Newcastle Greens say more than $6 billion should go to households

Newcastle Greens

MEDIA RELEASE
24 June 2011

Cr Osborne has backed the concerns of Australia’s chief scientist, Professor Chubb, that the climate debate in Australia “borders on the appalling” (SMH, 22 June 2011).

“The science backing climate change and pointing the finger at carbon pollution has been established for years”, Cr Osborne said

“It is only fair that the polluters should pay for their pollution.

“Experts such as Professor Chubb and Professor Garnaut agree that a price on pollution needs to work together with well-designed policies to bring on renewable energy, energy efficiency and clean transport.

“Around the world, pollution prices are in place in Europe, parts of the USA, India and New Zealand,” he said

Cr Osborne has called for households to get more than a half of the funds raised by a price on carbon pollution or more than $6 billion in the year 2012-13.

“I fully back calls by Greens Senator Christine Milne that households should be adequately compensated. This is particularly important for Newcastle, which according to the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, has almost 34,000 pensioners and almost 4,000 unemployed.

“These families need to be fully compensated for the effects of putting a price on carbon pollution”, Cr Osborne said.

Cr Osborne said that the Newcastle Greens will be distributing a pamphlet over the next week to give residents more information about the proposed package.

NOTES
Senator Christine Milne is leading the Greens negotiations with the Federal government.

ABS data can be found here

Professor Garnaut has estimated that with a carbon price of $26 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent would generate around $11.5 billion in potential revenue from the value of permits in 2012–13. (see Summary Report p18)

Infrastructure need upfront

My opinion piece published in The Herald today...

Many Newcastle residents feel short-changed by the State Government when they approve development without investing upfront in the necessary infrastructure to mitigate the development impacts.

With the State Government continuing to approve industrial development on Kooragang Island, it was surprising a few years ago that they chose to replace the old two-lane Tourle Street Bridge with a new two-lane Bridge, when for an extra $15 million they could have constructed a four-lane bridge.

Now, the already busy Cormorant Road is getting busier and a duplication of the Tourle Street Bridge and Cormorant Road is necessary. The price tag now is likely to be in excess of $50 million.

This infrastructure not only services Kooragang Island but also residents from Stockton and Port Stephens coming to the City and Newcastle residents going to the airport.

Where is the investment to beautify this important gateway to the City?

Newcastle residents will be severely impacted by the expansion of our Port unless the State Government invests upfront in the necessary infrastructure.

Newcastle Port Corporation has developed a Concept Plan for the redevelopment of a 90-hectare portion of the former BHP site.

This proposal includes seven new wharfs to support several cargo precincts. These include a dry bulk precinct; a general purpose precinct; a major container terminal with a trade volume of 1 million containers every year; and, a bulk liquid precinct for fuels and biofuels.

The Port Corporation’s plans as they currently stand would choke our roads.

The Port Corporation predicts that a significant amount of the goods to and from the Port would be by road - this will include 800,000 containers each year, 1,010 million litres of fuel and 3.1 million tonnes of other products.

Yet the Port Corporation seems to have ignored how this road freight will move through Newcastle (other than to specify that 60% of the cargo will travel to and from Sydney).

Will the freight traffic use the F3 freeway to Beresfield and the already busy New England highway and Industrial Drive? Or the shorter route down the Link Road and through the suburbs from Wallsend to Sandgate and then to Industrial Drive?

Either way, Industrial Drive will become grid locked under the Port Corporation’s proposal.

And there is nothing to stop the freight trucks travelling down our suburban roads through ‘rat-runs’. In fact the Port Corporation has not even looked at this possibility or made any commitment to fund the necessary Local Area Traffic Management controls to stop this from happening.

Once again Newcastle is being short-changed by State Government entities pushing development without providing the necessary infrastructure upfront to mitigate the impact on local residents.

When the Federal Government released its draft National Ports Strategy last year it recognised that local residents living near our ports would be impacted by future development unless investment in infrastructure occurred upfront.

One approach highlighted was the “early identification and land-use reservation of lands for major freight corridors”.

A regional freight rail bypass between Fassifern and Hexham and a freight hub in the vicinity of Beresfield has been on the drawing books for years. It was highlighted five years ago in the Lower Hunter Regional Strategy.

