News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Secret memo on Tillegra Dam revealed 

Secret memo on Tillegra Dam revealed

02 Jul, 2009 05:00 AM
THIS is the secret memo that Greens MP John Kaye says goes to the heart of the Tillegra Dam debate.

The State Government caved in yesterday to mounting pressure to release the previously privileged memo written six weeks before the controversial project was announced in November 2006.

Among those urging the document's release was retired judge Sir Laurence Street, who ruled that it was in the public interest to release it.

A further 28 documents relating to the Tillegra project are still classified as privileged.

Hunter Water managing director Kevin Young wrote the nine-page memo on September 28, 2006, in response to a request from the then water minister David Campbell's office for information about major water resource and recycling projects under consideration in the Hunter.

It lists Tillegra Dam as being among four projects "worthy of consideration".

The document shows that at the time the Tillegra project had "not been robustly quantified, but is likely to be in the order of $250 million".

The latest state budget papers show the dam's cost at $477 million. The figure does not include $71 million that will be recouped from the sale of surplus land once the dam is built.

Significantly, the memo also highlights the dam as an attractive option to supply water to the Central Coast.

The project was officially announced on November 13, less than a week after former Aboriginal affairs minister Milton Orkopoulos was charged with a raft of child sex and drug offences.

Dr Kaye said yesterday the document proved Tillegra Dam was a politically motivated project which lacked proper planning.

"There is a remarkable and damning absence of a planning document, study or other analysis indicating the superiority of Tillegra in any of the bundles produced under the call for papers," he said.

"No preference is identified for Tillegra. In fact, only one, bigger pump at Balickera Pumping Station, is under 'active' consideration."

The Government has denied the dam was rushed to counter the Orkopoulos scandal.

Mr Young said planning for the dam, which was first considered in the 1950s, began in earnest after a review in 2004 of the likely impact of climate change.

"The memo needs to be taken in the context of the work that preceded it and all the work that came after it," Mr Young said.

"We did a major strategy session in May 2005 looking at the options and pointed out that Tillegra was the best solution."

In closing the memo, Mr Young suggested holding off any announcement of individual projects until federal funding was available or there was a "broader vision" produced on drought security across regions.

Mr Young said yesterday that the paragraph was designed to maximise the opportunity to attract federal funds.

"That [federal funding] was not available," he said.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
I know this is the Orkopolous Dam, nothing more. Labor will do and say anything to cover up their scandals.
Posted by Jim, 2/07/2009 6:41:14 AM
Good work on the Green's behalf. I have always thought that this Labor Government was corrupt and may in fact know more about the Orkopolous Affair than it has let onto. As for the dam issue we all know whay is going on with it considering the amount of water rationning that has happened in the lower Hunter Valley during the last drought.
Posted by Martin C, 2/07/2009 8:10:59 AM
What did I say? "You cannot build a safe dam for this ($250m) budget" - Stateline 2008. Hunter Water's denials throughout this sorry saga are now exposed for what they are. The lesson to be learned? Stand up for the public interest if there is ever a next time.
Posted by Graham, 2/07/2009 8:28:09 AM
Cracks are beginning to appear in the dam. Is this just "doing a Godwin", or the tip of the iceberg?
Posted by beverley, 2/07/2009 8:35:55 AM
If we need a dam the size of Sydney Harbour to meet the needs of 150,000 people where is the sewage treatment plant to match this discharge? What was the very sizable recycling project?
Posted by Bigfeller, 2/07/2009 9:11:07 AM
QUOTE: "The Government has denied the dam was rushed to counter the Orkopoulos scandal." END QUOTE My answer: Picture of pigs flying! If and when a dam is needed, it should be for the H.u.n.t.e.r region, NOT Sydney and of the Central Coast.
Posted by Newcastle Flyer, 2/07/2009 9:38:04 AM
Who can you trust? This has been the call from the beginning. It was a rushed announcement based on back of envelope figures without basis. Hunter Water and this Govt tried to hide behind misleading information, but got caught. It now faces an even more hostile public who do not want Tillegra dam. The cost has blown out. Why should the people of the Hunter not feel aggreived?
Posted by Silvertail, 2/07/2009 9:38:12 AM
Making the prediction of 160,000 new residents "somewhere" in the hunter "maybe" in the next 20 years is a far fetched justification of building this dam. NSW Labor is just trying make us think they are planning again and doing something for the Hunter, when the complete reverse is the truth. This was done for their votes on the Central Coast, and to keep votes and community sense of safety in Sydney regarding water - but yet again - The Hunter will be the ones HANDING OUT THE CASH TO FUND IT!
Posted by Bondy, 2/07/2009 10:03:17 AM
In view of the recent revelations regarding Tillegra Dam may I suggest that "Caring for the Community" is an inappropriate slogan for Hunter Water.
Posted by Dorothy, 2/07/2009 10:27:04 AM
This ''secret memo'' is no surprise. It proves that the Government has lacked transparency on the Tillegra Dam decision all along, and it proves it was a knee jerk decision aimed at deflecting attention from a political scandal. So now we know that within only 3 months of the memo being written that the Government had enough insight into all the issues that go with building this unnecessary piece of infrastructure. Their track record proves that this is far from the truth. At the time of the announcement the dam was estimated to cost $250m, current estimates are $477m. So much for insight. The Government must re-think this decision! How about spending the $477m++on much needed infrastructure such as hospitals, rail, road (our roads are a disgrace, particularly west of Newcastle) and schools. This proposed Dam decision must be reviewed, their are better wiser ways to secure water for our region. Remember we will be paying for this folly for a long time.
Posted by The Voter, 2/07/2009 10:31:12 AM
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles

 
Scholarships
 
Klosters Golf GTI
 
Travelworld_See the World
 
Rovert
 
School Newspaper Competition
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...