The 4350water Blog highlights some of the issues relating to proposals for potable reuse in Toowoomba and South East Qld. 4350water blog looks at related political issues as well.

Friday, March 31, 2006

Why the game is now harder for the Council ...

Things have changed for the Toowoomba City Council since the end of June 2005 when they submitted the NWC application for funding for the recycled sewage project.

Up until June 2005, Council had kept the project rather secret, burying costs in forward budget estimates.

There must have been a flurry of activity at the Council towards 30 June as they hurried to complete the application. It does seem that only the small "deal team" were privy to the contents of the application.

It took many months for the application to be surrendered by the Council to members of the Toowoomba community following a Freedom of information request. The Council certainly dragged its heels on the request. Some say that Council would still be trying to avoid releasing the application if it weren't for the resignation of the Council CEO who departed to Logan city.

Was the release of the application his parting gift to the water debate?

We'll probably never know for sure.

However, the release of the NWC application opened a Pandora's box.

For months, Council had been telling the Toowoomba community that there were no other options and that the recycled water project was the only way to solve Toowoomba water problems during the current drought.

The NWC application showed that the Council's costings of the alternatives were suspect. (We already knew that the State government had rubber stamped the Council suspect figures.)

It also showed two major deficiencies - the treatment of the Gowrie Creek irrigators and the disposal of the RO waste stream

For Gowrie Creek irrigators, the news was not good. They would lose their water completely - it seems the Council gave zero consideration to their concerns.

For the RO waste stream, Council were advised that they better negotiate with Acland Coal to get them to take it otherwise the project would cost another $66 million as 600 hectares of evaporation ponds would be required. Council were advised that the smaller 68 hectare evaporation pond alternative was "full of uncertainties".

Council has still not reached agreement with Acland Coal. Recent press reports indicate that they were expecting to get high quality recycled water from the Council, not the RO waste stream. It remains unclear how the coal workers (and their union) will feel about handling this waste product.

So it's clear that the Council did not really consider the impact of the recycled sewage project on existing water resources and the disposal of the RO waste stream.

What's also clear is the Council did not consider Toowoomba residents and the surrounding shires.

The Mayor's "drink it or you can buy bottled water" approach to community engagement has done far more damage to the recycled water industry than could ever have been imagined.

One researcher has labelled the Council's approach as "pathetic".

What must other industry players think?

And the Council now faces the loss of several surrounding shires as water customers should they proceed with the recycled sewage project.

What impact will that have on the financial viability of the project?

Finally, we come to the most recent turn of events.

For months, Mayor Thorley has claimed that 70% of the community support her project.

Opponents denied this was the case. It would indeed be extraordinary if Toowoomba bucked all known research on this issue.

The Mayor was put on the spot on the 7.30 Report and stated that she "didn't have a clue" how many supported her project.

Perhaps she knew that a video image of her mentioning 70% support could easily come back to haunt her.

Her comments on the 7.30 Report seem to reflect the Council's real view - they have no idea what support there is in the community for their recycled sewage project.

The Federal government's decision to link funding for the project with a referendum (and other conditions) certainly seems to have had an impact.

Council affiliated support group Pure H20 packed up their kit and went home, declaring their campaign a success. For a group whose stated goal was to present a 20,000 signature petition in support of the Mayor's project to the House of Representatives in Canberra, they have an odd view of success. They packed up without their petition ever seeing the light of day.

Other parties close to the Council seem to have conceded defeat, believing that the Council will never win at a referendum.

And this week, perhaps the ultimate admission by the Council's Director of Engineering Services Kevin Flanagan. At a Water Facts meeting, he admitted that Water Futures was NEVER intended to get Toowoomba through the current drought.

This admission is the clearest indication yet that the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor and those working on the Water Futures project have perpetrated a fraud on the community.

On numerous occasions, the Council has argued that the community must accept the recycled sewage project because there are no other options. Now we hear that the Water Futures project won't solve the current water problems and Council will source water from bores and the State government will pipe water in from "somewhere".

As an example, if your doctor told you that you must have a operation and that there were no other options and, right before the operation, he then tells you that the operation won't actually fix your ailment, you'd be pretty annoyed, wouldn't you. You'd think seriously about changing doctors!

How is the Council's action any different? It's not - if it looks and sounds like misleading and deceptive conduct it probably is.

Life is now much tougher for the Council. All eyes are on them. Everyone is watching their conduct. Is the latest action by the Mayor a breach of the Councillors Code of Conduct? What other legislation has been breached? Will the Council be sued by the irrigators or will some other party obtain an injunction? How will they deal with the referendum? Will ratepayers' money be spent funding the "yes" campaign?

Privately, they may be wishing that it would all go away. However, they brought it on themselves and have only themselves to blame for the mess they are in ...

16 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Soon, how about now!

12:59 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Blogger Concerned Ratepayer said...

Now it is!

4:04 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Blogger Unknown said...

Well said. I'm linking that post to waterfutures.

I might add that your quiet assessment is now the tone of the debate in Toowoomba.

There is much less emotion since Turnbull took steps to hold Council accountable to the community.

4:54 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Blogger Water Hawk said...

Is it time for a CMC inquiry into the conduct of this council? If they have truly mislead the community then it should be looked at.
The citizens should never have had to worry and fret over a project that would not save them from this drought. This is nothing more than a push from the water industry to have a city used as the test case.

5:13 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agree it's a push to get a recycled water project in under the pretense that it will solve the city's problems. Shame on Thorley.

5:46 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Blogger Concerned Ratepayer said...

Link away!

Perhaps now sensible people can sit around a table and resolve Toowoomba's water source issues.

Set Water Futures aside and determine where the water will come from while the drought continues.

If that source turns out to also work as a long-term supply source, all the better.

5:51 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I,m still concerned that TCC will sit back doing nothing about our water hoping they win the referendum.

6:00 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Blogger Concerned Ratepayer said...

We need to maintain the pressure - don't think that Water Facts or Turnbull will solve everything - keep the Council under pressure - if the facts are in the public domain it gives the Council nowhere to run.

6:08 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Time to come up with the real solutions.

6:54 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did any one see Harland on Win TV to-night. He said that if the No vote gets up then they will loose the money. Well if that is not a threat ,I wonder what it is meant to be. That committee can not put forward an unbiased case while the chair has a bias to the mayor.

7:04 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The thrust of the debate should be how we can get water to the people for the next 5 years.
Doug Harland saying on Win TV that a vote for the No vote would only mean the we do not get the water money.
This is scaremongering and entirely inappropriate for the chair of the Water Facts committee.

7:11 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Chairman should wait until the committee has finalised its report.

Being a loose cannon with his thoughts helps nobody, including himself!

8:05 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Butt out until the homework is done.

The committee should resolve that there be NO press statements unless the committee agrees their content.

It is inappropriate that these statements are being made at this time.

8:32 PM, March 31, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

See Mr N. on Win news with his usual mantra - it's better than what you get from the tap now. What if we used him as the guinea pig and let him drink recycled sewage for 10-20 years and see if it has any effect?

1:33 AM, April 01, 2006

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Would anyone notice the difference!

1:37 AM, April 01, 2006

 
Blogger Water Hawk said...

We thought Nolan was to retire.
Did he get a taste of the political life and cannot go away or maybe he just wants to run for council.
The real answer is that Thorley's camp still need a front man as they cannot come out to talk to the people.
It's the same old song they sing extra extra la la, la la.
It's all the same old same old and we are sick of it as the truth is out of the bag and we need to know where the water is comming from for the next 5 years!

1:10 PM, April 01, 2006

 

Post a Comment

<< Home