Calls for Inquiry Ignored
This comes after the intermodal terminal — one of two proposed for Moorebank — was referred last month to federal Environment Minister Tony Burke for consideration under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
Mr Burke had to choose one of five possible levels of assessment. He chose an environmental impact statement.
As part of the referral, residents were given the opportunity to make submissions.
Among the residents who made a submission was Ray Van.
“As for the result, Mr Burke has shirked his responsibility and due care towards the citizens of Liverpool and the south west,” he said. “It is very disappointing. I think anything less than a full inquiry will just be a cut-and-paste whitewash report.”
Hughes MP Craig Kelly also pushed for a full public inquiry.
“The decision for a lower-level environmental impact statement falls far short of the public inquiry we are calling for,” he said.
“An EIS is an assessment done by and for the developers, and not even in the ball park of the arm’s length and independent study demanded by the residents of Liverpool and supported by the Coalition.”
The Liverpool Champion asked the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) why the project would not get a full public inquiry.
In response, a spokeswoman for the department said an assessment through an environmental impact statement did not exclude the project from a public inquiry.
“At the conclusion of the environmental impact statement, if the minister deems necessary, he can call for a public inquiry,” she said.
She said the environmental impact statement was determined to be the “most appropriate” process since it allowed for “a detailed assessment of impacts”.
Information about the decision: SEWPaC website, environment.gov.au/epbc
Source: Liverpool City Champion: http://www.liverpoolchampion.com.au/news/local/news/general/calls-for-inquiry-ignored/2305672.aspx