- Published on
By Neil Daly
WHEN a political party or independent members of a parliament bother to reply or take up a cause just under two years out from an election, one could say they are genuinely interested in the matter or politically astute.
In my article Hello Spring Street, are you listening?, I said the time had come for our politicians to prepare a Western Port Strategic Management Plan and present it to the electorate before the next Victorian state election.
I sent the article to my local state members of parliament and other parliamentarians to gauge their potential support for a Western Port Strategic Management Plan.
WHEN a political party or independent members of a parliament bother to reply or take up a cause just under two years out from an election, one could say they are genuinely interested in the matter or politically astute.
In my article Hello Spring Street, are you listening?, I said the time had come for our politicians to prepare a Western Port Strategic Management Plan and present it to the electorate before the next Victorian state election.
I sent the article to my local state members of parliament and other parliamentarians to gauge their potential support for a Western Port Strategic Management Plan.
Of the 26 Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council MPs approached, some replied to thank me for bringing the matter to their attention, others responded that their first concern was for their electorate of … and some, including the leaders of the major parties, didn’t bother to respond at all.
The Victorian Greens, Fiona Patten’s Reason Party, two Liberal MPs, two Independents and Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party all indicated they would be happy to engage in a further conversation with “the people” or if the matter came before the house. One Labor MP offered encouragement. And Clifford Hayes, from the Sustainable Australia Party, asked for additional information.
On February 18, according to page 522 of the Hansard record of Parliament, Mr Hayes asked the following question in the Legislative Council:
WESTERN PORT BAY
Mr HAYES (Southern Metropolitan) (18:13): The matter I would like to raise in the adjournment debate tonight is addressed to the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change. I would like to ask why there is not a strategic management plan for Western Port Bay. As it stands today, under the umbrella of Victoria’s Marine and Coastal Act 2018 we have the Western Port Ramsar Site Management Plan of 2017, the Marine and Coastal Policy of 2020 and Victoria’s Marine and Coastal Reforms: Final Transition Plan of 2017. In times gone by we could have probably kept muddling along with this collection of reports and plans administered by various government agencies, such as those listed, but the driver now is climate change. If we are to manage this situation, we need to develop a business plan, a holistic plan, that takes into account the environmental values and the social and economic needs of this region.
The Western Port Ramsar management plan is a wonderful plan for part of Western Port Bay, but what about the rest of it? There is a model for this approach: the Port Phillip Bay Environmental Management Plan 2017–2027. This plan offers a vast array of social, economic and environmental values to visitors and those who live and work around the bay and its surrounding catchment.
I ask that the government consider a similar strategic management plan for the entire Western Port Bay and not just the Ramsar wetland and consider the site in its entirety, not just one part of it. The respect for and protection of Western Port’s long-term environmental future need to be addressed, not only the impacts of climate change on water levels but protection of the seabeds and coastal areas. If the Victorian government believes, as stated, that there will be a 0.8-metre sea level rise by the year 2100, what impacts will this have on Western Port? We do not know, as there is no strategic plan on how to address these impending issues. I ask that the minister initiate a plan for the entire Western Port Bay site to take into account the wide range of uses in the region and long-term climate effects, which do and will continue to threaten the site.
The government is yet to reply.
I imagine the reply will be left till after the AGL/APA project decision for Crib Point has been tabled by the Planning Minister. Added to this is a plan to export liquefied hydrogen through the Port of Hastings. There is a lot to consider.
Quite possibly, the government’s response will be carefully worded so as to avoid any commitment at this stage – I hope I am wrong and the call will be heeded by all.
The Victorian Greens, Fiona Patten’s Reason Party, two Liberal MPs, two Independents and Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party all indicated they would be happy to engage in a further conversation with “the people” or if the matter came before the house. One Labor MP offered encouragement. And Clifford Hayes, from the Sustainable Australia Party, asked for additional information.
