Birdlife, including dozens of migratory shorebirds, next to a ferry entering Toondah Harbour
In essence, the Toondah Harbour real estate scheme, proposed for land and wetlands next to the Stradbroke ferry terminal at Cleveland, involves a contest.
On the one hand, there is the undeniable duty of State and Federal politicians and public servants to act with integrity, and in accordance with the world’s wetlands protection agreement – the Ramsar Convention. On the other hand, there is the corrupting influence of political donations and what has been termed the ‘game of mates’.
The contest is set to come to a head in 2022, under the watchful eyes of many, including the Stradbroke Island community. Public interest is high and opposition widespread e.g. a petition signed by over 45,000 people.
A key to understanding the dynamics behind the irresponsible 3,600 high-rise unit and yacht marina scheme, is to be aware of two issues:
- the proposal is not over privately owned land. It is over State Government controlled, publicly owned land and internationally important wetlands; and
- the long history of association and declared political donations from the property developer Walker Group/ Corporation (Walker) to both major parties – totalling over $2.5 Million.
The scheme remains possible because the State Government maintains its Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area (PDA) and related planning instruments.
The PDA includes the ferry terminal (the departure point for North Stradbroke Island) and almost 70 hectares around it – including an historic public park, and 50 hectares of protected tidal wetlands. The audacious intent is to allow the conversion of Ramsar listed wetlands to private use and profit.
The Federal Government has the power to stop the current Walker plan, but the only way to end the scheme once and for all, is for the State Government to withdraw its support and its PDA.
Withdrawal of State support sank a similar Walker real estate scheme over tidal wetlands in Tasmania several years ago (more on this later).
Why does the Toondah scheme need Federal approval?
Federal approval is required by the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act because the State’s PDA, and its development agreement with Walker signed in early 2016, would significantly impact “matters of national environmental significance”. These include Ramsar listed wetlands (blue stripes) and the habitat of migratory shorebirds (pink), depicted within the PDA (red lines) in Figure 1 above.
The proposal should have been rejected already by the Federal Government as “clearly unacceptable”, based on Federal Departmental scientific and legal advice revealed by the ABC’s Background Briefing report.
But the Federal Government’s intervention (or veto) power will arise again – after Walker releases its long overdue Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and the public has had the opportunity to comment on it.
Importantly, it’s not only the wetlands, and the species which inhabit them, which are threatened. The land portion of the PDA includes the habitat of a significant Koala population, referred to in this ABC report.
The mysterious expansion of the scheme and the delayed ferry terminal upgrade
In late 2015, Walker and the Redland Council revealed that the Toondah plan, which originated under the Newman Government, had expanded to 3,600 high-rise units under then Planning Minister Jackie Trad. Curiously, the Palaszczuk Government has not attempted to justify what appears to be a 450% increase in the number of proposed units.
A major claim about the Toondah scheme is that it is required to enable the Stradbroke ferry terminal to be upgraded and this is essential to Stradbroke’s future.
But what is a ferry terminal? A ramp to permit vehicles to drive on and off barges and a place for people to wait for the regular water taxis. And an upgrade can occur without destroying any part of the Ramsar site for a high-rise real estate scheme.
Several other Moreton Bay ferry terminals have been or will be upgraded, paid for by the ferry company, and/or the State Government and the Redland City Council as is normal.
Ironically, an upgrade of the Stradbroke ferry terminal has been delayed by the “Priority” PDA scheme.
Plan would breach the world’s Ramsar Convention for the protection of listed wetlands
Australia’s signature on the Ramsar Convention means we have promised 171 other nations that we would protect our Ramsar sites, and not “delete or restrict the boundaries” of any sites unless there were “urgent national interests” to justify this.
The Toondah wetlands are part of the Moreton Bay Ramsar site, declared in 1993. A Walker consultant plan of the latest PDA real estate scheme submitted to the Federal Government is represented in Figure 2. Walker’s plan clearly breaches the international agreement. For example, it shows buildings within (and on top of) the Ramsar boundaries, restricting access for the many marine and bird species known to inhabit the Toondah wetlands area – including critically endangered Eastern Curlews and Great Knots.
Shamefully, in August 2016, Jackie Trad and current Deputy Premier Steven Miles (then Qld Environment Minister) sent a letter to then Federal Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg urging him to make a ‘controlled action’ decision favouring Walker – a big step towards Federal approval.
The Trad/Miles letter was written on the same day as Walker Corporation’s owner, Lang Walker, met in Melbourne with Frydenberg, to discuss his company’s Toondah scheme.
A second Queensland Government letter to the Federal Government argued for a Ramsar boundary change (to accommodate Walker’s real estate scheme). It also backed Walker Corporation’s implausible suggestion at the meeting with Frydenberg that the scheme was in Australia’s “urgent national interests”.
