Botany Bay and Catchment Alliance

At the November Botany Industrial Park Community Consultative Committee, the Local Area Police chief, Commander Karen McCarthy, gave a presentation on the Botany Bay Disaster Plan. She outlined critical traffic challenges – the difficulties facing emergency response teams as well as the impacts caused by breakdowns. A truck breakdown on General Holmes Drive can result in gridlock on roads into the CBD. For every 10 minutes that the M5 is blocked another 1/2 kilometre of traffic is added to queues on the Eastern Distributor. One of the recommendations of the Emergency Plan is for a Road Network Assessment to be conducted. Note that in the the Government’s submission to Infrastructure Australia “Port Botany and Sydney Airport and Transport Improvement Program” dated November 2011, Police NSW are not included in the list of Agencies consulted! Nor are the Police included in the recent Amendment to the Protection of the Environment Legislation as one of the agencies to be notified – the agencies listed are EPA, Local Council, Fire & Rescue, Health and Workcover. This new regime arguably encourages a lower degree of coordination than the previous as no one Government Agency takes overall control from the beginning of an event.
For far too many years major traffic generating developments in this region have been approved without adequate planning being conducted. The Port Expansion is the prime example. It was approved for a cap of 3.2 million TEU on the premise that the rail share for container movements was increased from around 20%(2004 figures) to 40%. Recently at Budget Estimates Hearings it has been revealed that instead of the rail share increasing in recent years it has fallen to 14% . Reference is made to raising the cap and dropping the rail target to 28%. How is Sydney going to cope with the additional heavy vehicles. Mayor of Botany Bay Municipality, Ron Hoenig, is not optimistic - read his blog post of 23/11/11
The Botany Bay and Catchment Alliance(BBACA) campaign against the Port Expansion focussed on the negative impacts for the biodiversity and amenity of Botany Bay but also on the inadequate road and rail network supporting port operations. BBACA maintained that an expanded Port would strangle Sydney and impact the efficiency and productivity of the region. The cost of building a supporting road and rail network is far more expensive than alternative expansions, eg. Port Kembla, but when Treasury evaluated the cases presented by each of the Port Corporations (Sydney, Kembla, Newcastle) they did not factor in the supporting infrastructure costs for Sydney and argued that freight from Kembla would add additional costs.
No amount of reason, including the recommendations from a Commission of Inquiry, could dissuade the Iemma government from approving the Port Expansion. The O’Farrell government now has to deal with the consequences of that decision and the Police and other emergency agencies have to work out how they are going to cope with a full scale disaster in this region when even a minor breakdown can produce gridlock.
Recent posts: LINK 1 LINK 2 LINK 3

The Plan has been finalised and is available on the Sydney Catchment Management Authority website (Right – map of subcatchments)

Key recommendations:

To ensure water quality improves in Botany Bay and  its Catchment actions will need to be implemented at different levels of government as well as by the community. Below is a list of recommended actions each group should undertake to support the Botany Bay & Catchment WQIP. Those considered to be of highest priority are shown in bold.

5.1.1 Australian Government

5.1.1.1 Reviews and endorses the Botany Bay & Catchment WQIP,

5.1.1.2 Sets up a specific funding program to implement actions listed in the Botany Bay & Catchment  WQIP, possibly via a devolved grants program,

5.1.1.3 Ensures all grants or funding allocated in the Botany Bay Catchment are consistent (more…)

MEDIA RELEASE

The Hon Barry O’Farrell MP, Premier of NSW, Minister for Western Sydney,Monday 4 April 2011
NSW GOVERNMENT TO SCRAP PART 3A ALL NEW APPLICATIONS HALTED …………………….Mr O’Farrell said transitional arrangements would be put in place to deal with the more than 500 Part 3A applications already in the system. Subject to the final transition arrangements, he said it was anticipated that about half of these applications will be referred to the Planning Assessment Commission for determination. A further quarter will be referred to local government for determination and others, which have been in the system for up to two years, will lapse. A full review of the State’s planning legislation will also be undertaken, which is expected to take around 18 months. The days of giving the Planning Minister sweeping powers to approve developments at the stroke of a pen with virtually no consultation with local communities are over,he said………………….

