|
State Government Decision on Mining and National ParkMinutes from meetingThis is a very difficult issue for the community on North Stradbroke Island, and for me personally, and I am grateful for this opportunity to speak. I recently attended a rally in Dunwich, organised by people opposed to the State government decision to close the mine. Some of those at the rally asked me why I didn't speak and my answer was that I hadn't been invited to. Sometimes it is just as important for community representatives to listen, and that is what I did that day. And that is what I have been doing for several months - listening and trying to understand all of the implications of an end to mining on Straddie. I think it is safe to claim that the Island community is facing its most serious set of challenges for several generations. Broadly grouped, there are three strong views in the community. There is the environmental argument that Straddie is at tipping point with regard to the delicate ecosystem remaining viable. This argument is supported by a number of academics including Associate Professor, Dr Catterall, from , Griffith University, who has written that "with further mining of other areas there is considerably greater risk that the island's ecological values will be irreversibly degraded". These people would argue that rehab can look good but still not provide an ecosystem service like undisturbed bush. These people would argue that to go further with mining is also to risk the economic future of the island. That there is 'green gold' around the corner but only if the green product is protected. There is a second view that the local economy is at risk by shutting mining down early. I am told by the senior mining executives that the company has always worked on an end date, and recent pronouncements from the company indicate that they were comfortable with the 2027 scenario. But the announcement from the State Government finishes them earlier than that, and there are serious questions over whether the restrictions imposed on the mine path will finish the mine earlier still. The early finish date, could also threaten the best result possible for rehabilitation and hand over to National Parks or the State Government. A significant number of Island residents are worried about the viability of services on the island, future education and employment opportunities for their children, the kind of community they will end up living in, and their own future. Many people live with job insecurity these days - certainly Councillors here know what it is like not being sure whether you will be employed this time next year. The difference is that these families have had this uncertainty suddenly imposed on them, and the committments from the State Government do not give any comfort. The State Government's argument that eco-tourism will replace the mining contribution to the local economy is rejected by almost all Island residents. As we have seen recently, the jobs available in that tourist economy are too dependant on weather and external economic factors, and to put it simply, it takes a lot of cleaners, cooks and guides to replace the kind of salaries earnt by engineers or hydrologists. Skilled people earning family wages will be replaced by transient workers in low paid jobs. This Council has been grappling with the impacts of tourism on Island residents for many years, and I have not met too many local residents who are thrilled at the thought of tens of thousands additional tourists, or the construction of multiple eco-tourism resorts. Anna Bligh clearly loves the Island, she spends her holidays there, and she has a personal investment in getting the balance right. Many are bewildered that the ALP has hurt working people in this way. As you would expect there are a range of indigenous views. It would be unfair to expect otherwise. Some are as deep green and spiritual as Oodgeroo's poetry. Others have worked in the mine for generations and see the value in young people having the opportunity to work for a living. There is a sense within many that the island is Aboriginal land and as one t-shirt I saw recently put it "Always was, always will be." A lot of these views are working their way through a negotiation with the State Government about Native Title. Claimants have established through the courts their connection to the island and they are now entitled to a range of outcomes. We can expect some announcements on that in July, and these will need to be explained by the State Government when the time comes. It seems like there are two or three irresistible forces colliding within the community. On the whole people are tolerant and respectful of alternative voices, but inevitably there is an agreement to disagree in many camps and in many families. In my own family there is division over whether the government has done the right thing, and in which direction the future of the Island lies. The memberships of a couple of long standing and effective community groups have been reduced in numbers by internal disagreements over tactics and policy. For everyone, it is hard to watch. I have many friends who are employed by the mine, and others who are committed environmentalists. A surfing friend has a young family, works for the mine and has just bought a home in Dunwich. They now have a mortgage, an uncertain future, and a question mark around the future of house prices. Almost everyone knows someone whose future is now a little more uncertain than it was a few months ago. To Islanders, who understand the nuances and the complexity of the arguments, it is frustrating to see the issue reduced to photographs of a scarred landscape and glib, often uninformed commentary on the nightly news or in The Courier Mail. There is much more to this than can be explained with an aerial picture. But everything has moved so quickly, and it is easy to understand why the community feels that they have become pawns in a big political chess game. This is paradise threatened and many just want all the storm clouds of change to go away. State Member for Cleveland, Mark Robinson, claimed that the decision was motivated by a need for a preference deal with the Greens. He may be right, but I'm more inclined to think that this decision is pitched mostly at the hundreds of thousands of people who visit or have visited the island over the years to fish, camp, surf, bushwalk and enjoy the natural surroundings. Polls show that these people want more access to the island and they support a National Park being declared. The LNP have criticised the decision but at this stage they have not outlined an alternative position. The cynic in me thinks that Ashgrove is an important seat to the LNP too. With regards to the motion, this is a simplistic approach to a difficult problem. The Councillor is running for Mayor, and has suddenly discovered there is an island to the east of us. She sees a political opportunity to make a name for herself there. It is interesting that her motion only targets the ALP and not the LNP to outline an alternative...Islanders are smart people and they will see through this. And, when they come to understand that coupled with these State Government announcements is a directive to Council to begin a widescale town planning exercise, to both accommodate the Indigenous Land Use Agreement outcomes and rejig the townships' development footprint, they will soon know that they have a lot to fear in that process from a radical pro-development Mayor like herself. It is important, as the Mayor has said, that Council does not get caught up in the political football that the LNP and the ALP are playing on this issue. Green groups have approached us for support and been told to take it to the Government. Likewise with the pro-mining lobby, both are capable of making their voice heard, and the indigenous view is being heard through the legal processes. We have also been approached to be present at State Government announcements and we have declined. Now we are being invited to join with the LNP and we should decline. Council has an important role to play in all this. It is to push for the best deal for Islanders, providing as much local input to any decisions that either of the parties make. And to best do that we need to be seen as a honest broker who can be trusted to partner with either the ALP or LNP. It is important that we make sure that the ALP and the LNP and to a lesser extent the Greens are vitally aware of the realities of island living and reach considered positions about the island future. Most here will be aware that the initial announcement was a total surprise to us all but that we reacted by sending to the movers and shakers within the Government a complete set of the planning documentation that was done during the NSI/Minjerribah Planning study. That planning investigated the environmental, economic, social and cultural factors on the island and went through community consultation. Surely it would have provided some food for thought. I think that there is a recognition on the Island that mining would one day end. The concern is that it ends without a well thought-out and delivered approach to ensure that the Island and Islanders continue to thrive. It is my heartfelt desire that Council plays a constructive role in partnership with the State Government - whatever party holds power - to make sure that the economic transition North Stradbroke Island faces in the next decade embraces the opportunities on the horizon. We need to ensure the State Government is serious in creating a diverse, sustainable and vibrant economy for Island residents, and a better outcome for the fragile ecosystem. It is time to be in the government's and the LNP's face and get from them real commitments. I fell in love with Stradbroke not just because of the beaches but because of the unique, strong and diverse community. It's a steak and chips community, it's not a Noosa or a Byron Bay. It is made up of honest, hardworking people who love the place. It would be damn shame if that changed.
|
|
