Massive budget blow-out for contentious Far South Coast national park development; community 'disenfranchised, powerless and angry'

A response provided to the Green Cape Fishing Alliance (GCFA) from the NSW government under Freedom of Information (FOI) law has increased concern and anger in the community about plans proceeding for development at campsites on the Light to Light Walk.

A NSW government Planning, Industry and Environment document, of which ACM has copies, has revealed a massive blow-out of the project budget, from $7.9million to an estimated $14.48million, which Minister Matt Kean is seeking additional funding to address.

The document suggested a three-stage delivery of the project, supported in part by reallocation of other capital funds, will allow construction of the accommodation complexes at Mowarry Point and Hegarty's Bay to commence as planned.

A source with close knowledge of the project but who was no longer involved said they believed National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) was trying to circumvent going through the full process of the necessary environmental assessments by breaking it into smaller projects.

"They can get away with it that way, otherwise the cost would trigger major impact assessments and they would then need to consider each and every impacted species," they said.

GCFA spokesman Mick Ripon expressed frustration in the lack of response from NPWS regarding fee structures for use of the "world-class" eco-style accommodation.

"For months we have sought information from Minister Kean all the way through to the local NPWS area manager, with no response to date," Mr Ripon said.

"It is inconceivable that a development of this scale, now costing taxpayers $14.48million, cannot articulate a fee structure... we believe the government is deliberately withholding this information from the community."

Contained in the FOI documents are 16 pages of summary notation from the original 205 submissions responding to the proposal, the overwhelming majority of which strongly oppose the development of accommodation.

These are consistent with a later summary from the Review of Environmental Factors (REF) where 142 submissions were received, and only eight showed support.

"The FOI exposes a government that is breathtakingly arrogant towards the concerns of the regional community, with senior government ministers signing off on development documents as though they are a fait accompli, whilst conducting a disingenuous, tick box 'consultation' process," Mr Ripon said.

"It is no wonder the community feels disenfranchised, powerless and angry."

The contact with close knowledge of the project, who felt uncomfortable about being identified, said they believed NPWS would go ahead with the project regardless of what the community thought.

"NPWS is not going down the path of conservation. They are more interested in tourism and expanding income, which is taking precedence over the endangered southern brown bandicoot and other vulnerable species," they said.

"Staff involved were not adequately consulted either and if they raised their concerns were gagged to shut up and told to back off.

"In this way, they are working people with a true sense of conservation out of the organisation."

Research commissioned by National Parks Australia Council (NPAC) in February this year indicated 78 per cent of Australians did not support any development in parks and protected areas.

Of the 1122 Australians surveyed in the nation poll, 91 per cent agreed national parks and conservation areas were critical to protect nature from resource extraction.

NPAC said the poll was commissioned in response to the "increasing trend of federal and state governments proactively spruiking and funding development and commercial interests over nature protection in national parks".

Dr Bruce McGregor, NPAC president, said it had become clear there was a disconnect between public and political priorities.

"People don't support commercialisation or large-scale development of parks, but that's where governments keep putting their money and effort," Dr McGregor said.

"We need our politicians to match their actions with their communities' attitudes and rule out inappropriate development."

Mr Ripon agreed the survey results demonstrated the NSW government was not acting in the best interests of the community or the environment.

"Who really wants this development and who benefits?" he said.

Member for Eden-Monaro Kristy McBain said, while she would like to see the development and maintenance of more tracks and differing levels of accommodation in our region, it should not lock out or preclude campers or day walkers.

"The national park belongs to us all and we all should be able to access it in the manner we choose," Ms McBain said.

Although NPWS stated when queried by ACM that there was no connection between the Light to Light project and the responsible entities of Great Walks of Australia, the project is referred to in FOI documents as "the Light to Light Great Walk project" by Infrastructure NSW, the department funding the project.

"It's no wonder people are confused and concerned. The proposed 'huts' are designed by Andrew Burns Architecture, the firm that designed the privately-owned 'huts' on the Three Capes Great Walk in Tasmania, which cost approximately $1000 per night to stay in," Mr Ripon said.

A NPWS spokesperson said after community concerns were raised, it was "now guaranteeing the accommodation along the walk will be owned and operated by NPWS".

"NPWS does not intend to privatise the on-park hut accommodation or the camping experiences on the walk," the spokesperson said.

"NPWS will explore commercial partnerships to deliver visitor experiences and services that complement the walk."

PAST COVERAGE: