THE approval of a rail hub at tomorrow night’s Goulburn Mulwaree Council Meeting would provide great opportunities for Goulburn - its proponents say.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
They say the treatment and freight of pine logs from the proposed facility for export to China and India is just the tip of the iceberg - that the possibilities the rail hub would open up for other industries in southern NSW is endless.
Passionate proponent, Chicago Freight’s Mick Cooper said many other industries were already making approaches to him about the possibility of using the rail hub to get their goods and produce onto rail from the hub for export via Port Botany.
But concerns among nearby residents linger over a substance (Methyl bromide) used to treat the pine logs to prepare them for export.
Mr Cooper says the company has explored other options to using this chemical, but it is the only substance currently accepted by China and India.
Mr Cooper said the timber treatment facility is ancillary to the main business the company wants to establish, which is the rail hub and rail maintenance facility.
“The fumigation of logs is ancillary to this, but we had to source this business to get the proposal off the ground,” he said.
He also maintains the process is environmentally safe - that the shipping containers will only be opened to the outside air when Methyl bromide in them reaches 5 parts per million, a level deemed safe by the authorities.
No doubt the facility will get a lot of large trucks off roads as it expands in the future and this can only be a good thing for everyone else using the roads and for the condition of the roads as well.
It is up to nine councillors to decide the pros and cons of this rail hub, but in doing so keeping the community safe should be its paramount concern. Over to you.
A lack of process?
THE fact that childcare service will continue to operate from the TAFE childcare facility is great news for everyone involved - parents, childcare workers and the children. Anglicare should be congratulated for being proactive on this front, for stepping in to ensure the service continues.
But the way it has been handled raises some questions about process and transparency. Why was this service not put out to tender? How did Anglicare just emerge as the new operator?
The whole process has been badly handled by the State Government from the outset. First they said it close before Christmas.
Now staff at the centre are being told it will “re-open” but be run by Anglicare. The staff have been left in limbo all along. Do they have jobs in the new centre or don’t they?
The lack of consultation with staff, parents and the community on this is apparent and concerning.