Perrottet rejected suggestions the move to spur action on the project was politically motivated,despite the announcement coming six months out from an election most likely to be decided in western Sydney.
Stokes’ concerns over declaring the proposal as critical state significant infrastructure in September 2021 related to a section of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act,which prevents government agencies from issuing orders against environmental damage.
Opposition environment spokeswoman Penny Sharpe said she was also concerned that by fast-tracking the project,the government was rendering many important agencies powerless in protecting Sydney’s water supply.
“This declaration not only removes protection for Sydney’s water supply;once approved,it prevents any action from regulators to protect,preserve or stop damage to Aboriginal cultural heritage and threatened species in a World Heritage area,” she said.
Gundungurra community member Kazan Brown said she was angered by the state government’s decision,which would result in the destruction of hundreds of Aboriginal cultural sites.
“It will destroy it;there won’t be much left. There are campsites and burial grounds;there’s art,dream time stories. The government has just taken our voice again,” she said.
Gundungurra traditional owners Kazan Brown (right) and her daughter Taylor Clarke on land that would be inundated by the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.Credit:Wolter Peeters
“I’m very angry. Perrottet carries on about reconciliation and recognising past trauma;now he’s just doing the same.”
The state government has renewed its push to raise the dam wall following a year of destructive flooding across the Hawkesbury-Nepean region.
It recently wrote to the Commonwealth seeking a 50-50 funding arrangement for the $1.6 billion project,though it has received no definitive answer from Canberra.
Loading
Government modelling,based on housing development planned in the Hawkesbury-Nepean region up to 2041,suggests that,if the dam wall is not raised,8600 people would not be able to evacuate in the event of a “one in 100 chance per year flood”.
Perrottet insisted he did not want the dam wall project to result in irresponsible development downstream,but added it was important to feed Sydney’s housing demand.
“We also need to build homes so young people can get into the property market. It’s a balancing act. We can’t stop development,we need development,” he said.
Water Minister Kevin Anderson said the only viable solution for the dam was to raise its wall.
Loading
“The only way is up,build that wall,get it up by 14 metres and that’s what we plan to do and great to see that today,” Anderson said.
A document produced in June by an independent inquiry into the state’s recent flooding disasters warned that more than 160,000 people would require evacuation from the Hawkesbury-Nepean floodplain in the event of an extreme flood in 2041 if development was to go ahead as planned.
The document suggested that curbing development in the floodplain would help address flood mitigation.
Harry Burkitt from the Colong Foundation for Wilderness said the announcement did nothing to manage flood evacuation routes and hampered the ability of the community to object to the plan.
Loading
“Today’s announcement means only one thing. A community is no longer able to scrutinise the minister’s decision over this project in the courts,” he said.
Independent MP Justin Field said the state government’s decision was politically motivated.
“This decision strips the rights of the community to challenge a future decision in the courts and that is hugely concerning,” he said.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories,analysis and insights.Sign up here.