But the State Government has not dedicated the route, let alone invested in the infrastructure.

Removing freights trains from our residential areas would not only improve the way freight gets to and from our Port, but improve the amenity for all residents along the line from Fassifern to Islington and provide the opportunity for faster and better passenger services as well as bringing to an end the excessive delays at the Adamstown gates.

A dedicated rail freight line direct to the former BHP site is also required.

This Mayfield Portside rail line would connect from the Kooragang spur line at Sandgate to the former BHP site and onto the Carrington rail facilities.

This would allow most imports and exports to our Port to be by rail and remove the significant impact that the Port Corporation’s current proposal would have on local residents.

Most of the freight (including all the coal to the Carrington terminal) would use this new Mayfield Portside rail line. This would significantly reduce freight movements past all our suburbs from Warabrook to Tighes Hill and improve their amenity.

Our local residents are impacted already by the operations at the Port, and they deserve better.

The Port Corporation has been sending millions of dollars each year to Sydney. Now it’s time for the State Government to invest upfront in this necessary infrastructure before any further development is approved.

Newcastle council pushes portside rail link

From The Herald...

BY BEN SMEE

INDUSTRIAL Drive would be choked by traffic if a container terminal was approved at the former BHP site without new road and rail infrastructure, Newcastle councillor Michael Osborne said last night.

The council unanimously supported a notice of motion by Cr Osborne, which called for the establishment of a portside rail link from Sandgate junction to the BHP site.

The motion also called on the state government to release its masterplan for the port of Newcastle.

Cr Osborne told the council meeting that a council submission on the proposed container terminal had said that "Industrial Highway would fail" because of the extra traffic.

"We're calling for infrastructure to be put in up-front for a problem that we know is going to happen," Cr Osborne said. "What needs to happen is they need to look at the port as a whole.

"I think it's a dumb idea for this city that we have this skew towards coal when we could be doing a whole lot of other things with our port and diversifying it."

Cr Aaron Buman said many concerns about traffic were unfounded because he did not believe the proposed contained terminal would be needed for 20 to 25 years.

Cr Buman said he had never seen "propaganda" like the brochures distributed in Mayfield before the March state election, which warned of thousands of daily truck movements through the suburb.

"I'd stand on my grandmother's grave to say there would be no traffic through suburban streets of Mayfield," Cr Buman said.

Councillors also backed a push for a duplication of the Tourle Street bridge and road upgrades on Kooragang Island.

"The Tourle Street duplication needs to happen before the port on Kooragang Island develops," Cr Osborne said.

Lord mayor John Tate labelled the Tourle Street bridge "an abomination".

The motion also calls for dust monitoring in suburbs around the port.

Newcastle Port Redevelopment

The following motion was adopted by Council tonight.

NOTICE OF MOTION: NEWCASTLE PORT REDEVELOPMENT
COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE
MOTION
1. That Newcastle Council:

(i) Calls on the State Government to work with the Federal Government to build a Mayfield portside rail line from the Sandgate junction to service the former BHP site before any proposed redevelopment occurs.

(ii) Calls on the State Government to work with the Federal Government to build the Tourle St Bridge and Kooragang road network duplication to service Kooragang Island, Stockton and Newcastle Airport.

(iii) Calls on the State Government to release to the public its Master Port Plan and to expedite an Integrated Port Planning Strategy for the port that would include proper consideration of the cumulative impacts of all the proposed port redevelopment on nearby residents, strategies to reduce this impact and proper consultation with residents.

(iv) Calls on the State Government to install dust monitoring equipment to measure fine particulates in all suburbs in the Newcastle area that surround the Port and to make this monitoring data available to the Newcastle community.

2. That Newcastle Council write to all relevant State and Federal MPs to enlist their support for these proposals.

3. That Newcastle Council reiterates its support for the Newcastle freight bypass rail line to improve the efficiency of freight movements on the rail network and to improve passenger train movements in the Newcastle area. The Newcastle freight bypass rail line would stop the excessive delays at the Adamstown gates for example.

4. That Newcastle Council invites the Newcastle Port Corporation, the Port Waratah Coal Service, Buildev and the Tinkler Hunter Ports group to address Council on their proposed plans for the redevelopment of the Newcastle Port.

