Page 2392 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 6 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am surprised at the suggestion that there is something unsafe about the current method of asbestos storage. The best advice that I have available, and, I presume, the advice available to the former Government, is that what is being done is perfectly adequate. Indeed, we go beyond Australian standards. In New South Wales asbestos is simply packaged in two layers of plastic; whereas in the ACT it is packaged in two layers of plastic and boxed, the crates are securely bound with wire, and it is then buried under at least three metres of topsoil. The standard in other parts of Australia is to put only two metres of soil on top. Asbestos is dangerous because of its loose, fibrous nature. That is why it is being taken out of ceilings. It is not like a chemical which can leach from a ruptured underground container into ground water supply. It is not like lead tailings which can enter the atmosphere and cause problems there. If asbestos is securely packaged and buried three metres underground, it is perfectly safe.
It is not correct to say that the asbestos tip at West Belconnen is going to be quarantined by 1,500 metres, whereas that is not happening at Gungahlin. If any development goes ahead in that area - it is a matter that is with my colleague Mr Wood - the proposals indicate a 1,500-metre quarantine zone around the ordinary landfill tip, and that is there principally because of nuisance and convenience. Tips tend to emit noxious odours, and bits of paper and plastic fly around. The 1,500-metre cordon is around the tip, and the hazardous waste site is within the tip. It is not because of the hazard of asbestos.
At Gungahlin the asbestos area is being planted as a park; nothing will ever be built on it. The Australian Survey Office is very accurately marking where the asbestos is buried. That will be marked on all the survey maps of the ACT well into the future. Nothing will ever be built there; no trenches will ever be dug. The asbestos will be entirely safe. This is a piece of alarmism, extraordinarily directed at the actions of the former Government.
If Mr Stefaniak had spoken to his one-time colleague in the Alliance Government Mr Duby, I am sure that Mr Duby would have assured him in much the same way as I do. I am not an engineer, and Mr Duby was not one. We rely on the advice of our engineers and environmental scientists. I am satisfied with that advice that what is going on in West Belconnen is appropriate and safe.
MR STEFANIAK: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. The problem with the Gungahlin tip, as you are no doubt aware, Mr Connolly, goes back through the periods of not only the Alliance Government and the first Labor Government but also the Commonwealth Government. But, in relation to your comments regarding what is happening to that site, I would ask you to comment in relation to the 1,500 metres surrounding the Gungahlin tip. How far away from that tip will houses be built?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .