Goulburn Mulwaree Council listens to Tarago waste to energy pleas

"You can't say you're totally opposed to waste incinerators in one breath, then in the next say you're willing to take a levy of $20 per tonne and a 1.5 per cent infrastructure levy!" he said.

"That completely undermines your position of opposition and indicates to the NSW Government and Veolia that you are willing to compromise. You're essentially saying you'll sell us out for $20 per tonne and some extra infrastructure funding."

READ MORE:

Tarago Progress Association calls on neighbouring councils to oppose Veolia plan

Goulburn MP Wendy Tuckerman joins community opposition to Veolia plan

ACT politician Jo Clay questions Veolia over waste to energy plan

Tarago and Goulburn Mulwaree Council oppose Veolia waste to energy plan

Veolia proposes new $600 million waste centre at Woodlawn eco-precinct

The Tarago district resident was among 11 speakers at the council's meeting on Tuesday. Some accused councillors of putting a price on people's health in regard to Veolia's proposed $600 million waste to energy plant near the town if they accepted a staff recommendation.

Their full frontal assault helped turn the tide. Councillors have reinforced their opposition to the technology and demanded greater consultation and "transparency" from the government on its policies.

A staff report had outlined a proposed submission on the state's 2021 Thermal Energy from Waste regulation. The document had to be lodged by March 20.

It suggested the council "soften its language" in opposing Veolia's proposal, given the state had "been setting the approval pathway" for energy from waste facilities in NSW.

This included an EPA policy, a waste strategy, the Energy from Waste Infrastructure plan released last year, the NSW chief scientist's support for the technology and the fact that Woodlawn was zoned for the use and was already receiving Sydney's waste.

ALSO READ: Shock departure: Council chief leaves four months early

"If Veolia can provide evidence that their proposal meets the NSW standards emissions( that have been developed based on world's best standards), then this facility is likely to be approved," the report stated.

"Veolia has built and operated a number of these plants around the world and it's understood that this proposal would be compliant with the emission standards."

Staff suggested the council continue to oppose the facility until "absolute proof" of clean, health emissions could be provided.

But the report also urged preparation for its approval. Staff suggested all waste to energy operators should pay a levy of $20 per tonne of waste burnt, adjusted annually for inflation, to the host council.

In addition, it asked for a 1.5 per cent levy on any plant's capital cost to create a surrounding energy from waste business activation precinct from which local business could benefit.

The notion was anathema to residents.

Tarago woman Paige Davis said she believed the former and existing council when they "totally opposed" the incinerator and said they would fight for the community.

"And yet it appears that Goulburn Mulwaree Council has changed its tune," she said.

"Might I add, with no consultation with the community that will end up wearing all of the detrimental effects. Now, it appears to be not a no, it's a no but...It shows that in fact council is willing to negotiate, to compromise. To sell us out."

She questioned what had changed since last year and why the council should soften its language.

ALSO READ: New upgrade to improve disability access at Historic Waterworks

Ms Davis also showed a photo of her children's Tarago primary school class and asked what price councillors were prepared to put on their health.

Other speakers detailed the same fears for their family's health and impacts on soil, agricultural production, tank water and lifestyle from any emissions.

Austin McLennan, a grazier from Braidwood Road property, Connen Hill, said it was essential his stock and lucerne crops remained contaminant free.

"I feel disappointed, let down and insulted by this recommendation," he told councillors.

Amber Standley from Collector accused councillors of "turning their backs on the people who elected them."

Mr Thiele said residents had been denied freedom of information requests to the state government on how it identified four waste to energy precincts, including Goulburn Mulwaree, in its Energy from Waste Infrastructure Plan. They were branded 'cabinet in confidence.'

"So in short, the NSW Government wants to inflict a toxic, hazardous industry on my community to deal with Sydney's rubbish problem, but has made the decision in secret and is unwilling to divulge, explain or justify how they deemed the safety and wellbeing of people in Tarago less important than people in the rest of the state," he said.

Cr Bob Kirk led the charge in opposing implementation of any levies. On Wednesday he said this would have amounted to concessions and "tacit approval."

"Our position was that we were totally opposed so I didn't see how we could put our name to this. The community also jumped all over it," he told The Post.

He also won unanimous support from colleagues that council:

Cr Kirk described the regulation as being "totally written by Sydney-centric bureaucrats" and said it was "entirely appropriate" the community had a chance to comment.

The motion also called on the government to not progress the proposed regulations until "full and proper community consultation" occurred and, in the "public interest," to make available any scientific evidence it relied upon.

ALSO READ: 'Bit of a coup': Goulburn to host Matildas forward and former head coach

Further, it urged the government to reconsider the waste to energy precincts it had identified, including Parkes, Richmond Valley and Lithgow council areas. Cr Kirk said there should be no need to limit their location if they were safe for human, animal and environmental health, and location should accord with "market demand."

On Tuesday, residents accused the council of 'watering down' its stance in a proposed joint submission with the other councils about the Regulation. Cr Kirk successfully argued this should not be lodged and a six-week extension be sought to review the document.

He told The Post that Richmond Valley was not as strongly opposed to the facilities as Goulburn Mulwaree.

Finally, the council has asked that following more consultation, the revised Thermal Energy from Waste Regulation amendment be placed on public exhibition.

Goulburn Mulwaree will advise the other three councils of the decision in order to garner support.

Cr Kirk said councillors were there to represent community views and people had made their feelings known.

ALSO READ: Time to celebrate: CWA turns 100 !

Mr Thiele welcomed the decision.

"We took exception to the council administration issuing a media release last week stating that its position was that Tarago may need to live with a waste incinerator and that they would be seeking a levy on incinerated waste. This was then spruiked on local radio by the general manager, all before elected councillors had even considered the proposal," he said.

"I am pleased that the council again listened to the community (on Tuesday), maintained their strong stance against these toxic facilities, agreeing to make this clear to the NSW Government and work further with local councils in our region to oppose these developments."

Do you have something to say about this issue? Send a letter to the editor. Click here for the Goulburn Post

Did you know the Goulburn Post is now offering breaking news alerts and a daily email newsletter? Keep up-to-date with all the local news: sign up below.