Mines and Energy Legislation Amendment Bill

_{28 October, 2008}

MINES AND ENERGY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (4.02 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Mining and Energy
Legislation Amendment Bill. Although the bill amends various acts for a variety of purposes, it is my
intention to address only that part of the bill that pertains to the mining of oil shale in the Whitsunday area.
I want to preface my comments today with a declaration of my understanding of the importance of the
resources sector to the national and state economies and to the standard of living and employment
opportunity that is enjoyed by my constituents and those who live and work in and around the state’s
mining regions. However, the issues relating to oil shale mining are very different from those more familiar
concerns that are sometimes raised in relation to the mining of coal and other mineral deposits. So we
should not in any way believe or suggest that decisions made about oil shale mining reflect the
government’s views about other sections of the resources sector. This is a very particular industry with very
particular issues and, as such, I am wholeheartedly in support of this legislation.
As the Premier has outlined, the McFarlane oil shale deposit lies just below the earth’s surface in an
area south of the town of Proserpine. At its southernmost extremity it lies just metres from the ocean and in
the north is separated from the pristine Googangra wetland by only the Bruce Highway. It is this proximity
to both a World Heritage listed area and the town of Proserpine that has made it an imperative for me, as
the local member, and for the government to take a special interest in the proposal to mine the McFarlane
deposit and to process the resultant oil shale using unproven technology that has, at least anecdotally,
been associated with environmental and health impacts when in operation in other areas.
Just so we understand the dimensions of the project that may have resulted from a mining approval
on the McFarlane site, it is widely accepted that the deposit contains a recoverable resource of around
4.8 billion barrels of shale oil and in production the mining pit would have been on the same scale as the
Goonyella mine in the Bowen Basin—an open-cut pit with dimensions measured in kilometres. Combine
this with the rainfall and local flooding that was witnessed this year and it is not hard to understand the
implied threat to the wetland and to the waters of the Great Barrier Reef.
I want to be honest, though, and point out that my first reaction to Queensland Energy Resources
Ltd’s proposal was not to take an entrenched position but to collect as much information as I could from the
company, from those opposed to the proposal on environmental grounds and, most importantly, from my
constituents whose lives would be impacted by the introduction of a mine. There was potentially important
economic benefit for the local and regional economy to consider, including a broadening of our economic
base and the creation of jobs and career opportunities. I want to say that QER, through its representative
Simon Eldridge, was always willing to answer my questions insofar as it could and to hold information
sessions with the public upon request. QER acknowledged that there were gaps in available information
and that this information could only be provided as further testing of the prototype processing plant
occurred. In other words, the processing technology was still in the development phase.
As time passed and information was gathered, two things became clear: we just did not have
enough information about the processing of oil shale and the resultant emissions, and the Whitsunday
community was totally united in its opposition to the proposal. I know of long-term residents who had
already made the decision to leave the area, such was their fear of the impacts of this process. Others told
Speech by Jan Jarratt extracted from Hansard of Tuesday, 28 October 2008
File name: jarr2008_10_28_74.fm Page : 2 of 2
me that they would also leave and still more expressed their deep and genuine fear for what would
become of the community and their family’s health if the oil shale mine went ahead.
I have heard some commentators suggest that all this could have been resolved within a normal
process of an EIS. At first I also held that view. The crunch is twofold. First, an EIS process could
reasonably take many years to be completed—many years in which tourism in the Whitsundays would
surely wither and die on the association. Secondly, the company was set to apply for a mining
development licence to dig up 400,000 tonnes of shale from the McFarlane deposit for sampling and
testing—all without an EIS—to assess the associated environmental risk. Therefore, I do not believe that
the decision to place a 20-year moratorium on any development or mining at the McFarlane deposit was
hasty or ill-informed. In fact, it occurred in a considered and timely fashion that prevented any significant
disturbance of the area and before the company had gone to further expense in digging, transporting and
processing the rock for testing purposes.
I know that my constituents believe that the government has made the right decision. But the
question remained as to exactly what position the opposition was to take today. I have heard opposition
members say a few things in the past few months but, although I am really pleased that they will be
supporting this legislation today, I do not think we can be confident that they would have made the same
decision that this government has made in relation to the McFarlane shale oil deposit. In fact, for quite
some time the opposition was fairly silent on environmental matters and the issues of community health
surrounding this issue. We heard a lot about what it might mean for the broader mining industry but not so
much about what it was going to mean for my community. So while I absolutely welcome the opposition’s
support today, it has to be acknowledged that that position has taken some time to be arrived at. I believe
that the 20-year moratorium is the right approach in this specific circumstance. I thank the Premier and
ministers for taking a balanced approach to resource development in this state.
As I said at the outset, resources are very important to the state’s economy. But so are the tourism
industry, our environment and our lifestyle. If we as a government do not look to sustainable development
and a balanced approach to economic activity then we risk losing the very thing that makes us so proud to
be Queenslanders. I commend the bill to the House.

More Hansard