Dr LIM - 1998-04-30
As chairman of the Sessional Committee on the Environment, I am vitally interested in matters relating to the Jabiluka mine. I understand the federal government announced yesterday that a full environmental impact study would not be required for approval of a milling operation at Jabiluka. What does this mean for the project?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I note the reaction of the member for Arnhem. This would be what kids in Alice Springs and throughout the Territory would call a 'shame job'.
Mr Ah Kit: The chairman of the Environment Committee is pushing ...
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Arnhem.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, please resume your seat for a moment. I have put up with enough interjections from the member for Arnhem this morning. You are on warning. Allow the minister to continue uninterrupted with his answer.
Page 230
Mr POOLE: Yesterday, the Northern Territory government was very pleased to hear the announcement by Senator Hill that Energy Resources of Australia would not be required to prepare a full environmental impact statement on the development of a mill at Jabiluka. This was very welcome news to us. Senator Hill announced that he had determined that a public environmental report was required. This recognises the amount of environmental work that has been carried out already by ERA, as the project owner, and the extensive assessment of that work by the public and respective governments. It ensures that the Jabiluka project is not unnecessarily delayed. That is vitally important to the economy of the Territory and indeed to the economy of Australia.
We all know that the project has to be up and running before the ALP comes into power - if it does come into power - in Canberra. It has declared that it will stop this project unless full approvals have been given to allow the mine to operate.
Mrs Hickey: Who do you think will win the election, Eric?
Mr POOLE: I pick up the interjection from the Leader of the Opposition. It has to be a shame job from you guys because we are talking about jobs for Territorians. The Leader of the Opposition said on radio: 'I am bound by the federal policies of my party and, if that is what is to happen, then that is what will happen'. Our side of politics does not accept that. We want this mine to go ahead. It is vitally important in terms of employment for Territorians. It is vitally important to the economic development of the Northern Territory, and it is vitally important to the export effort of Australia, for the wellbeing of our country.
I point out that the requirement is independent of the current negotiations between the Territory and federal governments. ERA and the Aboriginal groups do not eliminate the possibility that the Ranger mill alternative should be, and could still be, endorsed by the traditional owners.
Mr Ah Kit: Which groups?
Mr POOLE: The member for Arnhem asks which groups. In this instance, a group of probably 17, perhaps 20, people who have been poorly advised and ill informed are trying to stop the project. As for the ragtag bunch of protesters who have been there over the past week or so, they have staged the most hopeless protest seen in a long time. For a protest that the media had said would be the biggest since the Franklin dam, what a pathetic effort it has been to date! It istoo hot for them, I guess, and there are too many mosquitoes. On the day of the launch of the protest, I went out that way to look at Wildman River, and I passed half of the protesters on their way back to town. They had been there only for about 4 hours.
We cannot afford the loss of jobs and the loss of millions of dollars in royalties and the loss of billions of dollars to the Australian and Territory economies. For those of us who do not know the history, when the Northern Land Council, representing the traditional owners, and the original Jabiluka lease owners, Pancontinental, signed an agreement to mine at Jabiluka in 1982, the year that the Territory government granted the mineral lease, they agreed that a mill could be established on the site. It is interesting to look back at that history. At the time, stage 2 of Kakadu National Park had not been declared. It was not declared until 2 years later. ERA bought the development lock, stock and barrel in 1991 in a deal that has been recognised by the High Court.
The Commonwealth's environmental report process, which is carried out in parallel with the processes under the Territory's Environmental Protection Act, is expected to take approximately 3 months and it will be conducted jointly by the Commonwealth and Territory governments. Both of these processes involve extensive public comment. The Pancontinental proposal for Jabiluka affected 819 ha. The ERA Jabiluka mill alternative affects only about 15% of that area, about 126 ha, and the company's Ranger mill alternative affects less than 10% - only 63 ha of Jabiluka. I would say that an obvious question to be asked of the environmentalists is: which mill proposal is better for the environment? Importantly, under the Jabiluka milling alternative, tailings dams affecting 55 ha would be required, whereas no such dams would be required at Jabiluka if milling were to be carried out at Ranger.
I believe that some of the traditional owners are accepting some very bad advice from their chief executive officer, Jacqui Katona, and her green mates. They have an agenda of their own. That agenda, which is obviously supported by the ALP members opposite, is to force the project into further environmental assessments in order to delay it, in the hope that Territory Labor's masters in Canberra will get into power and stop the project. None of this further environmental assessment affects the commencement of mining at Jabiluka, which has
Page 231
already been approved. This mine will proceed. The environmental movement and those few traditional owners who oppose the mine should be working towards achieving the best outcome for the environment, the best outcome for the Northern Territory and the best outcome for Australia.
