(Why didn’t the Environmental Protection
Authority (EPA) and the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) bother to visit the
Sita/SUEZ site?)
It is not just this Allawuna proposal but the lack of principle involved, where
objections based on known scientific facts and anticipated community angst are still
being ignored, so Perth rubbish can be dumped in a beautiful country backyard.
The rationale of job creation compared to the potential environmental damage does not compute.
The rationale of job creation compared to the potential environmental damage does not compute.
It also really nice to know that the voice of country people appears to go
unheard in the hallowed halls of Parliament House and at the EPA and SAT, with
any muted ministerial responses being you are contacting the wrong department,
even when you know you are not.
The EPA’s current board (that protects very little) is made up of a Professor from Utah, USA, two long-term public servants, with all the baggage it entails, an investment banker and a lawyer. It begs the question how many of these do you need to screw in a lightbulb or protect flora, fauna, its habitat and the environment with actual integrity?
Like the EPA, based on past performance, SAT is no better. It is made up of a ubiquitous argument of layers,(more than you can count on both hands) an accountant, a psychologist, an architect and a social worker. Not an environmental scientist in sight. The closet would be an urban planner and a midwife.
These two so-called Independent Agencies are, in the end, anything but. ‘Independent’ means ‘self-sufficient’ and ‘self-sustaining’, yet both rely totally on WA Government hand-outs and when push-comes-to-shove subjugate themselves to the government’s bidding. (Their decisions can be overruled by governments’ anyway.)
There is an understanding that the Shire of York continuously failed to monitor what was occurring regarding this highly contentious project since SUEZ backed away, and its public response to date could be considered amateurish and apathetic.
It also seems a little strange that, apparently, only one Shire of York Council candidate out of seven has publically prioritized environmental protection as an important part of a required, future council agenda.
Recently letters registering dissent have been sent to Paul Martin, David Wallace, Mark McGowan, Rita Saffioti and Stephen Dawson and kind assistance sought from the Catholic Archbishop of Perth and Greens WA. All have been published on the Shire of York Official Unofficial Website along with numerous articles dating back to when the saga first began.
Below you will read ‘Questions on Notice’ that hopefully will be used in State Parliament to debate the relevant Minister’s knowledge of his portfolio and his commitment to protecting the environment from pollution. The questions are based on known facts, verified by a local community member who should know, cannot be easily refuted and raise the issue of the inherent dangers of dumping massive amounts of pollutants, transported along a narrow country road.
David Taylor.
The EPA’s current board (that protects very little) is made up of a Professor from Utah, USA, two long-term public servants, with all the baggage it entails, an investment banker and a lawyer. It begs the question how many of these do you need to screw in a lightbulb or protect flora, fauna, its habitat and the environment with actual integrity?
Like the EPA, based on past performance, SAT is no better. It is made up of a ubiquitous argument of layers,(more than you can count on both hands) an accountant, a psychologist, an architect and a social worker. Not an environmental scientist in sight. The closet would be an urban planner and a midwife.
These two so-called Independent Agencies are, in the end, anything but. ‘Independent’ means ‘self-sufficient’ and ‘self-sustaining’, yet both rely totally on WA Government hand-outs and when push-comes-to-shove subjugate themselves to the government’s bidding. (Their decisions can be overruled by governments’ anyway.)
There is an understanding that the Shire of York continuously failed to monitor what was occurring regarding this highly contentious project since SUEZ backed away, and its public response to date could be considered amateurish and apathetic.
It also seems a little strange that, apparently, only one Shire of York Council candidate out of seven has publically prioritized environmental protection as an important part of a required, future council agenda.
Recently letters registering dissent have been sent to Paul Martin, David Wallace, Mark McGowan, Rita Saffioti and Stephen Dawson and kind assistance sought from the Catholic Archbishop of Perth and Greens WA. All have been published on the Shire of York Official Unofficial Website along with numerous articles dating back to when the saga first began.
Below you will read ‘Questions on Notice’ that hopefully will be used in State Parliament to debate the relevant Minister’s knowledge of his portfolio and his commitment to protecting the environment from pollution. The questions are based on known facts, verified by a local community member who should know, cannot be easily refuted and raise the issue of the inherent dangers of dumping massive amounts of pollutants, transported along a narrow country road.
David Taylor.
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Date Compiled ………………………………. to the Minister……………………………………
There is a proposed landfill site by Alkina Holdings Pty Ltd, being Great Southern Landfill of Lot 4869 on Plan 224502 in Certificate of Title Volume 285, Folio 784 at St. Ronan’s York. So I ask the Minister the following:-
1. what is the risk of leachate and other pollutants, including the possible storage of Crocidolite Asbestos fibres, contaminating the Mundaring Weir Catchment Area, areas such as St. Ronan’s Well and Conservation Area (WA Government Heritage Commission Listing 04429), local fresh ground water such as at St. Ronan’s Well itself and attendant water courses, creeks and river systems?
2. what assurance and absolute protection is to be provided to prevent the contamination of surrounding valuable, finite, highly productive agricultural land including under the Australian Government Biodiversity Act 2015 in accordance with, but not limited to, its export compliance regulations regarding contaminated agricultural goods?
3. what absolute protection is guaranteed against catastrophic breaching of this landfill site by a 6.9 magnitude earthquake, creating a 3 metre high fault line, 40 kilometres in length which occurred approximately 40 kilometres from this site 49 years ago?
4. what viable and adequate emergency contingency plans will be put in place to minimize any environmental, property and personal damage to those properties and persons located within a radius of a minimum of 10 kilometres of the site in case of any breech and who will pay for the implementation of these plans and any infrastructure required including forms of risk insurance, now and in the future?
5. what is the current traffic volume for both private and commercial vehicles using the Great Southern Highway between The Lakes and St. Ronan’s?
6. what will be the weekly volume of Alkina Holdings Pty Ltd waste management vehicles and their tonnage using what is considered to be, by its users and the Former Premier, Colin Barnett and the former Minister for Water and the Member for Central Wheatbelt, Mia Davies, as a possibly dangerous, narrow, winding road, potentially unsuitable for large increases in heavy haulage traffic movements?
7. what has been the death and serious injury toll on the Great Southern Highway, between The Lakes and St. Ronan’s since 2001.
8. why did neither the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) visit the proposed site personally to make themselves better aware of the location, its surrounding farmland area, its biodiversity, location of watercourses and the surrounding environs including habitat and its flora and fauna?
No comments:
Post a Comment