scientist’s Independent Review:

There is a need to understand better the nature of risk of pollution or other potential short- or long-term environmental damage from CSG and related operations, and the capacity and cost of mitigation and/or remediation and whether there are adequate financial mechanisms in place to deal with these issues. This requires an investigation of insurance and environmental risk coverage, security deposits, and the possibility of establishing an environmental rehabilitation fund. Doing this is essential to ensure that

the costs and impacts from this industry are not a burden for the community.

A promise of community consultation conducted up-front is found in the advertisement, but the Gas Plan itself is silent about how and when this will occur in any instance.

The one thing I can say with certainty about the Baird Government’s intentions towards the Northern Rivers region is that its Gas Plan is nothing more than a document without force of law. It is a public statement of intent vaguely promising a fair go, which was obviously written with the March 2015 state election in mind.

* The Daily Examiner image courtesy of Yuraygir Coast and Range Alliance

Has The Daily Examiner editor drunk the National Party kool aid?

Opinion in The Daily Examiner on Page 7 of the 1 January 2015 issue:

Happy New Year, and welcome to 2015.

It promises to be an exciting time for the Clarence Valley, with the pending start to work on the Pacific Hwy upgrade, including a second crossing of the Clarence at Harwood, as well as the start to the second bridge at Grafton.

The announced injection of Federal and State funding for these projects is unprecedented and seems certain to have a highly positive impact on the Valley economy.

Local residents could do a lot worse than to make their new year's resolution coming up with a way to be part of the economic boost heading our way.

You don't need to know how to build a bridge or drive a dump truck to take advantage of the big projects.

Many businesses and service suppliers are poised to benefit from the boost to employment and the economy.

Schools could see an enrolment lift and landlords could be in for a golden period.

Just like a resolution to lose weight, however, those who benefit most from the construction boom will be those who work hardest and are best prepared.

The Daily Examiner reported on 11 December 2014 something which a look at NSW Roads & Maritime Service’s website confirms in January 2015, the second Grafton Bridge has not yet received approval:

CONSTRUCTION of a second bridge for Grafton is in limbo with no announcement yet on when works will begin.

A spokeswoman from Roads and Maritime Services said there would be "no comment" on the proposed bridge while the project was under review by the NSW Department of Planning and Environment.

Meanwhile a spokesman from the Grafton Chamber of Commerce and Industry has raised concerns that an election promise, made in 2011 by the (then) Deputy Opposition Leader and Leader of the Nationals Andrew Stoner as well as current Clarence MP Chris Gulaptis, will not be met.

Des Harvey, board member of the Grafton Chamber of Commerce, said the community deserved clear answers.

"Given it is already December 2014, and the construction industry typically winds down for Christmas and the January holiday period, the Grafton Chamber is very concerned the deadline of 28 March 2015 for commencement of construction will not be met as promised," Mr Harvey said.

"People stop and ask me in the street - what's happening? - at the end of the day we want to see actual construction; we want to see tractors digging holes."

Mr Harvey acknowledged the project had progressed significantly, but he also noted that $177 million had been allocated for construction in the current term.

"I know plenty of work has already been done but the election is getting closer and the problem hasn't gone away," he said….

The second crossing of the Clarence River at Harwood is still at submissions from the community stage at this time, with tenders for preliminary first stage of soft soil treatment still being assessed.

Tenders are still being assessed for preliminary soft soil work on the Pacific Highway upgrade between Woolgoolga and Ballina generally.

This year is unlikely to see the hoped for golden period for the Clarence Valley - more likely there will be a slow trickle of employment opportunities in the second half of 2015.

Of course, if as is likely, the Baird Coalition Government is returned at the 28 March 2015 state election with a comfortable majority then any perception of political urgency in Macquarie Street will have subsided.

Then the federal funding earmarked for 2013-14 and the state's $395 million earmarked for 2014-15 may be the only funding not pushed forward past 2016-17 in this year's state budget papers, where such deferred spending would sit with further promised federal funding listed in forward estimates past the end of the Abbott Government's current (and perhaps only) term in office. 

