In stark contrast to the July Gloucester Shire Council meeting, just two people sat in the public gallery last Wednesday as council debated a notice of motion from Cr Richard Webb which outlined council’s policy in relation to current and potential mining activity in the shire.
In speaking to the motion Cr Webb described council’s consideration of the policy as a chance to draw a line in the sand and for council to move forward and consider issues as they arise.
The motion brought together all of the various resolutions of council, adopted in the past two years, which form council’s policy regarding mine related development.
In introducing the motion, the documents states that council “acknowledges the concern of the community regarding the potential health and other issues brought about by existing and potential resource mining in the shire. In doing so, it also recognises the commercial benefit that can come to the community by such activities.”
Among the points contained in the motion, council’s position that no extension or new mining will be supported unless stringent environmental and social expectations are met, extensive community consultation has taken place, if the aesthetics of the shire are compromised in any way or it if it located in a State Conservation Area or within zones E1, E2 or E3 of the Local Environmental Plan.
The motion also calls for coal wagons to be covered for dust suppressions and that PM1 be the standard test for air quality in mining locations.
In July a packed public gallery attended as Crs Lyford and Rosenbaum presented a notice of motion to council not to accept any further expansion of the open cut coal industry and to strongly object to any further threat to the communities health from open cut coal mine dust. That motion was lost five to four and resulted in a flood of letters to the editor from those who attended the meeting.
Wednesday’s motion was adopted unanimously by those councillors who remained in the chamber for the discussion and the vote. Crs Ian Shaw, Julie Lyford and John Rosenbaum declared an interest and left the chamber.
Cr Webb said he had spoken to his fellow councillors and had been given support from all of them in terms of the content and resolve contained in the motion.
While Cr Webb said he was happy to defer the item until all councillors could debate the matter, the feeling around the chamber was that the matter could be dealt with there and then.
Cr Slack said the item dealt with matters that had all been before council in the past few years and it was a re-stating of council’s position as to where council stands.
Cr Webb said for the past two years council has in fact been active in debating issues associated with mining and its impacts.
“Council has been addressing issues regarding mining in the community. Council has not been sitting on its hands, neither have staff, in terms of those issues.
“I commend the action of previous Mayor Lyford and current Mayor Slack in progressing policies of council with the correct authorities, state government and its administration.
“I think its important we re-affirm what has happened in the past.
Cr Webb said Wednesday was an opportunity for council to draw a line in the sand.
A line he said that is not meant to end debate, but a situation from where council can continue to consider any changes in policy that may need to occur once they are given due time to consider them.
He said council needed to remain aware of “all the issues put to us, respond to change where necessary as information and issues come forward”.
Council’s mining policy – what it says
Council acknowledges the concern of the community regarding the potential health and other issues brought about by existing and potential resource mining in the Shire.
In doing so, it also recognises the commercial benefit that can come to the community by such activities.
As a consequence of this understanding, Council has since 2008, passed various resolutions which reflect a balance of views relating to mining activity culminating in its current policy, namely:-
1. “Council recognises the economic benefits and responsible environmental management of past and current mining operations within the Shire, however, despite economic benefits, any extension or new mining proposals will not be supported:-
* Unless stringent environmental and social expectations are met.
* Unless extensive community consultation has taken place.
* If the aesthetics of the Shire are compromised in any way.
* If the proposal is located in a State Conservation Area or within zones E1, E2 or E3 of the Local Environmental Plan.”
2. “That where there is competing interest between the extraction of gas and coal over the same area then the principal factor is considering competing interest be the impact on the environment rather than the economic benefit to the State.”
3. “That the protection of agriculture be considered and evaluated as part of the assessment of mining development applications and in this regard recognition of agriculture be included in the State Plan.”
4. “That coal wagons be covered for dust suppression”.
5. “That Council communicate with State Government highlighting the possible mental health impacts arising from the granting of mining exploration licences and refer the same to a paper written by professor Glenn Albrecht”.
6. “That PM1 be the standard test for air quality in mining locations”.
Council also confirms that it is not the consent authority in respect to the application to explore or mine substantial resources within the Shire but will continue to pursue its policies with the authorities which are charged with those responsibilities.
Email a friend