The Noosa Council General Committee meeting of Monday 14 January, 2019
Prequel
Trevor Clarey and I were having a chat in the foyer with our backs to the entrance when unbeknown to me Dr Michael Gloster patted my back before shaking my hand and wishing me a happy new year before reaching out to Trevor, who rebuffed him. (The Doctor and I have had several skirmishes – usually he refuses to talk to me and walks the other way.) There was an argument between Clarey and Gloster before the Doctor marched down the corridor to talk to his mates. He then sat to one side of the public gallery from where he smirked a lot.
The Noosa River Oyster Reef (‘Bring Back the Fish’) Restoration Project
The Thomas philanthropic foundation is being disbanded and has gifted a final $1.2 million to The Nature Conservancy to be specifically used for this project provided it was matched by $1.2 million from council over the three year extension of an earlier project that’s been going for three years but has completed only one year’s work
‘Bring Back the Fish’ was an unusual title to choose for this originally NPA-inspired project as there are plenty of fish in the Noosa River. But maybe bringing back fish sounds more attractive than bring back oysters, which is what the program is really all about.
The first three years were beset with delays and the University of the Sunshine Coast scientists deployed to it were not able to do much (or anything) by way of evaluating its effectiveness. But it didn’t matter because somewhere in the murky antecedents to the deal to be debated tonight it seemed to have been decided the university’s services would no longer be required. My campus sources tell me this decision was received with great irritation if not anger.
Cr Joe Jurisevic then let fly with a curve ball and had it confirmed that the new project proposal to be discussed had not undertaken consultation with the Queensland state government, which ‘owns’ the river. Nothing to see there apparently, as The Nature Conservancy has promised to sort out the permits that are required. Then Cr Ingrid Jackson mused about the project’s future costs not being clear, which I felt was a very good point. It’s fine to shell out a lazy million bucks on a sparkling project title, but what will it all cost down the track?
The Director responsible said the money would only be for oyster reefs and that The Nature Conservancy would appoint a project manager but didn’t expect there’d be other costs. Cr Jackson persevered and asked if there would be costs to the budget above the $1.2 million. The director responded with a ‘have cake and eat it too’ answer that there would need to be further consideration but major costs were quarantined.
As Cr Jackson continued to ask a string of searching questions eliciting various responses which added little to the sum of human knowledge except one staff member saying the (nearly extinct) Thomas Foundation was the key to the proposed project while the university, the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation and Noosa Parks Association had no role. Strange, no?
As the questions rolled down, it became plain that not a lot was known (or not able to be said) about this project. Cr Frank Wilkie said he thought the biosphere foundation (of which he’s a board member) had spent $283,000. A director said she thought the newly proposed project was at Phases 2 and 3 – which sounded odd as Phase 1 hadn’t been completed. In response to another question by Cr Jackson, a staff member admitted he did not know whether there had been involvement of residents and stakeholders as promised in Phase 1 and took the question on notice. This was relevant because the new proposal also promises resident and stakeholder involvement.
Cr Jurisevic said he understood Cr Jackson’s point that the program had only been monitored for one year and wondered why the Council was rushing into the next stage before this one was over. A director intervened, saying this was an excellent opportunity from The Nature Conservancy and Thomas Foundation. She added that early results were promising and anyway the Council thinks it’s a good policy.
Cr Brian Stockwell then moved a slightly amended motion to include this project in the unfinished Noosa River Plan and launched into a PowerPoint presentation showing timelines from a history book and saying declining water quality was a factor in the project. He went on and on until Cr Jackson questioned the length of his presentation.
Mayor Wellington said he supports the project because oysters purify water and encourage more fish. Furthermore The Nature Conservancy was “an excellent NGO” and “would provide a global experience”. This, like many other previous unplanned expenditures from the Council was “an excellent opportunity”. Cr Frank Pardon endorsed the Mayor and Cr Stockwell’s comments and said this was, wait for it “an excellent opportunity”, admitting “there is some risk but we have to implement”.
Cr Jackson, who had asked many questions but was speaking for the first time in the debate, said The Nature Conservancy is reputable but “we have to look after ratepayers money and need more consultation”. She said not only had Cr Stockwell’s amendment not been part of the public consultation of the draft Noosa River Plan but there were other important projects for the Council to consider. Furthermore, she argued, the one year trial was inadequate – it was in fact one year of an approved three year trial. She pointed out that a staff report showed what had been done so far did not have conclusive results. There was a need for more monitoring.
I looked at the Doctor. The smirk had disappeared completely from his face, he was furious. Cr Jackson continued that there was no evidence to support the project (now the Doctor was really cranky – he also didn’t like me watching him). There were no detailed results about river fish studies. The need for this project was not yet proven. The $1.2 million could be better spent on more worthwhile projects, she said, and furthermore this project will inevitably accrue additional costs.
She mentioned a number of pressing projects that would demand substantial future funds – stormwater drainage, and spit erosion and the TAFE site. In a formidable analysis of the Council’s failures to look at this project critically, Cr Jackson said the Council was moving to an ad hoc decision without any thorough assessment. She concluded by saying there was no assessment to justify this project as a priority and she would not support the motion, asking for a division so her vote would be recorded.
Mayor Wellington then asked a staffer what seemed like a rehearsed question – would the offer of $1.2 million from the Thomas Foundation via The Nature Conservancy lapse if the Council did not take it up forthwith. Oh yes, the staffer dutifully answered, there is urgency – the Thomas Foundation is shutting down. Never heard of holding funds in trust apparently.
Cr Jurisevic said he understood Cr Jackson’s concerns but the trials were successful (he had just heard they had not been evaluated). The oysters have diminished. We have to respect local tribal elders and fishing families, we need to maintain sustainable fishing, we need to conserve fish stocks. The reefs should succeed. Cr Jurisevic supported Cr Jackson’s argument about priorities but (wait for it, it’s good), $1.2 million is not a lot of money. (If I may interpose, this is only the beginning of many years of spending.) Cr Jurisevic had an answer to this: If needs be the Council can always access more money. I wondered where this magic pudding was hidden.
Cr Wilkie spoke. He had taken umbrage to this ad hoc project being called an ad hoc project and claimed, without evidence, that the University of the Sunshine Coast thought the pilot scheme would be a success. He said spending on this project should not be compared with capital works. It’s a long term project which the Environment Levy can support. (This Council has given its Environmental Levy a real flogging in the last 12 months.) Cr Wilkie then took flight – young people support these schemes, there is risk but it can be managed, a healthy river should be everyone’s goal. I sat back in my chair. The river IS healthy. What is wrong with these people?
The motion which Councillor Stockwell had moved was then put to the vote and passed 6-1 (Cr Jackson voting against).
After this drama, the other items on the agenda seemed very routine. The December financial report was again meekly debated without any media present (they always leave well before this point of the meeting is reached). And there was no reflection on the report’s details, particularly concerning the re-arranged capital works budget. Ah, one day my desires for financial discipline and full disclosure will be satisfied.
Epilogue
When the meeting was over, Cr Pardon came over and had a brief chat – ‘keep it up, keep the bastards honest,’ he said. Hmmm. The Doctor watched on, waiting for me to leave before he joined his mates – no doubt to say well done comrades, hold the line, leave it to me, salvation will come your way etc.