REASONS WHY ORICA’S PART 3A PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP SOUTHLANDS SHOULD BE REFUSED:

1.Southlands is identified in the EPA Orica Cleanup Notice of the Botany Aquifer :  EPA reasonably suspects that a series of pollution incidents has occurred and is occurring at the Orica premises and also beyond the Orica premises, including at the Orica Southlands premises. The pollution incidents consist of leaks, spills or other escapes of substances at and from the premises and the continuing pollution of the groundwater by the substances. The EPA reasonably suspects that the location of the leaks, spills or other escapes of the substances to include the following sources on the Orica premises:
The former Solvent Plant; The former EDC storage tanks; The former TCE Plant; The former CTC/PCE storage tanks; The former Open Heavy Ends Drums Storage Area; The former Effluent Treatment Plant overflow area; The former re-drumming areas adjacent to the Heavy Ends Drums Storage Area

2. The Primary Containment line and monitoring wells are located on Southlands.

3. Advice provided by Australian and World experts in February this year suggests that the cleanup of the Aquifer will take hundreds of years.  The technology to solve the problem is unknown at this point, therefore it would be high risk to allow the construction of barriers to future access.

4. Environmental Justice: Public land on Botany Road is being used on Foreshore Road for the Secondary Containment line. Residents can no longer use bore water but Orica extracts more than double the water it did previously and after ‘cleaning’ re-uses on site and sells to neighbours. The Groundwater Treatment Plant is likely to be operating for hundreds of years. When first commissioned dioxin emissions exceeded approved standards. Other pollution/potential human health risks are associated with the stockpile of HCBs, the Carpark Waste treatment plant where the EPA has relaxed the ANZECC standards on mercury emissions, and Mercury soil washing facility.

5. Southlands is floodplain and the area is identified in CSIRO report as vulnerable to rising sea levels.

6. If Southlands is developed for any traffic generating activity it will interfere with port and other neighbouring operations.

7. Although polluted from dumping, Southlands has not been developed other than as market gardens. It was originally Melaleuca Swamp. If it planted the area with Melaleuca and other species Orica could claim Carbon Sink credits, remediate its polluter image, improve air quality in Banksmeadow and surrounding areas, enhance native habitat and extend knowledge in the field of Phytoremediation. Link to Tax Office information on Carbon Sink credits published October 2010. Link to  Information on Carbon Sinks published by the Department of Climate Change.

Background on Southlands : Orica’s Response to Submissions Report on Southlands

November 2010 Department of Planning Link

Previous Posts: November 2010

October 2009

 INVITATION TO BBACA SUPPORTERS

to attend EDO workshop to learn more about the environmental legislation, eg. EPBC Act as well as how Part 3A of the NSW State Planning Legislation compromises the State’s environmental protection legislation.

to be held:  Rainbow Room, Sutherland Entertainment Centre, Eaton Street, Sutherland.

Contact & RSVP:  Sutherland Environment Centre – info@ssec.org.au

R A P S Residents Against Polluting Stacks Inc, Sydney NSW Australia www.nostack.8m.com

IMPORTANT NEWS…..IMPORTANT NEWS……IMPORTANT NEWS……IMPORTANT NEWSMAY/JUNE 2008 NEWSLETTER

• RAPS MEETS AGAIN WITH  RTA ENGINEERS

At our meeting with the RTA this week, we were pleased to find that plans for the ceiling mounted trial and the provision of flexibility at the Bexley North end of the tunnel are going ahead. The RTA told us that Registration Of Interest documents for the in-ceiling trial at the eastern end of the tunnel will be issued for established providers of filtration technology in about 4-6 weeks.   Clearly, the aim of the project must be to achieve significant improvements both inside and outside of the tunnel. We have continued to ask that, as far as technology is concerned, the documents should define the outcomes desired and the essential constraints on the project.and not prescribe how they should be achieved. We pointed out the importance of a robust process and that we wished to have input as to the desired outcomes rather than on the technical detail. The necessity for vigorous testing and validation of equipment performance was noted and re-affirmed.   We further pointed out the need for co-operation with councils etc. for the upper Wolli Creek remediation, especially in relation to water cleaning and nutrient capture problems. RAPS suggested (more…)

 Community engagement is not a magic wand that can be waved to make all parties happy. If community engagements are not conducted in good faith and do not fully engage the community, they can be perceived as cynical and manipulative exercises. They may also be seen as tokenism responding to dominant voices and ignoring the broader community, as a means of co-opting groups or defusing opposition, as falsely raising public expectations, or as substitutes for good government and sound policy making.