Someone's not happy with the NSW Baird Government and their local National Party MP Chris Gulaptis - Part 2

Letter to the Editor in The Daily Examiner, 9 December 2014:

Gas or hot air?

Does Chris Gulaptis know what his government is doing when it comes to managing the state's unconventional gas resources?

Late last month, in his newsletter, Chris Gulaptis MP stated, 'The NSW Government is cancelling all CSG exploration licence applications... It is also buying back existing licences'.

Then, a week later, the Government approved Dart Energy's application to renew its licence for a further six year period. The licensed area for this exploration includes much of the Richmond Range, significant parts of the Richmond Valley around Coraki and Bungawalbin, and part of the Clarence lowlands around Tabbimoble.

As required under law, the government reduced the area of this renewed licence but chose to remove areas such as Byron Bay, Ballina and Lennox Head. This was presumably motivated by the fact that these lie in the Ballina electorate, which is considered vulnerable in next year's state election.

Voters in the Clarence electorate deserve more.

We should not be taken for fools who will tolerate gas exploration and the risk it poses to our water, land, air and climate.

Until all licences are cancelled, the future of our region's clean and green image remains at risk.

JANET CAVANAUGH

Whiporie.

1,500 Essential Energy jobs on the chopping block and reliable power supply at risk on NSW North Coast

The Australian Energy Regulator (AER) released a draft revenue determination for the NSW electricity distributor, Essential Energy, for the five year period through to June 2019.

The Draft Essential Energy distribution determination 2015–16 to 2018–19 affects many residential and business customers on the NSW North Coast

                                                                             

According to Essential Energy on 27 November 2014:

The AER draft determinations released today would mean, if implemented:

• Immediate job reductions of 4,600 employees (38%) across NSW (Ausgrid 2,400, Endeavour Energy

700 and Essential Energy 1,500).

• An inability to place 750 apprentices, currently in training, when they graduate to trade over the

next four years.

• A likely reduction of $460m in vegetation management programs over the next four years.

• Deterioration in the time taken for electricity networks to restore electricity supply to communities

after major storm events.

AER apparently also expects Essential Energy to increase efficiency savings by exposing customers to more frequent brownouts and blackouts during peak demand periods [AER Draft Determination Overview, p26].

The number of hot days are increasing on the NSW North Coast and, maximum daily temperatures in Grafton during the first six days of December 2014 were between 29°C and 33.5°C, Lismore’s maximum daily temperature for the same period ranged between 26.5°C and 30.8°C, Casino’s maximums reached 28.9°C and 35.3°C, while Kyogle’s  maximums fluctuating between 31.8°C to 35.3°C.

When one combines this heat in the first six days of an Australian summer with the aging population demographic of the region, it does not take a genius to see that any increase in power outages carries a risk to the health and wellbeing of older residents as well as infants and the ill.

Battling heat with no power for fan or air conditioner due to what should be an avoidable power outage may mean that nursing mothers and the frail aged will find little comfort in the fact that that AER expects residential electricity bills to decrease next financial year under its plan.

The NSW Nationals MP for Clarence response on 3 December in the Clarence Valley Review was weak to say the least:

Member for Clarence Chris Gulaptis said that “every consumer would welcome a drop in electricity prices to households and small businesses”, but opposed the idea of further job cuts at EE.
“What we [the Nationals] don’t agree with is the impact on regional communities, with any job losses,” he said.
“That’s why we opposed the sale of poles and wires in the first place – and that’s why the Nationals fought to secure EE remaining in government hands.

But then, this is a politician who has conveniently forgotten that earlier this year he voted for the second phase of privatisation of the state’s electricity infrastructure:

Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has voted with his party to back the State Government's proposed sell-off of electricity infrastructure.

[The Daily Examiner, 13 June 2014]

So who really owns coal seam gas exploration tenement PEL 445 recently renewed by the NSW Baird Government in the face of regional opposition?

Dart Energy (Bruxner) Pty Ltd registered in Brisbane, Queensland, in February 2013 has successfully applied to have its coal seam gas exploration licence PEL 445 renewed for a further six years by the NSW Coalition Government.

On 4 December 2014 the Minister for Resources and Energy Anthony Roberts cited the company’s financial and technical capacity, good record of environmental management and rehabilitation as reasons underpinning this renewal.

