Word has it that the SCA referred to one of the local Community Reference Group members, (a geologist), something which Patrice Newell issued as a Press Statement on - wait for it - 25 January 2007. Patrice posted this statement on her "Climate Change Coalition" website that day - some eight months ago.
What is going on here?
Why would the SCA now "discover" Patrice's Press release, which got State wide coverage at the time, prior to the last election. I should mention that Patrice stood as a candidate in the Upper House election in March 2007. She set up a website, but she never registered the CCC as a political party.
Secondly, what is the ethics involved in the SCA getting a tame, private Geologist to do its dirty political jobs for them?
If there is a political point to be made, then surely the SCA ought push the issue up the line of its Political masters, and let them answer, within the political fray - that would have been the appropriate way to handle this issue. Bob Debus was Minister at the time the Press Release was issued, and Bob Debus was never shy of a bit of a scrap.
So why is this person being used to attack a politician, who, at this stage is not a politician at all - but a private citizen?
The Climate Change Coalition is not registered as a Political Party. It exists as a website only, and an idea. But our friendly geologist cannot be expected to understand the subtleties of that situation. He is, after all, a geologist, not a political scientist.
*****
There is an issue about likely subsidence under the Kangaloon Aquifer - from coal mining by Gujarat NRE which has bought up the old Huntley and Avondale Coal mining leases. That allows them to mine directly under significant parts of the Kangaloon Aquifer - including Stockyard Swamp and North Pole Swamp.
Why does the geologist on the CRG not talk about that issue? Is he, in fact being used by the SCA to create a smokescreen? That might be to avoid scrutiny of the SCA's failure to defend the Kangaloon Aquifer from the inundations by coal mining.
After all, they will not wish to have to admit that they are about to invest more than $100 million worth of taxpayers money, when in two years time, the resource which they intend to harvest might be cracked, from below, by coal mining. If that were to occur, it would prove to be a total waste of their time and our money.
Graeme Head
CEO of the
Sydney Catchment Authority
It is not good public policy to allow two conflicting activities to run in parallel. Frankly, I would have expected better than this from Graeme Head, the Chief Executive of the SCA.
It smacks of something cooked up by the Project Manger for the Upper Nepean Borefield, John Ross - trying to be clever. Politics is not your forte, John.
You should have let Graeme Head know what you were cooking up with your little mate on the CRG. He might have been able to prevent this pathetic, demeaning debacle.
Engineers playing politics? Now I've seen everything.
Why does the geologist on the CRG not talk about that issue? Is he, in fact being used by the SCA to create a smokescreen? That might be to avoid scrutiny of the SCA's failure to defend the Kangaloon Aquifer from the inundations by coal mining.
After all, they will not wish to have to admit that they are about to invest more than $100 million worth of taxpayers money, when in two years time, the resource which they intend to harvest might be cracked, from below, by coal mining. If that were to occur, it would prove to be a total waste of their time and our money.
Graeme Head
CEO of the
Sydney Catchment Authority
It is not good public policy to allow two conflicting activities to run in parallel. Frankly, I would have expected better than this from Graeme Head, the Chief Executive of the SCA.It smacks of something cooked up by the Project Manger for the Upper Nepean Borefield, John Ross - trying to be clever. Politics is not your forte, John.
You should have let Graeme Head know what you were cooking up with your little mate on the CRG. He might have been able to prevent this pathetic, demeaning debacle.
Engineers playing politics? Now I've seen everything.
No comments:
Post a Comment