Land Clearing

2 April 2004

Serious conflict of interest emerges over Glyde Point development

Parliamentary inquiry needed

The Environment Centre of the Northern Territory, the Australian Marine Conservation Society and the Save Darwin Harbour Group today called for a Parliamentary inquiry into the environmental assessment process for the proposed massive new industrial estate at Glyde Point, 50 km north east of Darwin.

ECNT Coordinator Peter Robertson said the proposed 4,000 hectare development, including over 1,500 hectares of mangrove clearing and ocean reclamation, placed the government in a clear conflict of interest situation. "It is simply unacceptable that the proponent of the industrial estate (DIPE) is the same department that is now carrying out the environmental impact assessment of the project.

The Environment section of DIPE released the draft EIS guidelines for the Glyde Pt development two weeks ago for public comment. Public comment closes Monday.

Mr Robertson said the development was so environmentally damaging that only a completely independent and transparent assessment was acceptable. A Parliamentary inquiry would make recommendations on how such an assessment should be conducted.

"The environmental assessment should include an open exploration of the need for this development at this time, and whether there are other sites that would cause less environmental damage.

The assessment must also be empowered to provide a strategic report on the lack of integrated planning for the many gas-related development being promoted along the coast of the Northern Territory, and how this can be addressed."

AMCS spokesperson Adele Pedder said that an initial assessment had found that Glyde Point was of exceptional ecological and environmental significance, including:

Environment groups say they will not participate in the EIS process until the conflict of interest has been removed. They are planning a major public meeting to ensure the public is aware of the seriousness of the development and the flaws in the assessment process.

Further comment:
Peter Robertson 8981 1984
Adele Pedder 8941 7461
Duncan Dean 8931 2689

Back to top