Palaszczuk Government rules out Ramsar boundary change but has not revoked the PDA
In February 2020, in answer to a Parliamentary question by Greens MP, Michael Berkman, the State Government backed away from the second Trad/Miles letter and declined to endorse the absurd “urgent national interests” claim, putting it down to the “opinion” of a “former Director-General”. Also, a boundary change was ruled out because after a “comprehensive review” it was decided there was “no justification” for this.
In December, 2020, the current State Government confirmed this position in Parliament. Yet the State’s PDA remains in force.
The Ralphs Bay precedent
The last time Walker Corporation had a similar plan to build a real estate development over tidal wetlands – at Ralphs Bay, near Hobart – the plan was rejected by the Federal Government.
But this occurred only after the Tasmanian Planning Commission held a largely independent, public inquiry into the Walker plan and recommended against it.
The Tasmanian Government finally withdrew its support for the project, following the inquiry’s damning report and a long and spirited community campaign opposing it.
Toondah legal advice backs up ‘clearly unacceptable’ scientific opinion
Thanks to the ABC’s Background Briefing, we know Federal Government legal experts advised that, in effect, a real estate and marina development within the State’s Toondah PDA was inconsistent with Australia’s Ramsar Convention obligations. This aspect of the ABC’s revealing report is summarised well here. The legal advice backed up the “clearly unacceptable” advice from Government scientific experts.
The detail of Walker’s PDA real estate plan has been modified a couple of times, but the fundamental objection to it has not changed. The plan continues to involve the destruction and conversion of over 40 hectares of Ramsar protected wetlands into buildings and yacht marinas – for private profit. There is no dispute these wetlands are habitat of critically endangered migratory shorebirds and other species.
In addition to our general obligations to protect the Moreton Bay Ramsar site, to reiterate, under Article 2.5 of the Convention, we have no right to “delete or restrict” Ramsar site boundaries, unless for “urgent national interests”. Obviously, a private real estate scheme is not an urgent national interest.
The EPBC Act (section 138) stipulates that the Minister “must not act inconsistently with Australia’s obligations under the Ramsar Convention.”
Conclusion
Walker’s overdue Environmental Impact Statement and the public objection process will be important. It will focus public attention on the scheme and enliven the power of the Federal Environment Minister to refuse approval for the current proposal.
But as Federal Governments rarely use EPBC Act powers to intervene, what are the prospects of this occurring if the Queensland Government continues to support and facilitate the scheme with its ‘Toondah Harbour Priority Development Area’?
Walker’s similar Ralphs Bay real estate proposal in Tasmania failed due to the withdrawal of support by the Tasmanian State Government. This illustrates the likely most effective way for the public to help stop the Toondah scheme is by pressuring and encouraging the property manager and scheme facilitator, the Palaszczuk State Government, to withdraw its support – and revoke its PDA.
That would end the scheme.
Richard Carew
Environmental Consultant
(Richard Carew is a former lawyer who ran his own Brisbane CBD legal practice for 35 years before retiring in 2019).
Published by Redlands2030 – 26 December 2021
Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net
7 Comments
What a farce- real estate development construed by politicians and developers as urgent National need!
To destroy the wetlands for units would be an environmental tragedy- ousting fish and bird nurseries for profit. Please stop it now – let our childrens children enjoy the presence of the birds koalas and fish who thrive there.
Please do not allow this to go ahead
If this development goes ahead in the face of the documented public opposition, the civil disobedience, which is currently unreported by mainstream media in the case of Central Queensland’s Adani Mine, will pale into insignificance in the ensuing campaign.
It’s hard to fathom why the State Labor government would continue with this PDA (or PDAs generally, an evil invention of Campbell Newman) which basically trashes the legacy of one of Labor’s heroes, the late great Wayne Goss who pondered over how to protect these wetlands forever and came up with the Ramsar listing which he thought was watertight. How wrong he was and how disappointed he would be! The PDA legislation overrides everything and while this “development” of Toondah Harbour must be scrapped at all costs, equally important is the scrapping of PDAs which are anti-democratic with “consultation” token at best.
Thank you Richard Carew for your concise, non hysterical and easily understood report. We can only keep fighting and hope this madness will not go ahead.
We have so few surviving wetlands close to residential areas. This one particularly important as it is an area close to development where many water birds still nest. Particularly the Eastern Curlew. Also it is one of the few PUBLICLY owned wetlands near Brisbane still remaining.
Development of this area is going to benefit exactly who?
BIG BUSINESS and other vested interests. Certainly not the habitat.
Stop this exploitation now.
I can’t see any justification for this 1960’s style proposed development into tidal wetlands. How can it even be considered when the wetlands are protected under an international agreement? And when climate change should be leading to a retreat from foreshores, not development advancing the other way. The plan is utterly irrational on so many levels. If Walker’s political donations and “lobbying” of individual politicians succeeds in getting this approved at Federal and State levels, it will show how corrupt this country has become.