The second in a series of three 'Traveston Dam' presentations for the Hervey Bay Chamber of Commerce took place this morning. Last month (June 25) Roger Currie (pictured) spoke on behalf of the campaign, trying to cover as many of the downstream impacts - particularly economic - as possible in a short space of time. Today it was the Government's turn, and Hervey Bay's Labor Member, Andrew Macnamara, attempted to explain how the dam will benefit the community and the future of Queensland.
Here's a quick summary of the key points given by both presenters ...
Roger Currie outlined:
- the Cost Benefits Analysis (CBA) carried out on the dam and the substantial economic loss to the region should the 70,000mgl annual yield of the Mary Catchments be allocated to Brisbane
- the potential ecological losses to the region - how the dam will mean reduced ‘essential triggering flows' entering the RAMSAR Great Sandy Strait
- the potential indicative economic values of the Great Sandy Ramsar Wetland
- that the statement that the environmental health of the Mary River will not be significantly affected by a large dam at Traveston Crossing because 'end of system' flows will be maintained in excess of 85% of pre-development flows, is simply not supported by the comprehensive scientific investigations that have already taken place during the formulation of the Mary Basin Water Resource Plan.
He also referred to Paradise Dam (which, incidently, has been voted by the World Commission on Dams as one of the most disasterous dams in the world) and the Government's failure to successfully mitigate for Lungfish there. In doing so they breached the conditions of approval under the EPBC 1999.
Read Roger's submission to the Senate Inquiry here.
Today, Andrew Macnamara said:
- He supports the Traveston Dam because (he says) it is vital for Queensland's future
- The dam will produce economic benefits that will offset the losses
- If the Environmental Impact Study stacks up the dam will go ahead; if it doesn't, it won't
- Anyone who opposes the dam is arguing for zero population growth
- He only supports the dam on the basis of Government flow reports (referred to Roger's calculations as the 'back-of-envelope' sort)
- That those against the dam are suffering from NIMBYism, which hinders progress
As the latter 'Anna Bligh' style remark indicates, the speech offered nothing but the usual party spiel, with very little acknowledgement of the negative impacts.
There was time for questions after today's speech, and the issues raised by chamber members were encouraging. Referrence was made to some of the points made in Roger's presentation and they clearly had serious doubts about the wisdom of this dam.
The third in the series of presentations will be given by Graham Newton, speaking on behalf of Queensland Water and Infrasture (QWI) in August.
Stayed tuned.