According to the minister; Dart Energy is only permitted to undertake low impact exploration activities including data review, mapping and technical evaluation. Any other activities require further approvals and are subject to the Government’s strict new conditions and regulations.

As required by legislation the company had to relinquish 25 per cent of its original tenement (choosing sections which contained no identified commercially viable gas deposits) when applying for the licence renewal and this is the amended 5,868 sq km exploration lease:

The Dart Energy group was spun off from Arrow Energy Pty Ltd in 2010, when that company was taken over by Royal Dutch Shell and PetroChina. Most of Dart Energy’s current management team was originally with Arrow Energy.

Dart Energy acquired PEL 445 then covering approximately 7,100 sq km centred about 39 km WNW of Lismore (containing 15 wells) from Arrow Energy in 2013.

On 12 May 2014 The Sydney Morning Herald reported:

Dart Energy has abandoned hopes of emerging as a global player in non-conventional gas, agreeing to a scrip merger from a UK operator that will see it dump all its non-UK assets.

Dart has agreed to merge with IGas Energy, which is listed on London's secondary AIM market, via a scheme of arrangement.

Dart shareholders will receive 0.08117 IGas shares for each Dart share held, which values Dart shares at just 18.98¢ and the entire company at $211.5 million.

Dart shares last traded at 12.5¢, a far cry from their levels above $1 three and four years ago.

Agreeing to the merger will see longstanding Dart shareholders lose out following a series of changes of strategy as the group has floundered in recent years.

Its most recent raising of $20.7 million at 9¢ will see shareholders who took up that offer last September come out in front, although its 2011 raising of $100 million at 75¢ a share has left shareholders with bruising losses.

Soul Pattinson's New Hope Corp has a 16.3 per cent stake in Dart and has backed the merger proposal in the absence of a rival offer emerging, as have shareholders with a further 14 per cent of Dart's capital.

Dart has sought to undertake a series of changes over the past few years to put its operations on a viable footing, which included listing offshore assets in Singapore and, after that failed, seeking a listing in London, which now has been abandoned.

Dart was spun out from Arrow Energy in 2010, when Arrow was bought by Shell. Dart took the offshore assets of Arrow, which it bolstered by acquiring Apollo Gas, giving it a suite of domestic assets. But the company has struggled, making limited progress in developing its extensive asset portfolio despite high gas prices.

It recently booked $43.5 million of impairment charges, mostly relating to the writing down of assets in NSW and the UK. It also has sold some offshore assets, such as in India.

In October 2014 IGas Energy announced:

As part of the October 2014 acquisition of Dart Energy, the Group holds a number of Coal Bed Methane (CBM) exploration licences across Australia, Indonesia, India and Germany.

IGas will continue to progress Dart’s previously announced divestment plan. IGas will Operate non UK assets where it is contractually obliged to do so…..

In Australia we hold our licences under a care and maintenance basis.

We currently hold seven petroleum exploration licences all located in the state of New South Wales.

PEL 445 is one of those exploration licences.

IGas Energy Plc is a leading British oil and gas explorer and developer, producing approximately 3,000 barrels of oil and gas a day from over 100 sites across the U.K. IGas assets are predominantly 100% owned and operated by this corporation

The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from the NSW Baird Government’s renewal of the exploration title PEL 445, is that the application made through IGas subsidiary Dart Energy (Bruxner) Pty Ltd sought to increase the value of this asset ahead of any sell-on of the title.

Therefore, the assurances given by the NSW Minister for Resources and Energy as to the character of the nominal owner of PEL 445 are as ephemeral as a burning sheet of paper.

Gasfield Free Northern Rivers has echoed the sentiments of many communities across the Northern Rivers, from the NSW-QLD border down to the Clarence Valley:

Gasfield Free Northern Rivers has welcomed Dart’s surrender of twenty five per cent of PEL 445, which it says ‘covers the Ballina electorate’.

But it describes the move as, ‘only a small step in protecting our area from the practice of invasive and dangerous unconventional gas extraction’.

