Western Sydney waste transfer decision

November 12, 2003

The Sydney Morning Herald’s front page of November 12, 2003 carried a story headlined "Ruling tips city waste into crisis". The story related the success of two individuals, John Drake and Allan Brzoson in the Land and Environment Court. Drake and Brzoson successfully sought to stop a proposed waste transfer station at Clyde from proceeding. The Sydney Morning Herald’s reporting of the case was however misleading. The EDO (NSW’s) response is published below.

The editor:

"Ruling tips city waste into crisis" suggests that a proposed waste transfer station at Clyde was "scuttled" by litigants solely on environmental grounds and transfer costs. In fact, the proposal was rejected by the Land and Environment Court because it was unlawful.

Justice Bignold held that Collex misdescribed the development in calling it a "freight transfer terminal". He agreed that the development proposal was properly classified as a waste transfer facility or offensive industry, which is prohibited, and that the development consent was therefore in breach of the law. The environmental and other impacts were secondary reasons for his Honour’s ruling.

Acting on behalf of many local residents, the self-represented litigants, John Drake and Allan Brzoson, did a fantastic job in the Land and Environment Court. Regardless of Sydney's need for places to dump its waste, a problem that would be better solved by avoiding waste and reusing resources, it is crucial that our environmental and planning laws be followed. Where governments fail to do so, it is essential that citizens can access the courts to enforce the law. Disappointingly, Premier Carr seems to be willing to avoid the ramifications of these laws, and instead consider special legislation to allow the project to go through.

Elisa Nichols

Solicitor

Environmental Defender’s Office (NSW)