3. The Supervising Scientist

3.1 The Office of the Supervising Scientist was intended to play a key role in the protection of the environment in the Alligator Rivers region. However, environmental groups have freq2uently questioned whether it is fulfilling that role. It has also been the subject of regular criticism from other groups.

 

Concerns About the Supervising Scientist

3.2 There have been ongoing questions about the design of the Office of the Supervising Scientist's research program and its effectiveness in monitoring the Ranger and Narbarlek mines. Environment groups have been critical of the OSS on a number of grounds. They have raised concerns that:

• the OSS has little involvement in the day to day operation of the Ranger mine;
• it does not give sufficient regard to the possible deleterious long term environmental effects of uranium mining;
• staff have moved between positions in uranium mining companies and the OSS, raising doubts about conflict of interest;
• it has concentrated on researching the impact of mining but has never adopted a significant role as a regulator policing mining operations;
• its level of involvement in monitoring at Ranger is unsatisfactory; and
• some of its research projects have been poorly designed, failing to study some key species and aspects of the food chain of aboriginal communities.

3.3 Despite the fact that these concerns about the OSS have been raised there is little doubt that the OSS has contributed significantly to the protection of the environment in the region. While there may be room for improvement in the design of the OSS's research programs, and in its monitoring activity, it's continued operation remains the main source of protection for the environment of the Alligator Rivers region.

3.4 Some of the strongest criticism of the OSS has come from ERA which has often challenged the organisation about its research program, its jurisdiction as an environmental watchdog and the cost of research. This is hardly surprising since ERA has been required to help fund the Supervising Scientist and one of the principal roles of the OSS has been to highlight the failings of ERA. There are few people who express delight at the activities of the policeman who books them for speeding and threatens to cancel their licence.

3.5 Similarly there has been friction between the Supervising Scientist and Northern Territory government agencies. The Northern Territory Department of Mines and Energy has frequently been in disagreement with the OSS over a wide variety of matters. However, the NTDME faces a potential conflict of interest because its prime responsibility is to promote the development of mining in the Northern Territory. As the OSS has pointed out, the NTDME also 'has not established the scientific resources necessary to ensure comprehensive protection of the environment of the Region to the standard required by the Commonwealth.' [5]

3.6 Of more concern is the OSS's inability to enforce its recommendations. Some of the disagreements between the NTDME and the OSS have stemmed from the failure of the Northern Territory authorities to prosecute ERA for environmental transgressions. In his 1989 review Professor Taylor recommended that the Northern Territory authorities be required to implement the advice of the Supervising Scientist concerning environmental requirements. There is extensive support for giving the OSS greater powers. Submissions supporting this view were received from the Northern Land Council, the Australian Conservation Foundation, Friends of the Earth Sydney and Mr Peter Milton.

3.7 A valid argument could be made that the OSS should not be distracted from its role of providing independent scientific information by having to take on board a prosecutorial role on a regular basis. But where State, Territory or Commonwealth agencies have failed to act the OSS should have the power to take action.

3.8 The OSS has also been criticised for its lack of communication with local aboriginal communities. The traditional owners of the land in the Alligator Rivers region have a duty to protect the land and they, and their descendants, are the people who will most directly suffer from any adverse environmental impacts of mining. However, they have expressed concerns that they are not properly briefed, in terms that they can understand, about the results of research and monitoring programs. It is unfortunate that they feel largely ignored by the Supervising Scientist. This is doubly regrettable as these communities have a wealth of knowledge about their lands which would provide a valuable resource for the OSS. There is a need for the OSS to make a greater effort to gain the confidence of aboriginal communities.

 

The Downgrading of the Supervising Scientist

3.9 In 1993 the then Labor Government amended the Environment Protection (Alligator Rivers Region) Amendment Act. One consequence of that amendment was the incorporation of the OSS into the Commonwealth's Environment Protection Agency (EPA). The stated objective of this move was to reduce administrative duplication and to achieve better economies of scale. However, the most significant result was to bring the office within the public service where its independence and freedom from ministerial interference could not be guaranteed. The position of Supervising Scientists is now being further downgraded. A recent advertisement indicates that it is to be attached, more or less as an afterthought, to the position of Chief Science Adviser in the Department of Environment, Sport and Territories.

3.10 This concern about the independence of the Supervising Scientist is bourn out by recent events. A recent newspaper report has revealed that:

The Federal Government has ordered the Environment Department to conduct its policies in "harmony" with the nation's economic goals, signaling a dramatic change of direction and sparking an outcry among scientists and conservationists. [6]

3.11 The report went on to quote a comment from Professor Ian Lowe who recently prepared a report on the environment for the Government. He was quoted as saying that:

It certainly suggests the economic goals are first and the environment is second. .... We argued explicitly that our social development needs to be within the ecological framework and the economic development needs to be nestled within that. [7]

3.12 Given that the Government's policy is to expand uranium mining it is difficult to see how the public could have any confidence in ability of the Supervising Scientist to carry out his duties free from any undue influence.

3.13 With this reduction in the status of the office has come a series of reductions in it budget. It was initially estimated that a staff of 75 would be required to carry out the roles and tasks of the Supervising Scientist [8], and that staffing level was achieved in 1984-85. At that time the Supervising Scientist stated that 85 staff were considered necessary to carry out the environmental protection program envisaged by the Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry and the Act [9]. However, recent budget cuts have seen the staff reduced to 48 in June 1995 at a time when its responsibilities have expanded considerably. This emasculation of the OSS is clearly unacceptable.

 

EXPANDING THE ROLE OF THE OSS

3.14 The Committee received several submissions proposing that the role of the OSS be expanded to include the monitoring of all Australian uranium mines. A very good case has been made out for this proposal. The OSS has developed considerable expertise which the various State and Territory Environmental Protection Agencies do not have. Expanding the organisations role would also mean that the environmental performance of all of Australia's uranium mining operations would be subject to uniform standards of scientific examination. The major leak from the Olympic Dam operation clearly demonstrates the inability of State agencies to effectively monitor major uranium mining projects.

 

Recommendations: