Weekend Courier - - Opinion Clearly, It Is Time To Revise The Criteria -

TEN years ago, I as­sumed, like many peo­ple, that our en­vi­ron­men­tal pro­tec­tion laws ac­tu­ally did some­thing to pro­tect our en­vi­ron­ment. But not any­more! The Man­gles Bay canal ma­rina was granted en­vi­ron­men­tal ap­provals in 2014 de­spite ig­nor­ing the ex­is­tence of Rockingham's lit­tle pen­guins who for­age in Man­gles Bay.

Pen­guin re­searcher Dr Belinda Can­nell ap­pealed the de­ci­sion, but was again ig­nored.

And then when a project is granted en­vi­ron­men­tal ap­proval with 'con­di­tions', no in­de­pen­dent or ev­i­dence-based test is re­quired to demon­strate that the en­vi­ron­men­tal con­di­tions set by the fed­eral en­vi­ron­ment min­is­ter are com­plied with by the state.

If we stand by as a com­mu­nity and al­low the Man­gles Bay canal ma­rina to go ahead un­chal­lenged then we cre­ate a very dan­ger­ous prece­dent.

To do so would be to give the state gov­ern­ment a li­cence to dis­re­gard ev­ery en­vi­ron­men­tal pol­icy ever writ­ten, for what­ever pur­pose the gov­ern­ment chooses. DAWN JECKS, Safety Bay.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.