Page 232
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I note the reaction of the member for Arnhem. This would be what kids in Alice Springs and throughout the Territory would call a 'shame job'.
Mr Ah Kit: The chairman of the Environment Committee is pushing ...
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Arnhem.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, please resume your seat for a moment. I have put up with enough interjections from the member for Arnhem this morning. You are on warning. Allow the minister to continue uninterrupted with his answer.
Page 230
Mr POOLE: Yesterday, the Northern Territory government was very pleased to hear the announcement by Senator Hill that Energy Resources of Australia would not be required to prepare a full environmental impact statement on the development of a mill at Jabiluka. This was very welcome news to us. Senator Hill announced that he had determined that a public environmental report was required. This recognises the amount of environmental work that has been carried out already by ERA, as the project owner, and the extensive assessment of that work by the public and respective governments. It ensures that the Jabiluka project is not unnecessarily delayed. That is vitally important to the economy of the Territory and indeed to the economy of Australia.
We all know that the project has to be up and running before the ALP comes into power - if it does come into power - in Canberra. It has declared that it will stop this project unless full approvals have been given to allow the mine to operate.
Mrs Hickey: Who do you think will win the election, Eric?
Mr POOLE: I pick up the interjection from the Leader of the Opposition. It has to be a shame job from you guys because we are talking about jobs for Territorians. The Leader of the Opposition said on radio: 'I am bound by the federal policies of my party and, if that is what is to happen, then that is what will happen'. Our side of politics does not accept that. We want this mine to go ahead. It is vitally important in terms of employment for Territorians. It is vitally important to the economic development of the Northern Territory, and it is vitally important to the export effort of Australia, for the wellbeing of our country.
I point out that the requirement is independent of the current negotiations between the Territory and federal governments. ERA and the Aboriginal groups do not eliminate the possibility that the Ranger mill alternative should be, and could still be, endorsed by the traditional owners.
Mr Ah Kit: Which groups?
Mr POOLE: The member for Arnhem asks which groups. In this instance, a group of probably 17, perhaps 20, people who have been poorly advised and ill informed are trying to stop the project. As for the ragtag bunch of protesters who have been there over the past week or so, they have staged the most hopeless protest seen in a long time. For a protest that the media had said would be the biggest since the Franklin dam, what a pathetic effort it has been to date! It istoo hot for them, I guess, and there are too many mosquitoes. On the day of the launch of the protest, I went out that way to look at Wildman River, and I passed half of the protesters on their way back to town. They had been there only for about 4 hours.
We cannot afford the loss of jobs and the loss of millions of dollars in royalties and the loss of billions of dollars to the Australian and Territory economies. For those of us who do not know the history, when the Northern Land Council, representing the traditional owners, and the original Jabiluka lease owners, Pancontinental, signed an agreement to mine at Jabiluka in 1982, the year that the Territory government granted the mineral lease, they agreed that a mill could be established on the site. It is interesting to look back at that history. At the time, stage 2 of Kakadu National Park had not been declared. It was not declared until 2 years later. ERA bought the development lock, stock and barrel in 1991 in a deal that has been recognised by the High Court.
The Commonwealth's environmental report process, which is carried out in parallel with the processes under the Territory's Environmental Protection Act, is expected to take approximately 3 months and it will be conducted jointly by the Commonwealth and Territory governments. Both of these processes involve extensive public comment. The Pancontinental proposal for Jabiluka affected 819 ha. The ERA Jabiluka mill alternative affects only about 15% of that area, about 126 ha, and the company's Ranger mill alternative affects less than 10% - only 63 ha of Jabiluka. I would say that an obvious question to be asked of the environmentalists is: which mill proposal is better for the environment? Importantly, under the Jabiluka milling alternative, tailings dams affecting 55 ha would be required, whereas no such dams would be required at Jabiluka if milling were to be carried out at Ranger.
I believe that some of the traditional owners are accepting some very bad advice from their chief executive officer, Jacqui Katona, and her green mates. They have an agenda of their own. That agenda, which is obviously supported by the ALP members opposite, is to force the project into further environmental assessments in order to delay it, in the hope that Territory Labor's masters in Canberra will get into power and stop the project. None of this further environmental assessment affects the commencement of mining at Jabiluka, which has
Page 231
already been approved. This mine will proceed. The environmental movement and those few traditional owners who oppose the mine should be working towards achieving the best outcome for the environment, the best outcome for the Northern Territory and the best outcome for Australia.
Page 232
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016