‘This is only a part relinquishment and a very large area of PEL445 and the rest of the Northern Rivers remains open to unconventional gas exploration and fracking,’ said Gasfield Free spokesperson Dean Draper

‘It’s crucial our region’s water supplies and our agriculture and tourism industries are protected. Our community is calling for a full cancellation of the entire PEL 445 and all of the petroleum Exploration Licenses in the northern rivers.’

‘We need to have certainty in protection, until all of the licenses are cancelled the future of our regions clean and green image remains at risk.’ he said

‘It seems this announcement by minister Roberts is motivated by the fact that the Ballina electorate is considered a vulnerable seat by the NSW government in the lead-up to the NSW election.

‘However, the impacts of invasive gasfields stretch across electorate boundaries, and our community will not rest until the entire northern rivers receives the protection it deserves.’ Mr Draper said.

Someone's not happy with the NSW Baird Government or their local National Party MP Chris Gulaptis

Letter to the Editor in The Daily Examiner 29 November 2014:

Lost faith in MP

I thank Chris Gulaptis for starting and then presenting the flying fox/fruit bat petition to Parliament.

Unfortunately, as soon as I read that Chris was surprised the Coalition had enacted policy so quickly, a red flag went up. It would seem Chris was not involved in this policy that he was responsible for and would surely be a knowledgeable contributor.

The second red flag went up when I read it was being passed over to the council to act upon. That was the death knell for something to happen at Maclean soon and possibly will never happen, especially after reading CVC would not try anything if it was going to cost CVC money.

Chris has made a big stand here and, as his predecessors have done, has failed abysmally.

I don't consider the fruit bat failure to be enough to change my vote but Mr Baird stated last night that if the Coalition won in 2015 it had a mandate to "sell" the poles and wires of our publicly owned electricity companies. That is a politically fatal statement. There was nothing said about leasing 49%, he said "a mandate to sell".

That, combined with the Coalition's pathetic Ammunition Bill and their lack of action to stop fracking for CSG near productive farmland and water aquifers, I find myself looking for an alternative to Chris in 2015.

C Gosling

Coutts Crossing

In which Labor's Walt Secord and The Greens' Jeremy Buckingham nail NSW Nationals' hypocrisy in relation to coal seam and other unconventional gas exploration and mining in the state

The NSW Legislative Council Hansard recorded a seconding reading debate on the Petroleum (Onshore) Amendment (NSW Gas Plan) Bill 2014 which began at 12.50am and ended just before 2am on 19 November 2014.

Here are excerpts from that debate:

The Hon. WALT SECORD  [1.24 a.m.]: As the shadow Minister for the North Coast I speak on the Petroleum (Onshore) Amendment (NSW Gas Plan) Bill 2014. My observations on the bill will centre on North Coast issues. On Thursday 13 November at 10.05 a.m., without warning, the Liberal-Nationals Government introduced this bill in the Legislative Assembly. For a start, the title of the bill is a complete and absolute deception. The bill does not abolish current coal seam gas [CSG] and unconventional gas production licences currently in operation and it does not protect the Northern Rivers region of New South Wales. Furthermore, the Liberal-Nationals Government has put on the table the possibility of reopening the special area of the Sydney water catchment for CSG operations. 

If the purpose of the bill's title is to convey the Government's intention at law, then the bill should have been called the "Unlock the gate and roll out the red carpet for Metgasco on the North Coast after March 2015 bill". That is because that is the intention of this bill. It will allow CSG and unconventional gas exploration to return on steroids on the North Coast after the March 2015 State election. The bill provides no guarantee to the communities of New South Wales, particularly those on the Northern Rivers, that have made their views abundantly clear. But that is no surprise. The Liberal-Nationals Government has already flagged that it will back big corporations over the people of New South Wales every time.

