Approval for Acland to disturb priority ag land granted by State Government

It’s one of the final approvals, short of a mining lease and associated water licence being challenged in the High Court, which New Acland Coal Mine needs for its Stage 3 expansion. And the Oakey Coal Action Alliance is not happy.

The State Government has granted one of New Acland Coal Mine’s outstanding approvals, angering the Oakey Coal Action Alliance.

In late August, the State Government approved the company’s Regional Interests Development Approval application, publishing the decision on the Department of State Development’s website.

A statement from Lock The Gate said no notification of the decision was given to landholders or groups that had made submissions on the original application in January 2020.

New Acland applied for its RIDA to disturb 2995ha of land classed as a Priority Agricultural Area for its Stage 3 expansion in November last year.

Of that land, 2700ha is classed as Strategic Cropping Area, according to New Acland’s application.

In a Priority Land Use Assessment prepared by SLR Consulting Australia for New Acland as part of its application, SLR Consulting argued “there will be no material impact on the PAA as this report demonstrates that the activities will not be located on land that is used for a Priority Agricultural Land Use”.

SLR’s report found of the 33 paddocks within the PAA study area, “all were found to qualify as non-Priority Agricultural Land Use, having not been cultivated a minimum of three years in the past ten”.

Oakey Coal Action Alliance president and alpaca farmer Aileen Harrison said the decision to approve the RIDA over the area was disgraceful at a time when she and others were challenging the project in the High Court of Australia.

Lock the Gate said the approval had been “quietly handed out”.

New Hope chief operating officer Andrew Boyd said claims the company’s RIDA

application was quietly waved through by the Department of State Development were absurd.

“The application for RIDA was submitted many months ago and publicly notified for

more than the required 15 business days,” Mr Boyd said.

“The Department considered the submissions and, on August 25, advised us the

application had been granted. The Department published their decision on their

website, as required under the legislation. Affected landowners then had 20 business

days to appeal the approval.”

Mr Boyd said no one appealed the approval.

“These activists had ample opportunity to make submissions on our application and

subsequent approval,” Mr Boyd said.

“Now, several months down the track, they are jumping up and down criticising the

Government for doing its job.

“It is the role of Government departments to assess applications on their merit and

either approve or refuse them.

“That is all that has happened here.”