On February 18, according to page 522 of the Hansard record of Parliament, Mr Hayes asked the following question in the Legislative Council:
WESTERN PORT BAY
Mr HAYES (Southern Metropolitan) (18:13): The matter I would like to raise in the adjournment debate tonight is addressed to the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change. I would like to ask why there is not a strategic management plan for Western Port Bay. As it stands today, under the umbrella of Victoria’s Marine and Coastal Act 2018 we have the Western Port Ramsar Site Management Plan of 2017, the Marine and Coastal Policy of 2020 and Victoria’s Marine and Coastal Reforms: Final Transition Plan of 2017. In times gone by we could have probably kept muddling along with this collection of reports and plans administered by various government agencies, such as those listed, but the driver now is climate change. If we are to manage this situation, we need to develop a business plan, a holistic plan, that takes into account the environmental values and the social and economic needs of this region.
The Western Port Ramsar management plan is a wonderful plan for part of Western Port Bay, but what about the rest of it? There is a model for this approach: the Port Phillip Bay Environmental Management Plan 2017–2027. This plan offers a vast array of social, economic and environmental values to visitors and those who live and work around the bay and its surrounding catchment.
I ask that the government consider a similar strategic management plan for the entire Western Port Bay and not just the Ramsar wetland and consider the site in its entirety, not just one part of it. The respect for and protection of Western Port’s long-term environmental future need to be addressed, not only the impacts of climate change on water levels but protection of the seabeds and coastal areas. If the Victorian government believes, as stated, that there will be a 0.8-metre sea level rise by the year 2100, what impacts will this have on Western Port? We do not know, as there is no strategic plan on how to address these impending issues. I ask that the minister initiate a plan for the entire Western Port Bay site to take into account the wide range of uses in the region and long-term climate effects, which do and will continue to threaten the site.
The government is yet to reply.
I imagine the reply will be left till after the AGL/APA project decision for Crib Point has been tabled by the Planning Minister. Added to this is a plan to export liquefied hydrogen through the Port of Hastings. There is a lot to consider.
Quite possibly, the government’s response will be carefully worded so as to avoid any commitment at this stage – I hope I am wrong and the call will be heeded by all.
Keep it up and thanks George
The recommendation about the AGL proposal could be made public anytime now due, making Clifford Hayes’ speech in the legislative Council extremely timely.
An appreciation of Westernport and its unique ecology has been a positive outcome of recent efforts to expose the threats that Westernport faces from inappropriate industry .
It was shocking to hear the Port of Hastings claiming at the recent EES hearing that there is no limit to the increase in shipping operations and industrial activity that they envisage in Westernport. Expert witnesses on behalf of the council, Drs Blount and Lincoln Smith detailed Westernport’s shorebirds and marine life, and described the compounding devastation of these ecosystems when cumulative impacts of poorly considered industrial activity are allowed to go unchecked.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1H4F46YjqA_KOAi_p-DL_XciXHOwdlrnM/view?usp=drivesdk
The expansion involves the removal of remnant native vegetation from part of a priceless biolink stretching east of the highway from Nyora-Lang Lang to Grantville. Most of this biolink lies on top of sand. We have already seen what happens to mature forest when sand mines are allowed to be created and when they expand. For instance, have a look at what happened late last year to the ancient Grass Tree forest located on Crown Land held by a work authority by Sand Supplies Pty Ltd at their Grantville site.
DPQ is also requesting to go below the water table and that involves issues with Deep Creek which drains into Western Port Bay.
Spring St needs to hear what is at stake here, Neil, and what you propose is worthy of our politicians’ attention.
All who love Bass Coast and Western Port Bay should contact their politicians and urge they support such a plan – and without the exemptions to which Neil Rankine refers.
As one of the people opposing the Grantville quarry expansion I was pinning my hopes on the DAL listing until I read the detail and realised that sand quarrying was exempted!!! It makes no sense and is a conflict between the environment and the supposed 'economy' which appears to have no resolution other than trashing the environment every time. The planning system is broken: opaque, complex, riddled with exemptions and stacked against local councils and communities. I despair.