Confidential letter says ‘historical mapping anomalies are now compromising the revitalisation of Toondah harbour’

This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

The Queensland government advocated for a boundary change to internationally listed wetlands to make way for a proposed development at Toondah harbour, according to confidential letters to the federal government.

One letter also claims that areas that could be the site of future development should have been excluded from the Ramsar wetland when its boundary was drawn up in the 1990s.

In August 2016, Jim Reeves, then the director general of Queensland’s environment and heritage protection department, wrote to Gordon de Brouwer, who at the time was the secretary of the federal environment and energy department, about Walker Corporation’s proposal for apartments and a marina on Toondah harbour in Moreton Bay, south-east of Brisbane.

The harbour is part of a Ramsar-listed wetland, which was declared internationally important under a 1971 intergovernmental treaty that asks members to maintain the ecological character of their listed wetlands.

In the letter, written on behalf of Queensland’s deputy premier, Jackie Trad, and the then environment minister, Steven Miles, Reeves says that “historical mapping anomalies are now compromising the revitalisation of Toondah harbour” and that it was in “the urgent national interest” to redevelop the harbour in an “environmentally sensitive manner”.

The letter states that the federal government could invoke its right under the Ramsar convention to change the boundary of the wetlands, if such an action was “considered by that party to be in the urgent national interest”.

“We suggest that it is in the urgent national interest to successfully revitalise Toondah harbour in the next few years in an environmentally sensitive manner to ensure that North Stradbroke Island transitions into a resilient ecotourism-based future community with a sensitive marine environment,” it says.

The federal government’s assessment of the Walker Corporation development has been subject to calls for an independent probe after the ABC revealed in December that the former environment minister Josh Frydenberg rejected advice from his own department that the $1.4bn development was “clearly unacceptable” due to the impact it would have on the wetlands.

Walker Corporation has been a major donor to both political parties and in 2016 made a $225,ooo donation to the Liberal party and a $23,000 donation to Queensland Labor, the same financial year in which the initial proposal was submitted for assessment.

A spokesperson for the federal environment department said there were preliminary discussions between Queensland and the commonwealth about a possible boundary change but it “is not currently a matter of live consideration”.

In Reeves’s letter to the federal department, he suggested that certain parts of the site should never have been included within the protected wetlands’ boundary.

“In defining a proposed boundary in the early 1990s, a number of assumptions were made by the then governments regarding future use and development patterns in and around the Bay,” the letter says. “It is now recognised that the Ramsar boundary actually includes the existing regularly-dredged swing basin and public navigation channel.

“In hindsight, this area should have been excluded from the Ramsar wetland consistent with other areas subject to historical disturbance or identified for future development for public infrastructure that were excluded such as Brisbane Airport and the equivalent harbour at Dunwich (on North Stradbroke Island).”

He adds that an area adjoining the proposed Toondah harbour development site was already excised from the Ramsar boundary and had probably been intended “to cover the understanding” of future port development or another development proposal at the time.

“These historical mapping anomalies are now compromising the revitalisation of Toondah harbour and potentially threatening the realisation of the vital re-orientation of the North Stradbroke Island economy, community and environment from sand mining to ecotourism,” the letter says.

In a separate letter from August 2017, Miles wrote to Frydenberg to say the government was working with the Walker Corporation to update technical information about the Moreton Bay site and had also prioritised updating an information sheet about the wetland.

The letter mentions the proposal to change the boundary.

“Finally, the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection will await further information from the Australian Government regarding any boundary amendment proposal associated with the Toondah harbour, and acknowledges that any such amendment needs to be in the urgent national interest,” it says.

The Australian Conservation Foundation said both governments needed to make their intentions for the Ramsar boundary at the site clear.

“Australia promised the international community that it would protect this special wetland. It is truly dismaying to find out that our elected representatives were so ready to cut it loose to accommodate a private property developer, who also happens to have been a major political donor,” the ACF’s chief executive, Kelly O’Shanassy, said.

“Both the Queensland and federal government need to be crystal clear about whether they still intend to change the Moreton Bay Ramsar site boundaries to help this property development to go ahead.”

Guardian Australia asked the Queensland government why it had sought the boundary change and whether it was still being pursued.

A spokesperson for the environment department said the government’s support for the development remained contingent upon a “rigorous assessment” of its environmental impacts by the federal government.

The spokesperson said that any change to the Ramsar site had to provide a net gain in both size and environmental quality.

“The Australian government is currently preparing guidelines for the content of a draft environmental impact statement for environmental impacts associated with this development. Hence, any proposed modifications to the boundary would need to be part of the applicant’s submission to the Australian government,” he said.

“It will be the Australian government which will make a final decision on any future development of Toondah harbour in the Ramsar area.”

The federal department’s spokesperson said that as the site owner and manager, the Queensland government would need to submit any proposal to change the boundary.

“There is no current formal proposal to change the Moreton Bay Ramsar site boundaries,” the spokesperson said.

A Walker Corporation spokesman said: “Walker Corporation was aware that a request was made by the Queensland government to consider a boundary change to the wetland area in 2016.

“Toondah harbour is a state and council endorsed project of significance and a number of options were looked at to progress the proposal and deliver its benefits to the community.

“The idea of a boundary change was not a new suggestion and had been raised by the federal government at Walker’s original pre-lodgement meeting in 2015.”