The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) attempts to avoid embarrassing the Morrison Coalition
Government on the day it announced a federal election date:
In late 2018 and early 2019 CSIRO and Geoscience
Australia wrote two reports for the Federal Government on specific questions on
groundwater monitoring, management and modelling planned by Adani Pty Ltd for
its Carmichael mine proposal in central Queensland.
This advice was limited to answering discrete inquiries
on whether elements of Adani's proposed plans would be adequate to protect nationally
significant environmental assets.
CSIRO identified inadequacies in the plans and was
subsequently asked to review Adani's response to the recommendations CSIRO made
to address the issues raised, as summarised by the Department of the
Environment and Energy. Adani had committed to address the modelling
limitations identified by the CSIRO and GA review in a groundwater model re-run
to be undertaken within two years.
CSIRO considered that this commitment satisfied its
recommendations, while also acknowledging there were still some issues that
need to be addressed in future approvals, particularly confirming the source of
the ecologically-important Doongmabulla Springs.
CSIRO has provided robust, peer-reviewed science on
specific groundwater modelling-related questions about the plans. CSIRO's role
is to provide scientific advice to inform approval processes, but it does not
have any role in making approval decisions.
The
public broadcaster reports in greater detail and with less reticence when
detailing facts of the matter…….
Handwritten documents obtained
by the ABC appear to directly contradict the Environment Minister Melissa Price
that Adani "accepted in full" changes sought by scientists to limit
the impact of its controversial Queensland coal mine.
Announcing her decision
to approve Adani's water management plans for its Carmichael mine earlier this
month, Ms Price said Adani "accepted in full" advice from the
CSIRO and Geoscience Australia.
Prime Minister Scott
Morrison also maintained the Government would "make all decisions based on
the expert advice from ... Geoscience Australia and the CSIRO".
"We have always
been following the advice of the scientists and we'll continue to do
that," he said.
The advice was provided
in a damning review in February of the company's plans.
The ABC has obtained
notes taken by three attendees of a phone hook up on April 5 involving senior
officials from the Department of Environment and Energy and staff from
Geoscience Australia.
The documents show the
government science agency was concerned the water plans could allow Adani's
mine to breach the conditions of its environment approval.
However, Adani would not
accept the need for corrective action if that occurred.
The notes said that
Adani refused to:
- acknowledge the
scientists' key finding that the model Adani used to estimate the mine's
impacts was not fit for purpose;
- accept that a new model
could show that the mine's impacts would breach environmental approvals; and
- commit to corrective
action if the new model showed greater impacts on the environment than Adani
had claimed would occur.
A separate briefing note
from the Department of Environment and Energy shows Adani also refused to
consider scaling back its mining operation to minimise its impacts, despite
being asked to do so.
The ABC requested the
meeting notes under freedom of information (FOI) laws, but Geoscience Australia
took the unusual step of releasing the documents immediately instead.
The briefing happened
after the Department of Environment and Energy had already advised the Minister
to approve the plans, which had been finalised the previous month.
One set of notes was
taken by Geoscience Australia chief Dr James Johnson, another by head of
environmental geoscience Dr Stuart Minchin, and the third by senior executive
Dr Richard Blewett.
A handwritten note by Dr
Blewett mentions concerns held by Jane Coram, the head of CSIRO's land and
water division.
She complained the
science agencies had "not seen the revised plan" set to be approved,
and that they were expected to take the summary of it at "face
value".
After the meeting, Ms
Price published a statement announcing, "Geoscience Australia and the
CSIRO have provided written assurances that these steps address their
recommendations."
A spokesman for Ms Price
said she was not present at the meeting.
"Decisions were
made between the department officers, Geoscience Australia and the CSIRO on the
proper scientific assessment of the issues and no other factor," the
spokesman said.
But the notes show the
scientific agencies were asked by the Minister's department to give formal
assurances that Adani's commitments met their concerns in language acceptable
to the Government.
"Gov[ernment] is
keen for assurance," the notes taken by CEO of Geoscience Australia, James
Johnson said.
"Ideal for
gov[ernment]: letter from me to [Mr Finn Pratt] saying based on extensive
briefing from [Department of Environment and Energy] on Adani addresses the
concerns raised."
