Despite a show of support by the Illawarra Knitting Nannas Against Greed (IKNAG) and two speakers with coal mining expertise, a motion that Wollongong City Council oppose Peabody’s plans to mine under the water catchment failed to win through at Monday night’s meeting.

Retired coal miner Darryl Best spoke at last night’s meeting in support of Greens Councillor Deidre Stuart’s motion that council object to an extension to Helensburgh’s Metropolitan coal mine via modifications to longwalls 317 and 318, citing the dangers of subsidence, gas escaping through cracks and damage to upland swamps.

“We should never, ever mine under a major city’s water catchment area – that just should never happen,” said Mr Best, whose roles have included production manager and longwall superintendent.

“All mines cause subsidence to the surface that they mine under. I know what happens when you mine under all these areas. There's cracks, there's creeks disappear, there's swamps disappear, the ground subsides, rock platforms fall down. I’ve worked in a coal mine where the actual mountain disappeared.”

He said Metropolitan’s current longwalls will be finished by “2029 or 2030” and – with the Illawarra recently declared an urban renewable energy zone – now is the time to upskill and retrain workers. “Peabody are using job losses as an excuse for this being continued. That's just a reckless reason to destroy the environment.”

‘Time for change’

Ann Brown spoke next, introducing herself to councillors as a local of 28 years, with a science background, who has spent 10 years on the Community Consultative Committee for the Wongawilli underground coal mine.

“Coal miners are a brave bunch of people and very skilled, and I respect them, and I appreciate the industry and the prosperity which their work has brought to our region,” Ms Brown said. “But many people in our community now believe it's time for change, to wind down the coal mining, slowly, but not to permit new expansions, which is what this is. The Woronora reservoir supplies drinking water to the northern Illawarra. So this proposal is particularly relevant for Ward One Councillors. It's hard to believe our state government is actually permitted destructive longwall mining, actually underneath the Woronora reservoir, beneath the upland swamps and beneath the rivers and streams which feed the reservoir.”

“Council needs to strongly object to this expansion into new areas.”

Ms Brown ended her speech by saying: “There’s no way that you the councillors can be expected… to be experts in this complex field, but I believe it's very important to use independent experts for these planning decisions, which are vital to our future. This proposal should go to the Independent Planning Commission … our reservoirs are full right now, but we live on the driest continent on earth – will our descendants have the water they need to live?”

Double submissions trouble

Cr Stuart’s motion was the final agenda item in a meeting that ran for more than two hours and had already included a testing debate over a motion to fly Palestine’s flag.

The Ward 3 councillor began by explaining she had recently received an email from staff saying that council had already provided a submission on August 18. She described it as an “excellent” submission.

Asked for details, General Manager Greg Doyle said: “There's elements that we believe the assessment agency needs to look at in greater detail. I think it's important to just to clarify that it wasn't an assessment, and in no way was the advice that we provided detailed.”

Cr Stuart then put forward a motion, saying: “I want to move that council objects and also asks for a referral to the IPC [Independent Planning Commission] for a public meeting and subsequent determination.

“This is a controversial project because of the proponent, Peabody, and also because of the coal mine’s record of damage and destruction.”

Fellow Greens Councillor Jess Whittaker said: “The idea of punching yet another massive hole deep into the ground to connect the coal seam with our atmosphere is actually sickening.”

'Personal' submissions proposed

However, Labor’s David Brown proposed a variation: “That councillors consider making individual, personal submissions to the mine proposal, noting the receipt of the Council’s staff submission in your hands.”

A debate between Labor and Greens councillors followed, with Cr Brown raising the “perils inherent with interfering professional decisions of our planning staff”.

The Greens’ Kit Docker said: “It's not simply an abstract planning matter. It does pose a direct risk to the drinking water of people in the north of our city.”

Labor’s Ann Martin read out a response from local minister Paul Scully, the Member for Wollongong and NSW Planning Minister, explaining that the department will consider the modifications and greenhouse gas emissions against the Commonwealth and NSW policy framework.

“It is not our role to make an objection,” Cr Martin said.

“It's up to the state government as the determining authority to make the appropriate decision.”

Cr Martin was concerned about council leapfrogging into the process of determination. “My key issues are: we are not a determining body … We have no role. It ain't our gig to go leapfrogging or to even pretend to have a role. And there is no way in hell, Hades or whatever that we can say that this council does not care about our water catchment.”

Cr Hayes accused the Greens of “cheap politicking” and criticised what he saw as Cr Stuart’s attempt to summarise council staff’s “measured approach” into whether their submission was “supportive or not”.

“It's more complex again than that," he said, "and we should recognise that this is the environmental version of what the anti-vax 'do your own research' cooker crowd does, where they cherry-pick information, make tenuous if not completely absurd links, and then demand everyone supports the conclusion that they reached prior to the process." 

Cr Hayes described the motion as "a real slap into the face" for the public servants who “should be the ones who evaluate this submission clearly and objectively”.

Cr Stuart said she had not intended to replace staff’s submission, rather to put in a second submission.

In the end, Cr Brown’s foreshadowed motion was carried, with only the three Greens councillors voting against it.

Next steps

This morning, Cr Stuart explained the confusion over the staff submission and her submission arose as she had not realised that Council staff had a different deadline to the public cut-off for submissions – which is today.

“I must admit that I thought a submission from council would come to Council,” she said. “So I was surprised that councillors weren’t kept in the loop, though I also guess that SSD [State significant development] proposals requiring comment must come across staff’s desks all the time – and councillors do not get to see them all.  Obviously, I was interested even though I am a Councillor.”

With submissions closing this afternoon, Cr Stuart now plans to talk to the community about council’s role in future consultation.

“My next steps – I want to confer with people in our community.  What is council’s role and what are council’s responsibilities in the context of WaterNSW and coal mining activities and proposals in the water catchment special areas in our LGA?”