This is why community engagements must be conducted in a clear, transparent manner that provides the public and all participants with a realistic understanding of the policy and decision making process and the range of possible outcomes. Part of this approach is clarifying the limits of the community’s influence in the process. This is particularly necessary when the decision making power ultimately rests with government. Without a clear definition of the realities of a particular situation, it is inevitable that a sense of distrust will be generated about the engagement process.

The above is contained in a document produced by the NSW Department of Planning.  As you can see, The Department of Planning is not/has not been bereft of good planning ideas.  You can read about them in:

Community Engagement in the NSW Planning System: Handbook and Website Full link  published in 2003

You have to question the wisdom that lists Bondi Beach on the National Heritage Register but omits Botany Bay. 

Sure Bondi is a tourist icon but in terms of national identity, culture, historical significance does it rank before Botany Bay.

According to the criteria by which the items on the list are judged “Australia’s national heritage comprises exceptional natural and cultural places which help give Australia its national identity. Such places are a living and accessible record of the nation’s evolving landscapes and experiences.National heritage defines the critical moments in our development as a nation …”     Phillip first stepped ashore on January 18, 1788 at Yarra Bay on the north of Botany Bay just beating the French.  How defining is that.  Almost eighteen years earlier it was Cook who explored, recorded and named Botany Bay.  Thereafter whenever reference was made to the fledging colony it was to Botany Bay.  And now the Minister for Environment, Heritage and The Arts and representative for the waters and bed of Botany Bay is Peter Garrett.  Mr Garrett’s first additions to the National Heritage Register are Bonegilla Migrant Camp Block 19 and Bondi Beach. 

For further details on the Register http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/national/index.html

The following is an opinion piece prepared for publication in The Age.  The subject matter is the dredging of Port Phillip Bay but similar could be written about  local processes in regard to the Port Botany Expansion and projects like Desalination. 

BRUMBY BARGES ON

Mr. Brumby has over stepped the mark. The debate about channel deepening is not over Mr. Brumby (Age 23/1) because you have never let it happen. Since first floating to the top around 1999 the channel deepening project has had an armchair ride through open doors, greased and oiled by the Bracks-Brumby machine. Treasury insiders tell us that the Bracks Brumby Batchelor machine was on a mission to ram through channel deepening, regardless of what Treasury had to say. For years words straight from the PoMC’s glossy promotional brochures have appeared like magic on the lips of politicians.

The public has financed $120 million of spin, not science and we are now having it rammed down our throats by the likes of the VFF, who should rather be asking if, as is the case, almost 40% of our export containers are empty, why the hell should they be paying a huge increase in container charges to finance a project which they don’t need? The truth is our primary producers (our biggest exporters) have much more to fear from climate change and drought than they have from shipping channels remaining at their current depth. There are no containers ‘sittin on the dock of the Bay’, and PriceWaterhouse Coopers in its 2007 Economic Analysis of the Port of Melbourne reports that trade through the port will quadruple in 30 years regardless of whether we have channel deepening.  Sadly at the 2007 Inquiry the VFF expressed no concerns at all for their primary producing fishermen colleagues who will suffer a drought in the Bay if channel deepening proceeds.

Whilst there has been plenty of chatter about how much we “need” channel deepening, the silence from government agencies connected with the Bay is deafening.  The EPA, Department of Fisheries, Parks Victoria, Tourism Victoria et al have sat on their hands under the direction of Mr. Brumby. (more…)

The following article by Peter Christoff appears in The Age today.  Very timely considering the Business as Usual attitude (Channel Dredging in Port Phillip Bay and Desalination Plant) coming from the Victorian State Government.

January 15, 2008, The Age
 In a hundred years, the planet will be unrecognisable.

AFTER the hottest year on record for Victoria, and with a few scorchers already under the belt in 2008, most Victorians seem to have headed to the coast. Where better, then, to re-read Neville Shute’s On the Beach. Set in Melbourne, Shute’s novel explores humanity’s last months after a nuclear war that has annihilated the northern hemisphere, leaving radioactive fallout drifting inexorably southward, extinguishing all in its path and with Melbourne the last temporary refuge. (more…)