Tell the Mayor about Rio

On 25 August, 2013, in response to a request from the then-Mayor during her visit to Costerfield Community Hall to provide Councillors with details of the Rio Declaration and the Precautionary Principle we sent the following email...


Dear Lisa,

Let me thank you once again for taking time out from your busy schedule to attend our meeting in Costerfield last night and for graciously allowing us to have our voices heard in this matter. Your presence and availability were and are very much appreciated.
 
You asked me to provide you with details and links regarding the particular aspects of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development that we consider to be pertinent to our submissions and statements and to which we feel Council's attention should be drawn. Prior to that though I hope you'll allow me to make a few clarifications so as to lend a little background to our position and to give you an idea of the kind of concerns and attitudes with which you are dealing.... [there follows details of our own properties that are not relevant here.]
                                                                      ****
Regarding the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development 1992 and its relation to our predicament. As you and your fellow Councillors will be aware, local government, as governmental arms of the the Australian state are signatories to the Principles contained within the Declaration. Of particular relevance in the current situation, as in all matters of ecologically sustainable development (ESD) is this statement from the New South Wales Law and Environment Council, which I have italicised in places to emphasise their pertinence and which states explicitly that:
    "Four of the Rio Declaration principles are substantially reflected in subsequent Australian legislation, namely:           

•  Principle 3. The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.
•  Principle 4. In order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it.
• Principle 15. In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
• Principle 16. National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic interests, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting international trade and investment.

        The central concept of ESD, the integration of environmental protection and development, appeared in Principal 4. Three of the four pillars on which the concept rests- the precautionary principle, the principle of intergenerational and intra-generational equity and the internalisation of environmental costs principle - were embodied in, respectively, Principles 15, 3 and 16. However Principle 16 was heavily qualified."
(The full document is available at http://www.lec.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/lec/m420301l711805/biscoe_esdnsw.pdf)

And therein lies the crux of the issues to which we wish to draw Council's attention. This is no place to present our own interpretations of the applicability of these considerations to our own situation - that will be done in a forthcoming submission to Council - but it will serve further explication of the matters at hand to refer you and your fellow Councillors to some of the relevant background regarding the application of these principles under Australian Law; especially the 'precautionary principle'. For a thorough but accessible encapsulation of the legal issues I would be hard-pressed to direct your attention to a more succinct summary than the discussion of Telstra Corporation vs Hornsby Shire Council 1996 and other allied cases, and the recommendations of Chief Justice Preston provided in this synopsis of The Precautionary Principal in Australia.  The transcript of Justice Kevin Bell of the Supreme Court of Victoria's 2010 seminar on the issue of "The Precautionary Principle: How do courts use it to protect the environment?" is another informative resource.

                                                               ****
We are reasonable people and we are ready to take into account, and be convinced by, the thoroughly scientific evidence. But this is a process that demands equitability and reciprocity and so the scientific evidence must be convincing and must thoroughly take us into account, too. 

Please come out and visit us at any time to experience our beautiful land and have a cuppa and a chat. 

Once again thank you very much for providing this opportunity to communicate with you and for listening.

Cheers