GREAT Lakes Councillors agreed that Coal Seam Gas (CSG) developments could have “unacceptable impacts” on the environment and the local community during discussion on the issue at their general meeting on March 24.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Related coverage: Gill's anti-CSG motion defeated...click here
Can't ban CSG: Great Lakes mayor...click here
But the proper position for the council to take on the issue divided councillors, with a motion passed and then rescinded during the meeting as a solution was sought.
The council finally voted, in a split decision, to take MidCoast Water’s current policy position as a guide, reflecting a ‘precautionary principle’ in relation to CSG developments in the future.
The motion, put forward by Deputy Mayor Len Roberts, stated “with the information presently available, Great Lakes Council has concerns that Coal Seam Gas developments can be undertaken without causing unacceptable impacts on the local community and the environment”.
Cr Linda Gill, who moved to have the shire declared CSG-free at its February meeting, previously raised concerns that by adopting MidCoast Water’s current policy, council would be softening its position.
The previous position stated that, along with Taree and Gloucester shires, Great Lakes Council did “not have confidence” that CSG developments could be undertaken without causing unacceptable impacts and stated approvals should not be granted in the area until the environmental risks, social and economic impacts, were “rigorously assessed and publicly reported”.
The current policy position focuses on water, stating that “any extractive industry should not adversely impact water resources”.
“A detailed consideration of a proposed development’s potential impacts on the region’s water cycle should be undertaken prior to its approval,” it states.
While there were references to environmentally sustainable development in both documents, Cr John Weate said he had wanted to see the council’s stronger position maintained, including its focus on scientific evidence.
“Until science can assure us we have sufficient knowledge about it, it should not proceed,” he said.
“It is important to state that we are not confident that we have the science to say this is safe – and safety is the key word.”
Cr Weate said, on one hand, the position of council was not important as it had no consent role for CSG developments.
“However, it is important that council be an advocate on behalf of the community and I am confident that the majority of the community is not confident CSG activity can be carried out safely. Our position should reflect that.”
The Great Lakes Advocate contacted Deputy Mayor Roberts for comment but he was unavailable due to meeting commitments.
