News 
 Opinion 
 Editorial 
 General 
 Central Coast and Tillegra 

Central Coast and Tillegra

23 Dec, 2008 08:18 AM
IT is beyond doubt that water supply authorities on the Central Coast wanted Tillegra Dam to be built.

The coast's WaterPlan 2050, its blueprint for long-term water security, lists the dam as the first among a range of options to drought-proof the region.

By unexpectedly announcing the dam in November 2006, when the coast's drought was dire and reserves were under 15 per cent, the NSW Government was giving the Central Coast what it wanted and playing good politics in the lead-up to an election.

For some months the Hunter had been piping large amounts of water to the coast but there were limits to what it could supply. Tillegra, previously considered a future option if Hunter water demand grew vigorously, promised to remove those limits, drought-proofing both regions for many, many decades.

Now, however, the Central Coast has changed its mind.

Gosford Mayor Chris Holstein has conceded that Tillegra was the coast's preferred option, but this changed in May 2007 when the Federal Government also in election mode unexpectedly promised $80 million to build a pipeline from the Wyong River to the Central Coast's Mangrove Creek Dam.

The pipeline made Tillegra redundant from the coast's point of view, especially since coast users would have been paying top dollar for Tillegra water.

Having trumpeted the Central Coast benefits when it announced the dam, the State Government is now shrugging off the Central Coast's change of heart, promising the marginal seat voters that they won't have to pay a penny towards Tillegra.

Not only that, the Government's decision to exempt property developers from contributing to the dam's cost through levies means Hunter Water's budget for the project is up in the air.

The only option left to finance Tillegra is to crank up the water bills of existing Hunter Water customers who are already facing a massive increase in bills over the next four years.

This hardly seems fair. At the time the dam was announced it was clear that the Central Coast was intended to be a beneficiary. If the coast hadn't been in drought it is debatable whether the announcement would have occurred.

The Government helped make this mess and it should not leave Hunter residents to clean up on their own.

Danger on the roads

MOTORISTS be warned: the roads are busy, many drivers are impatient and the Hunter's highway patrol officers are out in force. Driving during the holiday season is going to require unusual patience and the consequences for those who can't muster some could be serious. The region's police are striving to keep the road toll as low as possible using all the methods at their disposal, including double demerit penalties. Young drivers, in particular, should use extra caution. Statistics demonstrate they are at greater risk of accident than more experienced motorists, with 26 teenagers dying on the region's roads over the past three years. That's a dreadful tally that should not be allowed to grow.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Your editorial is on the right track here but only partly. The State Government needed to remove the Orkopoulos affair off the front page. The then Chief of Staff to Milton Orkopoulos left the sinking ship in early August 2006 and suddenly appeared in the Premiers office as a staffer. He and senior Government Ministers at the time, along with the Premier were aware of the impending damage Orkopoulos was about to wreck on the Government and something had to be done. Hunter Water along with many other Govt departments were asked for an urgent "good news " story in 5 points or less form. Drought was on the lips of everyone except those in the Hunter where residents still hosed down the drive, washed their cars and boats and life was pretty good compared with to Sydney and Central Coast reisdents who were on Level 3 and 4 water restrictions. So why not announce a major dam to pacify the electorate. It also meant that it was the next step in Govt corporatisation of the whole water grid from the Shoalhaven in the south to the Hunter in the north. Legislation had already been approved for the purchase of the Central Coast Water Authority and all it needed was a bit of pressure from the local sittting members to endorse the idea. But 6 months later in the light of the up coming federal election the water supply issue became a federal issue. Howard offerred to fund 50% to start, Rudd countered by offerring the same if elected , and Howard topped it all by approving the total funding of the "missing link" pipeline in the next financial year budget. ie July 2008. This spiked the guns of the State Govt grab for a total water grid and immediately removed Tillegra from the equation. But someone forgot to tell Hunter Water. Meanwhile I believe they continued to force land holders in the affected inundation area to sell to Hunter Water. This was contrary to the agreement reached at the Hunter Water Consultative Forum of March 2003 where Hunter Water stated they would only purchase land in the inundation area of the Williams Valley if nobody else purchased it first. Sounds convoluted, but that is what happened. And now the people and their children's children of the Hunter will have to pay for this political power play for at least the next 75 years. So who are the suckers in this monumental case of political mismanagement?
Posted by Silvertail, 3/01/2009 9:49:30 AM

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




Newcastle Herald







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...