Meeting with Malcolm Turnbull August 2007

The Environment Centre was invited to meet with Environment & Water Resources Minister Malcolm Turnbull in Sydney on 30th August 2007.

I represented the CEC & the North Coast Environment Council. Leonie Blain, Secretary of the Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition also represented the National Parks Association (Clarence Valley branch). The Minister attended 20 minutes of the 45 minute meeting, which included a ministerial adviser and Steve Costello of the National Water Commission (NWC).

We made it clear that all groups were fundamentally opposed to any damming or diversion of water from coastal rivers, particularly the Clarence. We explained that our main purpose was to highlight issues such as misinformation - specifically, the overstated amount of available water in the Clarence; the ability to capture flood water and control flooding, and the claim that only excess flows would be taken (detailed in our full submission on the CEC website). I was given the opportunity to present all the issues contained in the submission.

Mr Turnbull said he has been misrepresented, with a public perception that he had bulldozers waiting on the banks of the Clarence River. He said Government had ordered the SMEC Report to force debate about water provision, in response to State Government failure to address water shortages.

On climate change, it appeared that the NWC was not aware of CSIRO findings that since 1950, rainfall has declined on the eastern seaboard. We told Mr Turnbull that SMEC's study had used long-term average river flow figures from a previous study which the CEC had found to have also relied on “existing available data”, thus perpetuating the myth that the Clarence River still has an annual average flow of 5 million megalitres. We found that flow figures have been handed down from study to study for at least 40 years, overlooking recent downward trends. The CSIRO has now linked this trend to climate change, a fact we impressed on the NWC representative.

We said plantation forestry is likely to have serious impacts on river flows. We said most local plantations will be clear-felled on a 15 year rotational basis, locking into place a vigorous growth cycle with high water usage indefinitely. This point appeared to be accepted by Mr Costello as highly significant. It seemed the NWC is aware of the problem elsewhere, even acknowledging that legislation is underway for some areas requiring plantation developers to apply for water licenses even if irrigation is not proposed. They were specifically aware that the activity was occurring here.

When we explained the myth about dams ameliorating impacts of downstream flooding, Mr Costello and Mr Turnbull agreed there would be little, if any, reduction in flood impacts through the damming of the rivers.

Mr Costello also seemed to agree with our assertion that SMEC had erred (I claimed they would have known better) when using 'average' flows rather than 'percentile' or 'median' flows to determine the amount of available water in the river.

On the issue of available water, they appeared to accept our claim that Tabulam flow data include inflows from a number of creeks downstream from the Duck Creek dam site, including Duck Creek, that add considerably to the total flows at Tabulam, but would not be captured by the dam. The data should therefore not be used to determine the viability of building a dam on the Clarence upstream of the Duck Creek junction.

We argued that proponents cannot claim that only surplus flows would be taken for transfer to south east Queensland, given that the proposed dam sizes have the capacity to hold only one year's supply (100,000 megalitres). We said that after several years of below average flows, they would be forced to remove water from medium and low flows if supply to Queensland was to be maintained.

There was less willingness to accept our assertion that low flow protection would be ignored in extreme drought, Mr Costello pointing to State Macro Water plans. However, our concern that providing water to Queensland would simply accelerate the ongoing inappropriate urban and rural residential development, struck a chord with Mr Turnbull. Unable to resist taking a swipe at Labor, he said the Queensland Government had long been irresponsible over the matter of water provision.

Oddly, he described he building of dams, pipelines, and desalination plants here there and everywhere” as knee-jerk responses to a crisis that should have been properly addressed and planned for decades ago.

Both Mr Costello and the Minister assured us that inland diversions as proposed by the Bourke and Cobar Councils will never happen, agreeing with us that the proposed amounts of water transfer would evaporate before they reached Wilcannia.

Mr Turnbull commented that while Clarence Valley residents were opposed to any transfer of water, he had received guarded support from Councils further to the north, and that this cooperative approach may be linked to the possibility of gaining infrastructure which would be paid for by Queensland.

Mr Turnbull's view is that discussion must be generated on how we address water needs across the country. Whether this be through water tanks, reuse, or desalination, and even (jokingly) the towing of icebergs from the Antarctic, or shipping of water from northern Australia in giant ocean tankers, as has been proposed, is something that has to be determined before communities run out of water altogether. When we asked if there were plans to investigate other water schemes Mr Costello claimed merely, “we have not commissioned any further studies.” I read this as meaning they have not actually commissioned further studies – yet.

In conclusion, we found the Minister receptive of our concerns. He appears to have a very good grasp of the environmental impacts of dams and river diversions. Having said that, we acknowledge that the job of Environment Minister in a Government obsessed with economic growth is unenviable to say the least. Nevertheless we were appreciative of the fact that he found time to meet with us. I for one came away from the meeting confident that our message, particularly in relation to the myths identified in our presentation, had been heard.

-John Edwards

In subsequent developments:

• NOROC is calling for further investigations to secure Kyogle's water supply.
• Kevin Rudd has ruled out a dam on the Clarence or its tributaries.
• John Howard has promised that a Federal Government will not build a dam because constitutionally it’s a state matter – not because it would be an environmental disaster.