Letter to the Editor: An invitation to fair dinkum debate

DEAR News Of The Area,

I WRITE in response to Kathy Brown’s (5 February) and Robina Badger’s (19 February) letters.

I am a 50-year resident of Port Stephens and as Secretary of The No Offshore Turbines Port Stephens (NotPS) group I have been at the forefront of the community effort to protect the integrity of our coastal region since it began over two-and-a-half years ago.

I’m deeply concerned that the lack of credible and relevant arguments, such as those presented by Ms Brown and Ms Badger, is stalling our progress on reaching rational evidence-based solutions on this matter.

Ms Brown opens her letter with a logical fallacy, claiming that the federal election result was a “survey” on offshore wind which ignores the complex range of factors that influence voters and wrongfully attempts to claim a mandate that simply doesn’t exist.

Ms Brown then proceeds to contradict herself by later claiming that “it proved to be a non-issue in all elections held in Port Stephens” and compounds that by adding the incorrect statement that Labor was returned in a state election.

No state elections have been held since the zone was declared.

In fact, it was in the local elections that our mayor campaigned on a platform of non-support for the offshore wind zone as was equally true for the federal election where the majority of candidates adopted a strong stance against it.

It was indeed a hot button issue, but it was not the sole determining factor of both election results.

To further claim that offshore wind is not a state or local government issue is simply nonsense when they are clearly identified as key stakeholders by project proponents and the federal government.

A clear example of this is the inclusion of local council and state government representatives on The Hunter Wind Industry Advisory Board formed by the federal government to oversee the development of the offshore wind zone.

If Ms Brown is still failing to grasp this concept, she may consider that undersea and onshore electrical cables and onshore substations would need to be sited in state waters and on local lands.

Ms Badger bases her objection to her non-substantiated claims that our opposition campaign is “well-funded” and has “little merit”.

It is unclear whether this represents the spreading of disinformation on her part or simply an ignorance of the facts?

I can personally assure Ms Badger that our limited fund-raising methods of conducting raffles and receiving small community donations leaves us very far from being well funded.

Never has our bank balance exceeded four zeros, nor do we own reportable physical assets. Compare this to the annual revenues of climate and green energy organisations who receive millions in grants and funding every year.

The Sunrise Project, a charity that funds many of these groups reported an annual revenue of $76.8 million in 2024 largely sourced from foreign and Australian billionaires.

This represents double the revenue of minor Australian political parties such as The Greens.

Large green groups such as the ACF are extremely well funded employing 95 staff and paying their CEO $300K p.a. whilst our small community group can’t afford to employ even a single employee, relying solely on local volunteers.

We truly are the “David” in this battle against “Goliath” (green energy developers, climate groups and the government).

Finally, both Ms Brown and Ms Badger close out with a straw man argument, suggesting that those who oppose this specific renewable project are not willing to foster climate solutions.

This is coupled with a false dichotomy that implies the Hunter offshore wind zone represents the only solution to addressing global climate change.

These scare tactics are blatant mistruths and gross oversimplifications of a complex issue.

NotPS opposition to the Hunter Offshore Wind Zone is based on the inappropriate siting of large-scale industrialisation in our ocean without proper consideration of environmental and social impacts on our region.

This has been compounded by a continued lack of genuine consultation, communication and acknowledgement of our community’s valid concerns.

To answer Ms Badger’s question – NotPS expects climate solutions to be achieved through rational evidence-based approaches not rushed knee jerk reactions, siting unviable projects in inappropriate locations in a desperate effort to appear that progress is being made.

Ask yourself how serious is a government about their climate policies when they have approved 35 coal and gas developments, expansions and extensions since coming to power?

To meet climate concerns we invite everyone, including Ms Brown and Ms Badger, to participate in rational fact-based debate regarding this issue.

Transparency is also required, such as Ms Brown clearly declaring her own self-interest as the Secretary of the Port Stephens Green Party.

Genuine solutions require openness, not political manoeuvring.

Regards,
Leonie HAMILTON,

Secretary of No Offshore Turbines Port Stephens.