COUNCIL stood by its anti-coal mining stance at Wednesday’s meeting, despite concerns about possible legal implications.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The matter was a continuation of debate at the October 12 meeting, when councillors considered two separate motions on the future of coal mining in the Highlands.
This week, Councillors Duncan Gair, Graham McLaughlin, Peter Nelson and Garry Turland moved to rescind their previous motion, which lost to Councillor Larry Whipper’s more detailed request for an anti-coal mining action plan.
Cr Gair spoke about the move to rescind, saying his decision was related not to coal mining, but to the potential for council to be perceived as being biased. “Someone in the community, or a body or organisation could take this council to court and say we have an ‘apprehended bias,’ a pre-conceived position prior to looking at all the relevant information,” he said.
Cr Gair stressed Hume Coal was yet to release its Environmental Impact Statement, and said the rescission motion was about acting fairly and ethically in the interests of the whole community.
Debate among councillors again turned to a discussion of semantics, just as it did at the previous meeting. Many councillors, including mayor Ken Halstead, argued the extent that bias could apply to council’s coal mining stance, given it is not an authoritative body in the process.
“The legal definition of bias [refers to] a decision maker’s public statements – we are not the decision maker,” he said.
The gallery cheered Councillor Gordon Markwart when he brought the meeting’s focus to what he termed ‘the bigger picture’.
“I’m not concerned with who puts a motion or who writes it. I’m interested in sending a strong message to the government. I want to talk about the larger problems about coal – the elephant in the room – which is climate change,” he said.
Cr Whipper said he was pleased council had supported his anti-coal mining action plan, and called it a policy decision. “We are not the consent authority in this process, we have no bias except our policy and position. Evidence suggests very strongly that our water reserves and agricultural land are at threat from mining practices, why would we not stand up and say we oppose that, hand on heart?”
Councillors Ian Scandrett, Grahame Andrews, Whipper, Markwart and Halstead voted against the rescission, which did not proceed.