Southern Beaches Conservation Society
A society formed to protect the southern beaches and voice opposition to the toxic dump C Cell proposed for the Carlton River/Copping area.
Wednesday, 9 August 2017
Thursday, 20 October 2016
Doug Chipman's Cut Price Toxic Dump for Copping
Attention rate-payers of Clarence and Sorell
Clarence Council risks $4 million of its rate-payer’s money to build a hazardous
waste dump in Sorell municipality
provided $4 million of Council’s money (rate-payers’ money) for the construction of
a hazardous waste facility (or C-cell) near Copping, in the Sorell municipality
(‘Tender let for C-cell’, 31 August 2016, http://swstas.com.au/)
The C-cell, approved in 2012, is permitted to receive a higher level of hazardous
waste than normal landfill sites, including, potentially, all types of non-liquid waste
except nuclear waste. Construction has not yet commenced.
The proponent is a council-owned business called Southern Waste Solutions, coowned
by Clarence, Sorell, Tasman and Kingborough councils.
Why was such an important decision made in total secrecy?
There was no prior consultation by Clarence Council regarding the decision to
spend $4 million of rate-payer’s money (a 1.4 m gift and a $2.4 m loan). The decision
was made in a closed meeting of Council, sometime in July or August 2016 (the date
is unknown). A closed meeting means there were no members of the public present
and no public record is made available regarding the decision or the discussion by
councillors. We don’t think there is any justification for this level of secrecy.
What are the financial risks to Clarence Council?
What else could the $4 million have been spent on to the benefit of the Clarence
community?
The rate-payers have not been told why Council made this decision and what the
financial risks are. We can find no evidence that the C-cell can make a profit so the
$1.4 million may be a gift rather than an investment. We understand that the
conditions of the loan are that the SWS will only need to start to repay it when, and
if, contracts are signed with businesses that want to send waste to the C-cell. It is not
known if interest will be charged. It could take many years for any money to be paid
back, making the $2.4 million unavailable for the ratepayers of Clarence. Many
community projects will not receive funding because of this decision of council.
Did Clarence Mayor Doug Chipman attempt to avoid media attention?
The Clarence Council made no public announcement about its decision. The
proponent, Southern Waste Solutions, issued a media release on 31 August 2016
which included a one sentence statement at the end, from the Clarence Mayor,
saying that: “The development will be funded through a combination of some $2 m.
funds from the state government, while CCC will invest a further $1.6 m. and provide
$2.4 m. loan to the organisation.”
The media release was prepared by a public relations company and clearly aimed
to minimise the attention the council would receive.
Are Clarence rate-payers subsidising this risky waste dump through a rate-increase?
In June this year the Clarence Council increased rates across the municipality by
1.9% for the 2016-17 financial year. The Council could have avoided such a high rate
increase if it had not provided the $4 million for the C-cell.
Why has Clarence Council risked its money when no private investor is willing to?
Despite claims by the proponent since 2012 that they had customers interested in
paying to send waste to the C-cell, they have no contracts with private businesses.
Information provided by the Tasmanian Ombudsman to Federal Member for
Denison Andrew Wilkie states that on 10 June 2016 an unnamed business revoked its
contract to invest in the C-cell. It seems that Clarence Council, and the Clarence
Mayor Doug Chipman in particular, has rescued this development when no business
or other council would spend money on it. We are continuing to investigate Doug
Chipman’s involvement in this affair.
Why has Clarence put $4 million into the C-cell when other councils have put
nothing into it?
If you live in Sorell municipality you probably know that this risky venture is proposed
to be built near Copping, but you may be wondering why Clarence Council is so
keen to fund the C-cell when the other owner-councils Sorell, Tasman and
Kingborough have not put one dollar into it. We think it has a lot to do with Doug
Chipman’s keenness on landfill as a waste solution.
Is the Sorell municipality going to get a ‘cut-price C-cell’ and what are the
implications of this?
Southern Waste Solutions and Clarence Council have admitted that it is still $4 million
short of the full amount that it requires for the C-cell but SWS intends starting
construction soon.
In addition to the $4 million provided by the Clarence Council the state government
provided $2 million last year through the Regional Revival Fund. SWS say that $6
million is sufficient to construct the C-cell, but it has made numerous media
comments that the complete cost is $10 million. The agenda papers for Clarence
Council meeting of 5 September 2016 states that its ‘investment’ of $4 million is 40%
of the capitol required – therefore confirming the total cost of $10 million.