BACKGROUND

Newcastle Port Corporation has developed a Concept Plan for the proposed redevelopment of a 90-hectare portside portion of the former BHP Steelworks site which includes seven new wharfs to support several cargo precincts. These precincts include:

• Bulk and General Precinct capable of handling non hazardous dry bulk products including grain, briquettes, and coke cargoes.

• General Purpose Precinct a flexible facility to handle and store cargo containers, heavy machinery, Roll On Roll Off and break bulk cargo.

• Container Terminal Precinct with a trade volume of 1 million twenty foot equivalent units per annum at final development.

• Bulk Liquid Precinct used for storage, blending and distribution of high quality fuels and biofuels.

Newcastle Port Corporation is predicting a significant amount of these exports will be arriving through Newcastle to the Port by road (see Attachment 1). Newcastle Port Corporation have predicted, that when the precincts are fully developed, each year 800,000 containers, 1,010 million litres of fuel and 3.1 million tonnes of other products will be transported through Newcastle by road

A significant amount of this material (including all the containers) would be kept off the roads if the State Government invested in a rail line on the Mayfield side of the Hunter River South Arm.

Buildev is developing plans for the other 60-hectare portion of the former BHP site, known as the Intertrade Industrial Park. The proposed developments for this site have not been released yet.

This Mayfield Portside rail line would connect from the Kooragang spur line at Sandgate to the former BHP site and onto the Carrington Coal terminal rail facilities, the grain terminal and the general wharf freight lines in the area (see Attachment 2).

The exact route would need to be determined by detailed investigation but it is important to note that much of the required corridor is currently vacant.

Most of the freight (including all the coal to the Carrington terminal) would use the new Mayfield Portside rail line. This would significantly reduce freight movements (including coal) past Warabrook, Mayfield, Waratah, Georgetown, Islington and Tighes Hill and allow for the revitalisation of these suburbs.

This rail line would also provide options for Steel River businesses and other commercial operators like One Steel and Koppers.

This proposal would mesh perfectly with the proposed freight rail bypass for the Region and the proposed rail freight hub in the vicinity of Beresfield.

Council should reiterate its support for the Newcastle freight bypass rail line because it will improve passenger train movements in the Newcastle area and stop the excessive delays at the Adamstown gates for example.

ATTACHMENT 1: NEWCASTLE PORT CORPORATION’S PROPOSED OPERATIONS HIGHLIGHTING SIGNIFICANT ROAD FREIGHT MOVEMENTS


ATTACHMENT 2: POSSIBLE ROUTE OF THE MAYFIELD PORTSIDE RAIL LINE

Show us port masterplan: councillor

From The Herald...

BY BEN SMEE CIVIC REPORTER

GREENS councillor Michael Osborne is calling for the release of a state government masterplan for the port of Newcastle as part of a push to establish a freight rail link to the former BHP site.

Cr Osborne has tabled a notice of motion for tonight’s Newcastle City Council meeting, calling on the state and federal governments to link the BHP site to Sandgate junction by rail before any proposed redevelopment occurs.

The contents of the masterplan, which is expected to be placed on public exhibition later this year, have been a tightly kept secret.

Cr Osborne said a comprehensive planning strategy would be needed to help guide the development of the BHP site, Steel River, the proposed terminal 4 coal-loader, and other sites.

The Newcastle Port Corporation has concept plans for a container terminal at the former BHP steelworks site, while Nathan Tinkler-backed developer Buildev has flagged an application for a coal-loader there.

Cr Osborne said the plans also required a rail link.

"Newcastle Port Corporation have predicted that when the precincts are fully developed, each year 800,000 containers, 1010million litres of fuel and 3.1million tonnes of other products will be transported through Newcastle by road," Cr Osborne said.

"They need to put in infrastructure up front."

Cr Osborne’s said the portside rail plan would mesh perfectly with a proposed freight rail bypass, and a freight hub planned at Beresfield.

His motion also calls on the state government to duplicate the Tourle Street Bridge and to monitor dust in suburbs surrounding the port.

Cr Osborne also wants to invite the Newcastle Port Corporation, Port Waratah Coal Services and Buildev to address the council about their port plans.

A spokesman for Ports Minister Duncan Gay had not responded to requests for comment about the masterplan or the rail plan by the close of business yesterday.