That is why Labor will be moving a number of amendments to the bill to bring it into line with Labor's policy, announced by Opposition leader John Robertson on 29 October. Our amendments will ban coal seam gas from the special areas of Sydney water catchment and from the Northern Rivers, encompassing the local government areas of Ballina shire, Byron shire, Kyogle shire, Lismore city, Tweed shire, Richmond Valley and Clarence Valley……

If the Liberals and The Nationals were interested in responding to community concerns they would have proceeded with a second reading speech by the Minister and then adjourned the bill, allowing the Opposition and crossbenchers to consider it. But their motivation is simple. If the North Coast community had time to consider the bill they would find it lacking in any detail and teeth, and they would see that it was an attempt to dupe them. But what is even more shameful is that not a single member of The Nationals spoke on the bill. I say that again: not a single Nationals member of Parliament spoke on the bill. That is a big betrayal of their electorates—not a word from the member for Tweed, not a word from the member for Ballina, not a word from the member for Lismore, and not a word from the member for Clarence. And out of left field, on 14 November the member for Tamworth popped up in his local media and said he wants to protect the Liverpool Plains. After months of absolute silence, he enters the fray. It was like a scene out of Muriel's Wedding: "Deidre Chambers, what are you doing here? What a coincidence!" It is no wonder that the local community have dubbed The Nationals "Team Metgasco"……        

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM [1.03 a.m.]: I contribute to debate on the Petroleum (Onshore) Amendment (NSW Gas Plan) Bill 2014. What a long and winding road it has been to get to this wafer-thin bill. After nearly five years of policy development, promises, posturing and touting their wares across the countryside the Government came up with a Petroleum (Onshore) Amendment (NSW Gas Plan) Bill that is nothing of the sort. There is no gas plan in this bill; there is no response to the Chief Scientist in this bill. This bill is a thin veneer of the Government's plan to sneak coal seam gas through the next election and launch it onto the countryside. This is more spin, more carpet-bagging, from a government that the people of New South Wales do not trust. 

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Take your koala suit off.

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: It did not take long to get a rise out of you. The Strategic Regional Land Use plan failed, the Aquifer Interference Policy failed, and the people of New South Wales do not believe a single word those opposite say on this issue. Not even the Government's backbenchers, parliamentary Secretaries or Ministers believe a single word Minister Gay says.

The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: Point of order: The member should direct his comments through the Chair and should stop pointing at people across the table. He should take a moment to take a deep breath, relax and be calm.

DEPUTY-PRESIDENT (The Hon. Natasha Maclaren-Jones): Order! The Minister was referring to relevancy. There is no point of order.

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: We are debating the Petroleum (Onshore) Amendment (NSW Gas Plan) Bill. Where did this bill start? It started with the Hon. Chris Hartcher introducing an onshore petroleum bill back in May 2013. Do members remember him introducing that bill and saying ad nauseam, "These are the toughest rules in Australia"? He went on to say, "These are the toughest rules in the world". What a joke that is! We heard announcement after announcement after announcement and that bill, which passed the Legislative Assembly on 28 May 2013, then disappeared; it was pulled off the Notice Paper on 10 September this year. It died an inglorious death; slowly and quietly culled—euthanased—because it was an absolutely pathetic bill that did nothing to placate the people of New South Wales who have concerns about coal seam gas.

The Hon. Steve Whan said this bill is not very broad. I have seen needles with more breadth and depth than this bill. Talk about pinpoint legislation—it is pathetic. The Government is expunging a handful of titles—and it very nearly could not bring itself to do that—when the people of New South Wales wanted substantive action in this area. They wanted, as the Government promised, areas ruled out of coal seam gas activity. We got some very sensible recommendations from the Chief Scientist that should be applied to extractive industries across the State.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: We're going to do the whole lot.

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: No you're not. There were dozens of pages in the Chief Scientist's report—I read them—and the Bret Walker report, but did their recommendations turn up in the gas plan? No they did not. Some key things are missing from the gas plan. One of the most important things missing is the recommendations of Bret Walker, SC: The rights of farmers, the rights of communities, to be empowered in arbitration and land access. It says in the Government's response to the review in the most Yes Minister type language I have ever seen:

On 15 April 2014, the NSW Government commissioned Mr Bret Walker SC to undertake an independent review of the land access arbitration processes relating to exploration under the Mining Act 1992 and the Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991.

The Walker Report … made 31 recommendations to improve the arbitration land access framework. The NSW government has endorsed all the recommendations in the Walker Report relating to the current arbitration framework and committed to a process of implementation commencing immediately where possible."

