BY ALEX BAINBRIDGE
HOBART — The state Labor government of Premier Jim Bacon decided on February 3 to introduce new laws to allow the $30 million Meander Dam project to go ahead. Previously, the Resource Management and Planning Appeals Tribunal had ruled that the dam could not proceed for environmental and economic reasons.
According to Michael Lynch of the Tasmanian Conservation Trust (TCT), "the tribunal's decision [to overturn approval for the dam] was a detailed one, and was based not only on the impacts of the proposal on populations of the two threatened species at the actual site, but the cumulative impacts on those two species".
"In this instance", Lynch added, "the weight of expert evidence was fully with the TCT, and the state government did not dispute that evidence.
"In the case of the economic benefit associated with the proposed dam, the TCT presented an extremely robust counter-model to that of the state government...
"The tribunal quite rightly did not choose between the models but instead determined that the economic benefit was uncertain."
Farmers in the Meander Valley have faced shortages of water since the Meander River has come close to drying up this summer. Proponents of the dam argue that collecting the large flows of water in winter will enable a steady flow all year round. This would "mitigate effects of both drought and floods", according to the pro-dam Resource Management Group president Rodney Stagg.
The Liberal opposition has supported the government's decision, as has the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The Greens and the TCT are strong opponents of the dam.
Greens MP Tim Morris, for instance, argues that "the debate should be about how much government money and resources does the community want invested in the supply of summer water to private agri-businesses and what is the least environmental damage that can occur in the process.
"A farm that is unsustainable is not going to be made sustainable just by adding more water. The other crucial question is: Will such irrigation practices cause salinity, in 10 years, 50 years or not at all?"
The Planning Institute of Australia also criticised the government's decision to overturn the tribunal ruling. "The government's willingness to ride roughshod over due process when it doesn't get the decision it likes sends a very poor message to developers and the general community", the institute's president Brian Risby told the February 5 Mercury.
From Green Left Weekly, February 26, 2003.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.