The additional $4 million is required for capping the C-cell after it is full and for
ongoing monitoring and potentially remediation. This $4 million is expected to come
from profits, which are highly unlikely. We think it is too risky to start the C-cell without
knowing if you can safely cap it and monitor it.
What you can do:
- Repost this to other Facebook sites
- Sign up for updates: send your contact details to the emails below
- Raise concerns with your local Sorell or Clarence councillors
- Write to the Mercury newspaper at: mercuryedletter@themercury.com.au
Petition
- We are preparing a petition to the local Government Minister, Peter Gutwein
calling for an investigation into Clarence Council’s funding of the C-cell.
Register to receive updates and we can send you a copy of the petition
when it is ready.
For further information:
Peter McGlone, Director, Tasmanian Conservation Trust – email peter@tct.org.au
Angela Marsh, Southern Beaches Conservation Society – email
angelamarsh1@bigpond.com
Friday, 16 September 2016
Tuesday, 23 February 2016
Thursday, 11 February 2016
Media Release 11 Feb 2016
MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release 11 February 2016
Final Legal Costs Hearing Copping Waste Authority (SWS) Vs SBCS and Marsh
Before Justice Blow in the Supreme Court 4.15pm.
Justice Blow will hand down his final decision regarding costs in the legal action brought by the Copping Waste Authority (SWS) against Southern Beaches Conservation Society Inc. (SBCS) and Angela Marsh.
SWS decided to discontinue their Action following a scheduled date for trial on 23 – 27 November 2015, before Justice Escort. SBCS and Marsh were confident of a very favourable outcome of the trial.
Costs could amount to $100,000 for SWS. As an Authority answerable to the Councils who are its owners these costs will inevitably be passed on to rate payers.
*MEDIA RELEASE ENDS*
Monday, 21 December 2015
Media Release
Southern
Beaches Conservation Society
Dump
the Toxic Dump
MEDIA
RELEASE
For Immediate Release 20 Dec 2015
Another shonky move by government
If Matthew Groom really wants Tasmania to be a clean green
state why has he turned down a waste levy in favour of funding landfill? In
other jurisdictions, in line with first world countries, high waste levies are
put into place by government in order to encourage phasing out landfill in
accord with the recommendations from the OECD.
Instead of funding the C cell State government would be far
better off implementing a state waste management strategy - raising a hazardous
waste levy to encourage business to deal with their own waste and using
proposed funding and the levy as an industry start-up incentive to waste
recycling and remediation industries. This would provide far more than jobs, it
could be a real move in the right direction for Minister Groom's touted, 'Our
Big Green Goal,' rather than a toxic cell in a hole in the ground.
Nyrstar is an example of industry taking responsibility for
their own waste. They ship waste to SA for reprocessing, ending up with an
inert substance used for bricks. Without incentives business will be only too
pleased to transfer their hazardous waste to future ratepayers and not have the
responsibility of dealing with it.
Southern Waste Solutions, who for over three years have not
been able to raise the funds from the private sector, because they do not have
a viable business case, have been bailed out by Councils to the tune of
$1.9mil, only made a profit of $80,000 last year and have outstanding
liabilities of $4mil. They do not have one organization that has confirmed that
they will use the c cell. Only 10,000
tonnes of legacy waste across Tasmania has been identified in their report –
hardly the quantity to merit the cost of a 300,000 tonne C cell and much of
this waste could be remediated in-situ given the incentive to do so.
As for waste from Antarctica -does Tasmania really want to
accept waste from other Antarctic countries such as: Italy; China; and Russia;
to name just three of a long list. We do not need to tempt these countries to
Tasmania to be known as the Toxic Dump for Antarctica. This is also in
contravention of the core principles of the Basal Convention.
In the past our own Antarctic waste has been transported to
WA but in future there will be very little Australian Antarctic waste as it is
less impacting on the environment to remediate or seal it in situ. Since 2015
France’s solid and liquid waste has been completely used as waste to generate
energy.
Minister Groom why condemn Tasmania to another 10 – 20 years
of toxic landfill?
*MEDIA
RELEASE ENDS*
For further information, please contact Dump the Toxic
Dump: dumpthetoxicdump@gmail.com
Saturday, 21 November 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)