The State Government appeared to be a model of sensible pragmatism last week when it granted approval for Griffin Group’s planned coal-fired power station at Collie.
The State Government appeared to be a model of sensible pragmatism last week when it granted approval for Griffin Group’s planned coal-fired power station at Collie.
When approving the power station, the Government took the brave move of rejecting advice from the Environmental Protection Authority over greenhouse offsets and sulphur dioxide emissions.
For a government that tries so hard to boost its green credentials, it was a surprise decision.
Yet five days later the Government had reverted to type, warning of the potentially dire consequences of commercial developments, including BGC’s proposed brickworks at Perth Airport.
Planning and Infrastructure Minister Alannah MacTiernan claimed that non-aviation developments at airports had become a growing problem.
It’s certainly a contentious trend, evidenced by a recent Federal Court case in Brisbane, in which Westfield tried unsuccessfully to block a commercial development at the airport.
Ms MacTiernan has sought to elevate the issue to a new level, claiming that developments on airport land are “an abuse of process” and are “being used to bypass state and territory planning and environment laws”.
Ms MacTiernan has foreshadowed a constitutional challenge, with the Government seeking legal advice on whether the Commonwealth was going “beyond its constitutional power” in approving land uses that have no connection with aviation.
She also convinced the Australian Transport Council – a gathering of state and federal ministers – to investigate the use of Commonwealth airport land for non-aviation purposes.
Ms MacTiernan implied that the Federal Government supported her stance.
“To have the Commonwealth recognise that there are legitimate concerns needing to be addressed is an important breakthrough,” she said.
However, a spokesman for Transport Minister John Anderson said he “utterly rejected” this interpretation and “made that specific point” at the ministerial meeting.
The spokesman said it was the states that needed to change.
“The review presents an excellent opportunity for the states to amend their legislation to bring it into conformity with the best practice principles that underpin the Airports Act,” he said.
Westralia Airports Corporation chief executive Graham Muir said he was not aware of any concerns with developments at the airport.
“I was a little bit surprised at the minister’s [Ms MacTiernan’s] statement,” Mr Muir said.
He particularly questioned the suggestion that commercial developments may “compromise future air services”.
“I’ve no idea what that point is meant to mean,” he said, adding that the relevant legislation expressly forbids any activity that may compromise the airport’s core function.
The brickworks is one of three BGC-related projects, including a quarry and a port proposal, to have been affected by environmental and planning processes.
Mr Muir said the brickworks would be subject to extensive environmental review.
Federal Environment Minister Senator Ian Campbell has made the same point, saying it would be subject to “comprehensive and stringent” assessment.
That has not satisfied Ms MacTiernan, who said airport developments like the brickworks may not comply with “strict environmental standards”.
Environment Minister, Judy Edwards, has expressed similar views, saying WA was yet to receive a “definite guarantee” from Canberra that the brickworks would meet the state’s environmental guidelines.
Which brings us back to the power station decision.
On that occasion, Dr Edwards was much more flexible.
“Although the company’s greenhouse offsets are less than those contemplated by the EPA, the initiative is recognised as a positive contribution,” Dr Edwards said.
The Government also decided that Griffin would not have to meet European Union emissions limits, which Dr Edwards said “would be at considerable cost to the proponent and would result in other environmental consequences”. She added that imposing significant greenhouse reductions or offsets on new projects would place “an inequitable burden on new energy producers and could be counter productive in the long run”.
That approach is sensible, balanced and pragmatic.
The challenge for the Government is to apply that pragmatism in a rational and consistent manner to all industrial developments.
The airport issue is complicated by the current fight between Canberra and the states across a whole raft of policy areas, and greater certainty in that regard would be welcomed by all.
However, that fight should not be at the expense of WA companies trying to get on with business.
State Development Minister Alan Carpenter put it well last week.
“It is no good having a never-ending war between the environmental movement on one side and the pro-development lobby on the other. We need to get both sides to the table to help us develop strategies that will address the very real challenges of the greenhouse issue in the most sensible and beneficial way for this state.”
