Airport environment study flawed, insists WSROC

The president of the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) has told the federal government that the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Western Sydney Airport fails to meet the government’s own guidelines for the project.

Cr Tony Hadchiti, who is on Liverpool Council, expressed the concerns of WSROC in a letter to the three ministers involved in the project, Warren Truss (infrastructure), Paul Fletcher (major projects) and Greg Hunt (environment).

“These guidelines were developed specifically for the Western Sydney Airport less than a year ago and the government has scrapped them at the first check point. This is both unacceptable and irresponsible,” Cr Hadchiti said.

“WSROC conditionally supports the government’s plan to build an airport at Badgerys Creek, it offers unparalleled opportunities for our residents and the NSW economy, but we need to get this right. We can’t afford to cut corners,” he said.

“WSROC supports the objectives set out in the guidelines as these reflect a rigorous and comprehensive process of investigation and consultation. There is such a divergence between the guidelines and the Draft EIS that the integrity of the process is now called into question,” Cr Hadchiti said.

The EIS guidelines put out by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development in January 2015 state that a draft EIS for the Western Sydney Airport should include discussion and modelling of aircraft noise impacts including consideration of all potential flight paths in the short, mid and long term.

[social_quote duplicate=”no” align=”default”]“If the EIS was conducted according to the government’s own guidelines it would look into different options for flight paths and conduct modelling to determine which of these options work best,” the WSROC president said.[/social_quote]

“Not only does the Draft EIS not discuss why the presented flight paths were chosen, it does not suggest whether any alternatives were considered,” he said.

“Contrary to the guidelines’ advice, that requires assessment of specific intentions, the flight paths presented are only ‘proof of concept’. Meaning a full assessment of the impacts on the community and natural environment cannot be completed,” he said.

“This uncertainty doesn’t just affect western Sydney residents. An entire reconfiguration of flight paths in the Sydney basin is likely once a proper airspace management plan is developed. A reconfiguration of flight paths at Kingsford Smith will be needed within five years of Western Sydney Airport opening,” he said.

“An independent review into the Draft EIS has already found the document to be lacking in several areas, but if the government can’t meet its own basic guidelines what is the point of conducting an EIS at all?” Cr Hadchiti said.

“The guidelines ask for transparency, however requests by the independent review team for access to the data and modelling used in the EIS were denied.

“The guidelines also state the need to fully address environmental impacts; including an outline for the performance criteria to be met as well as the monitoring and reporting responsibility for each issue. The mitigation measures themselves have not been described in detail, let alone how they will be carried out and by whom,” Cr Hadchiti said.

“It is obvious that this has been a rush job and claims from the Minister Truss’s spokesperson that the Draft EIS “did not cut corners and met all legislative requirements” does not cut it,” he said.

“The government itself saw a need to have the guidelines developed to guide the EIS, so just use them and in doing so earn the trust of the affected communities,” Cr Hadchiti said.