The Government is committed to a process of implementation commencing immediately, where possible. What an absolute joke! This Government is a farce. No-one trusts this Government and no-one believes this Government. The gas plan is an absolute joke. It is just a blueprint to turn a beautiful State into a toxic gas field. No-one believes this Government.

Do Government members know who does not believe this Government, in particular? The Minister for Mental Health, and the Assistant Minister for Health and member for Wollondilly, Jai Rowell, Gareth Ward, Lee Evans, Mark Speakman, Mark Coure, Stuart Ayres, Chris Patterson, Brian Doyle, Russell Matheson, Rosa Sage, Barry O'Farrell, Don Page, Kevin Anderson, Thomas George, Chris Gulaptis and whoever the Coalition has running as a candidate in Ballina. They all rushed out within 24 to 48 hours of the announcement to state on the public record, "We're banning it. We're banning it." They knew what the community's interpretation of the NSW Gas Plan was. 

It is a carpetbagging exercise by snake oil salesmen who have come into New South Wales communities to sell them a story that New South Wales is running out of gas and this State must have coal seam gas. How many Holdens does New South Wales produce and how many mangoes? Are we completely self-sufficient concerning mangoes? Do we have to have a mangoes industry? We are a federation, a commonwealth, and this issue should be dealt with at the Council of Australian Governments [COAG], not through some carpetbagging exercise by the New South Wales Government. In the context of the most outrageous, erroneous and egregious untruths, I will refer to the Minister's second reading speech, which states:

For example, we appointed a New South Wales Land and Water Commissioner to provide independent advice to the community about exploration activities.

When referring to the framework for community engagement, the Minister stated:

We have also established the Gloucester Dialogue, chaired by the Land and Water Commissioner. The Gloucester Dialogue brings together community, industry and local and State governments to explore issues surrounding the exploration and extraction of coal seam gas in the Gloucester Basin.

This is this the first time in New South Wales this type of dialogue has occurred. Through the dialogue there is regular contact between senior departmental officers and Gloucester Shire Council. Any topic is up for discussion. A community liaison officer from my department operates out of the council chambers two to three days a week. The tenth dialogue meeting was held last Thursday. I commend the Gloucester Shire Council, particularly the mayor, Councillor John Rosenbaum …

Through the dialogue the community has access to all materials relevant to licensing decisions and approvals about AGL's Gloucester gas project.

That is unadulterated rubbish from the Minister because in that very week the man who had the idea for the Gloucester Dialogue, Aled Hoggett—a former councillor of the Gloucester Shire Council—resigned from the Gloucester Dialogue. He did that in the very week when the Minister was spruiking it as the way forward for engagement and the way to sell the Government's gas plan. Aled Hoggett stated in his letter of resignation, "The dialogue was initiated at my suggestion in February this year."…..

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: Thank you, Madam Deputy-President. "The dialogue was initiated at my suggestion in February this year", Mr Aled Hoggett stated in his letter of resignation from the Gloucester Dialogue to which the Minister referred in his second reading speech. "I hope that Mr Roberts' current assertions would become reality, that we could find a new path to coexistence between coal and gas projects in local communities. Instead I resigned my position on the dialogue early this month. In my opinion, the dialogue has failed and has become an overbearing monologue directed at our tiny and underresourced council. It is being managed to satisfy the requirements for consultation while delivering no such thing. More fundamentally, the dialogue cannot address three major problems in the New South Wales planning system that undermine coexistence between rural communities and the coal and gas industries. The first problem is that the New South Wales planning system disempowers local communities."

Mr Hoggett went on. He resigned from the committee that was his idea and that the Government enshrined in the heart of the Government's NSW Gas Plan because it is a farce—like the rest of the Government's plan. The gas plan is based on a false assumption around economics and on a belief that the Government can say just anything to the community and get away with it. I will read onto the record what Mr Jai Rowell declared in the Wollondilly Advertiser to his community in relation to the announcement of the gas plan: "'It ain't happening, it's over, we won', Wollondilly MP Jai Rowell declared last week", after the gas plan was released. Yet the gas plan refers to the very fact that the AGL gas development in Camden will remain an integral part, in the Government's opinion, of gas delivery in New South Wales. That completely contradicts what Mr Jai Rowell said—"It ain't happening, it's over, we won"; there will be no coal seam gas in Wollondilly. The community is not stupid.

