“Stop the clock” – slogan , electioneering or a real attempt to analyse the risks to water resources of the Chinese government mine (Shenhua Watermark) on the Liverpool Plains. 

The answer lies in the fine print of the water trigger referral that Minister Hunt has made to the Independent Expert Scientific Committee  (IESC) and the as yet unanswered questions.

The water trigger was passed by the Gillard government on June 22,  2013 in the last week of that parliament . 

It gave the Commonwealth government, under the Environmental Protection Biodiversity and Conservation Act (EPBC), power to assess and approve CSG and large coal mining developments where there was potential to impact on water resources. 

The Namoi catchment has the largest groundwater system in the Murray Darling catchment and hence is classified as a matter of national environmental significance. 

An indication of motive is revealed by the fact that the federal Coalition government has passed legislation in the House of Representatives to gut the water trigger of its real power by giving that power back to the states . That legislation is currently blocked in the Senate, particularly due to the work of Senator Dio Wang and former Namoi Water boss John Clements. 

If the trigger did not exist, the Shenhua mine would now be proceeding under NSW law.

There is a certain hypocrisy and irony in the statements of Hunt, Joyce and Kevin Anderson now lauding the trigger as the saviour of the Liverpool Plains and Kevin Anderson’s seat, when the same people want to devolve its powers back to the states , the source of the problem.

So exactly what does Minister Hunt’s “Stop the clock” statement mean?

In his own words, and those of Shenhua’s project manager Paul Jackson, he is asking the IESC to “review revised information over the past two years”. 

He refers to a revision of “previous advice under the EPBC act of April 2013”, inferring that there has been detailed work done already at the federal level. 

He conveniently overlooks the fact the  trigger didn’t exist until two months after that date. 

Hence, a review of April 2013 information is meaningless in terms of the trigger because it didn’t exist. 

Barnaby Joyce’s own words reinforced this argument when he said this is the first time the water trigger has been used in the Shenhua development.

So what will the review entail?

The minister and Mr Joyce need to answer some direct questions:

1 – Exactly what are they asking the IESC to review?

2 – Is the minister aware that the trigger requires the significance of an action to be considered with other developments, whether past, present or reasonably foreseeable?

Given that there are advance plans for a BHP mine of 500,000,000 tonnes less than 10 km from Shenhua, and a CSG licence for Santos to explore for gas across the floodplain, will these potential impacts be taken into account by the referral? No mention in the fine print.

3 – Will the IESC carry out the bioregional assessment of the impact of the proposed mine on the Namoi catchment as originally discussed, or will they be simply reviewing other peoples’ work rather than carrying out their own independent work? Or will this be window dressing until after the state election and in the words of Shenhua’s Paul Jackson “be done and dusted by April”? The state election is March 28 .

4 – Will the IESC engage with the Local Land Services over the potential cumulative impacts of extractive industries as proposed under the water trigger prior to the NSW government trashing the Namoi Catchment Management Authority ? Or is the minister asking for a desktop assessment of the hydrogeology and geology, even though all hydrogeological studies in the region (except Shenhua ) suggest there is vertical connectivity in aquifer structures and universally recommend that more work is required?

5 – As the trigger requires the mining proponent for reference,  does the minister have the referral document from Shenhua, or is the minister and the company relying on a two-year old referral that predates the trigger?

This debate is more important than someone’s political future.

It is about the future of our region!