A cross-party New South Wales parliamentary committee has recommended the state government consider alternatives to its controversial plan to raise the Warragamba dam wall.
The inquiry’s interim report, released on Tuesday, calls on the government to “more fully consider” alternatives to the project including the acquisition of properties on the lower flood plain and lowering the full supply level of the current dam.
The committee found the wall raising should not proceed “if the proposal cannot maintain or improve the current and future integrity of the Greater Blue Mountains world heritage area”.
The upper house committee is chaired by the independent Justin Field but Tuesday’s report had the backing of the inquiry’s six other members – including three government MLCs.
The committee has been examining the plan to raise the Warragamba dam wall by up to 17 metres and will hold further hearings next month that will consider the project’s environmental impact statement (EIS), which was published last week.
WaterNSW has proposed raising the dam wall to mitigate the risk to human life and property in the flood plain of the Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment in the event of a major flood.
But the plan – which would involve holding flood waters temporarily inside the Blue Mountains world heritage area and then releasing it in a controlled way – has faced strong opposition due to the impact on threatened species, cultural heritage sites and the outstanding value of the world heritage area.
Among the recommendations, the parliamentary committee said WaterNSW should conduct further field surveys and expand its Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment after concerns were raised by Gundungurra traditional owners about the adequacy of the work undertaken.
The report recommends the government address concerns raised by the federal and state environment departments by conducting on-ground fieldwork to assess the impact of the 2019-20 bushfires in areas that would also face damage as a result of the project.
It calls for greater transparency from the NSW government as it develops the EIS and says the final documents should be presented to the World Heritage Centre to allow any feedback from the World Heritage Committee to be made public before a decision about the project is finalised.
It recommends the government work with councils in the Hawkesbury-Nepean region to “urgently develop a comprehensive flood evacuation plan for the Penrith Valley and other flood-affected parts of western Sydney”.
The release of the report came as the minister with oversight of the project, Stuart Ayres, was named NSW’s new deputy Liberal leader.
“It’s interesting that we’ve got the government members of the committee supporting these recommendations, so really challenging Stuart Ayres,” Field said on Tuesday.
He added the project should not proceed “unless the government can guarantee world heritage values won’t be impacted”.
Shayne Mallard, a Liberal party MLC and Blue Mountains resident who sits on the committee, said it was important the final EIS address concerns raised by the report. “My biggest concern is the impact on the world heritage area and the damage to cultural heritage,” he said.
Mallard was also concerned about the potential threats to life and property from a major flood and said government decisions about flood mitigation would require “a balancing act”.
“I grew up in the Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment, so I understand the issues people are talking about,” he said. “We’ve got people in the catchment saying they are terrified of a big flood.”
Penny Sharpe, NSW Labor’s environment spokesperson and a member of the committee, questioned whether the project would fix the problem it was trying to solve.
“What [the report] shows is there are significant concerns with the project and the government realises that,” she said. “The committee believes the EIS has got to address these issues.”
Comment was sought from Ayres.