The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: It is in Camden. It is not in Wollondilly, mate.

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: I acknowledge the interjection. The expansion plans of AGL are clearly into the Camden electorate. The member for Camden knows it. The community knows it and they are not being sold a pup on that one. Another very important element of the recommendations made by the Chief Scientist and Engineer that did not make it into the Government's NSW Gas Plan. It should serve as a warning to all people in New South Wales that the Chief Scientist and Engineer concluded her report with these words:

There are no guarantees
· All industries have risks and, like any other, it is inevitable that the CSG industry will have some unintended consequences, including as the result of accidents, human error, and natural disasters. Industry, Government and the community need to work together to plan adequately to mitigate such risks, and be prepared to respond to problems if they occur.

They are wise words by any measure in regard to risk management. How did the Chief Scientist and Engineer suggest that those risks be managed? By Recommendation 9, which states:

Recommendation 9
That Government consider a robust and comprehensive policy of appropriate insurance and environmental risk coverage of the CSG industry to ensure financial protection short and long term. Government should examine the potential adoption of a three-layered policy of security deposits, enhanced insurance coverage, and an environmental rehabilitation fund.
That is a very sensible recommendation. It is something that I would recommend in relation to any extractive industry, in all industries and most undertakings…..

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: Clearly, there is enormous concern in the community. Does the recommendation to which I have referred turn up in the gas plan bill? No. What we have from this Government is a suggestion that all this will be done after the election—just like after the 2011 State election the Government had strategic regional land use plans that covered the State and protected areas, such as water catchments—"no ifs, no buts, a guarantee". Where did that go? It went the way of the premiership of the Hon. Barry O'Farrell. Those promises were not kept and people will hold this Government to account on its word. People do not believe for one instant that this promise from the Government will be kept. That is clear from the words of Mr Kevin Anderson who, straightaway after the announcement of the gas plan, rushed out to say that he wants the Liverpool Plains to be protected. Other members on the North Coast have said that they want those areas protected. I join them in saying that those areas should be protected. This coal seam gas industry is unnecessary. As the Chief Scientist said, it has major issues in terms of risk.

The Government may argue that it did not have time to do this. Why has it not implemented the recommendations of the Bret Walker review? I would like to hear from the Minister in his reply why the recommendations have not been implemented. There is a massive configuration in the community about land access and arbitration. The Government commissioned one of the best legal minds in the nation to deal with the issue, and he made fantastic recommendations about how to deal with it. The recommendations are widely supported by the environment movement, people in social justice, the legal fraternity and all sides of politics. Yet the Government has not moved. That shows that the Government is not serious and cannot be trusted on the recommendations of the Chief Scientist; otherwise some of the low-hanging fruit in the recommendations would have turned up in this wafer-thin petroleum bill. All the bill does is set out to cancel or expunge—

Mr Scot MacDonald: Finally we can talk about the bill.

Mr JEREMY BUCKINGHAM: I will cover the whole bill in my remaining two minutes. The Government will expunge a number of petroleum title applications, which simply could have been rejected. Will the Government cancel the petroleum exploration licences [PELS] that are up for renewal? As promised, will it protect areas such as water catchments? No, it will not. With this bill, the Government thinks it can erect a thin veil and hide behind it and sneak through to the next election. However, the electors of Lismore, Ballina, Tamworth and Barwon do not want to be guinea pigs in the Government's toxic coal seam gas experiment. They understand that we are a country rich in natural resources. Former Federal Labor and Coalition governments have signed up to a massive export of LNG without proper socio-economic analysis. 

There is a parliamentary inquiry into gas supply and demand. I look forward to that inquiry. We have seen some of the submissions to the lower House inquiry from companies such as Jemena, which say there is no gas supply crisis, there is lots of gas in Bass Strait from conventional sources and all it needs to do is build a pipeline. There are other suggestions for pipelines, et cetera. The Greens are not opposed to fossil fuels…..