Northern Interconnector Pipeline (UPDATE 29 June, 2007)
SENATE INQUIRY PROGRAM FOR GYMPIE, PROCEEDINGS DAY 1
SENATE INQUIRY PROGRAM FOR BRISBANE, PROCEEDINGS DAY 2
SENATE INQUIRY, CANBERRA, PROCEEDINGS DAY 3
Why a thorough investigation of the Traveston Crossing Dam proposal is
a Federal Government responsibility (HERE)
SUBMISSIONS to Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee
by April 4th 2007
Mayors' report and EIS submissions released,
Go HERE for latest details
The more that is known about the Traveston Crossing Dam proposal on the Mary River, the worse it looks
Queensland Premier Mr. Peter Beattie announced on Thursday, 27th April 2006 that the Queensland Government proposes to build a mega-dam (more than 1.3 times the area of Sydney Harbour) on the Mary River at Traveston Crossing that will inundate the central Mary Valley in Queensland's Sunshine Coast hinterland and re-direct the water of the Mary River catchment into Brisbane. Until the announcement, no information had been made public about ANY planning procedures or studies to justify the decision. There had been absolutely NO public consultation with any of the local stakeholders regarding this decision before the announcement.
This is the official website of the Save the Mary River Coordinating Group, a local community support organization formed in response to the proposal. On this site we will collate information about the proposal and assist in the public debate on the issue of dams on the Mary River and water and planning procedures in Queensland in general.
Following the Premier's June 2006 announcement of his formation of a company to proceed with the dam project - 'Queensland Water Infrastructure Pty Ltd' and the release of the Water Resource Plan legislation for the Mary Basin in July, there has been the opportunity to investigate the limited scientific, engineering and financial information that has become available.
The State Government's own scientific evidence indicates that this proposal would seriously degrade the 200km of river downstream of the proposal and greatly effect the Great Sandy Straits by stopping all fresh water flow to the sea from the river for a significant proportion of the time. Independant economic analysis now shows that the proposal is an extremely high risk, high cost strategy compared to other viable means of providing for urban water supply in SE Qld, and would produce water that will cost the public significantly more than most of the other viable options investigated. Reputable academic studies assessing social impact of the way the project has been implemented to date have been condemnatory in their conclusions.
It still looks as if the decision to spend billions of dollars of public money on a potential environmental and social disaster has been made on the basis of political expediency rather than good science, engineering and planning. This is surely not appropriate behaviour for a "smart state".
The matter has now moved into the realm of Federal politics, requiring the assessment of a limited range of some of the environmental impacts of the project under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. In addition, a federal Senate enquiry into all aspects of the actions of the State Government to date with respect to the proposal has been initiated to bring out the true facts underlying the proposal and allow some justice to the people of Queensland