The Hon. Dr A. CHESTERFIELD-EVANS [7.55 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House the decision of the Roads and Traffic Authority [RTA] to combine three stacks into one in Turrella Valley. It is most unfortunate that Sydney has a poor road network and relies heavily on road transport. Successive governments have neglected to develop rail transport since 1930, apart from small sections. The entire western Sydney area is without a proper rail service, and because of the western Sydney orbital, rail services have not been developed. That has resulted in urban sprawl, despite considerable traffic congestion and pollution.

New technology is available from overseas to build tunnels, but instead of rail tunnels, road tunnels are being built. Although that is a mistake, perhaps small tunnels can be justified. The RTA built the Anzac Bridge, a massive tribute to overengineering, when all that was needed was a couple of extra lanes across the waterway that has little boat traffic and vacant wharves on either side. State Rail has not given any consideration to extending its rail facilities. The RTA loves building roads and dominating the planning process. As a result, the whole city has been inappropriately planned.

When the decision was made to build the M5 East tunnel, the original plan was for multiple emission stacks. An environmental impact statement [EIS] was prepared on the suitability of various sites. A site at Turrella, very close to the present site, was proposed for a 1.5 kilometre extension to the tunnel but it was deemed unsuitable and the least preferred option. Because of public outcry at the suggestion to build three stacks on the ridge of Bardwell Park, the Government, which was concerned about losing votes, without any further environmental impact statements, decided to take the path of least resistance. It decided to combine all stacks into one and place a single giant stack on the floor of the valley where it believed the loss of votes would not hurt it: at the boundary of three electorates. That decision was a cynical, political exercise.

To say that the stack will be placed in an industrial area is quite misleading. It will be in a street that has six very clean businesses backing onto the bank of Wolli Creek, which is a small river. Now that the land has been cleared there is a lovely view of the river, but poor planning is damaging a wonderful resource. It would be more accurate to say that the stack will be built on the banks of a river at the entrance to a regional park than in an industrial area. One of the factories in this area, the Australia Post mail exchange, will close in October, and I am advised that medium-density housing will be built on the site - within 50 metres of the stack. Opposite the proposed stack is the railway, and on the corner is the old Street’s Ice Cream factory, which closed two years ago. Again, medium-density housing is planned for that site.

The site will be used not for more factories but for medium-density housing. The new railway line will also service this area, and that will encourage population growth. On one side of the stack is the Wolli Creek Regional Park, which is being developed into a wonderful resource. It should extend further. However, less than 500 metres from the proposed stack is an urban infill area, which is to be named North Arncliffe. That area could be considered to be the entrance to the valley. At present the land use of that area is predominantly industrial but the rezoning will allow for further residential development. A $60-million plan has been submitted, which includes 22 buildings of at least 10 storeys. The buildings may affect the wind entering and leaving the valley and will trap pollution. The development will attract an additional 5,000 people into the valley, and those people will be directly affected by pollution from the stack.

No studies have been undertaken of the impact these buildings will have on dispersion from the stack. To say that the single stack is located in an industrial area and will have little effect on people’s health is entirely misleading. Indeed, it is environmental criminal vandalism. The Premier must take control of this situation and demand proper environmental impact studies and a whole-of-government approach to this poor planning decision by the Roads and Traffic Authority. It is not too late to implement more sensible planning and treatment systems, but action must be taken now before the M5 East claims more taxpayer dollars to undo the damage that is likely to be caused by this hasty and politically driven planning mistake.