Fin Pratt is the head of
the Department of Environment and Energy.
In his handwritten notes
of the meeting, Mr Johnson said the Government was keen for an assurance
"based on discussion briefing" from the department, but he scribbled
that out and changed it to "based on extensive briefing".
The Minister
subsequently published a letter from Mr Johnson to Mr Pratt saying: "Thank
you for the extensive briefing ... Based on this briefing Geoscience Australia
is of the view that Adani have addressed the issues and concerns raised in our
recommendations."
Ms Price's spokesman
told the ABC no pressure was placed on the science agencies.
"Any suggestion of
pressure in that process is rejected in the strongest possible terms and is
insulting to the integrity of the experts concerned," he said.
Adani said in a
statement it could not comment on the content of the documents.
"Adani was not
privy to internal briefing documents or discussions that the Federal Department
of Environment and Energy may have provided to Geoscience Australia and CSIRO,
consequently we are unable to comment as to their contents."
'Advice to Adani that
they refused'
The briefing notes
listed in point form the "advice to Adani that they refused".
These included a
recommendation Adani acknowledge their modelling "is not fit for
purpose" and that a "new model could revise impacts [to be] greater
than [what] has been approved".
"So told Adani — if
new model shows greater impact than current model, they have to sort it out
[with] corrective [actions]", the notes said.
"They
refused."
Before the verbal
briefing to Geoscience Australia, the Department Environment and Energy
prepared a summary of Adani's response to concerns raised by Geoscience
Australia and the CSIRO, which was provided to the two agencies.
That document shows
Adani declined to commit to a reduced mine plan, or to cutting back coal
extraction, as suggested by the Department Environment and Energy in response
to the damning report on its groundwater management model and plans by
Geoscience Australia and the CSIRO.
It also shows Adani
negotiated compromise outcomes in response to some of the scientists' concerns
and rejected other measures that the two agencies sought.
There were gaps between
what was included in that document and what was apparently outlined in the
verbal briefing to Geoscience Australia staff.
The notes of the verbal
briefing the department gave to the scientists said that Adani committed to a
"maximum timetable of three months" for conducting an investigation
if water use limits were triggered — a demand of both CSIRO and Geoscience
Australia.
In fact, the response
Adani formally agreed to is less watertight: "If the groundwater level
thresholds exceedance is because of authorised mining activities, the
investigation will be prioritised and, depending on the nature of the impact,
completed within three months."
Adani told the ABC it
was not provided directly with the advice by CSIRO and Geoscience Australia
until after the Government approved the plans. Instead it responded to summaries
made by the Department of Environment and Energy.
Minister faced intense
pressure to approve mine
Ms Price faced intense
pressure from her own side of politics to approve Adani's water management
plans before the federal election was called.
In the wake of the
Federal Government's sign-off on the water management plans, Adani is pressing
the Queensland Government to complete a series of other, state-based approvals
that are needed before mining can commence.
When Ms Price announced
that she had approved the water management plans — just one working day after
CSIRO and Geoscience Australia were briefed on Adani's responses to their
concerns — the Environment Minister said:
"I have accepted
the scientific advice and therefore approved the groundwater management plans
for the Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Infrastructure project under the
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
"Both CSIRO and
Geoscience Australia have confirmed the revised plans meet strict scientific
requirements."
The Queensland
Government is yet to approve construction as it seeks to protect a colony of
black-throated finches around the mine site.
In an official statement
to the ABC, a spokesperson for Geoscience Australia said it stood by their
earlier statement that Adani's actions addressed the concerns raised in their
technical advice.
"Adani did not
acknowledge our advice that their groundwater model was not fit for purpose,
and indicated they would not revise the model in the short term," the
spokesperson said.
They said despite that,
additional monitoring and mitigation Adani did agree to do satisfied their
concerns.
Geoscience Australia
said it was not pressured to provide the Government assurance.
The United Nations has taken a position on Adani Group mining consents after the Wangan and Jagalingou Traditional Owners Council put their case to this international body last year and, it has asked the Australian Government not to proceed with granting consents until after the High Court appeal by this traditional owners group is heard in May 2019.
A request the Morrison Government saw fit to ignore.
