No Tillegra Dam Group

Hunter Water Corporation has begun the process of delivering customer newsletters to counter voter backlash over the proposed Tillegra Dam, which ratepayers will be paying off for the next 50 years.

The newsletter states that Tillegra will create 1850 jobs.
This is incorrect. Information received by the National Party has revealed that the NSW Government changed budget job creation figures at the insistence of Treasury officials. The proposed dam may only support 280 construction jobs and create the equivalent of 5 long-term jobs.

The newsletter stated that customers will pay $30 per annum by 2012 for Tillegra.
More spin from Hunter Water. Hunter Water has intentionally kept prices low for the first few years to convince customers that Tillegra is a cheap option. The current estimate of the proposed dam is $477 million. Dams have overrun costs of approximately 56%, therefore ratepayers will be paying big time, for a long time, for Tillegra.

The newsletter stated that the alternative to Tillegra is water restrictions during drought.
Hunter Water has tried to create a fear campaign around water restrictions. The region has not had restrictions in place for decades. Hunter Water’s average storage level has been 80% from 1991 to 2008. The Hunter has a one in one million chance of running out of water. Sensible water management, and policies, such as the New Water Rules recently implemented by Sydney Water, would negate the need for new dams. The truth is that Tillegra would create an absurd level of water security, with level 1 water restrictions needed only once in every 1,250 years to maintain 60% capacity.

The newsletter stated that Tillegra is such a stand-out option.
This is a mantra that Hunter Water’s Managing Director, Kevin Young, has been spruiking since the announcement. Hunter Water has never been able to produce a single document supporting this. Papers subpoenaed by the NSW Upper House on 26 November, 2008, and FOI documents received since, have also demonstrated that Tillegra was never the preferred option for maintaining drought security in the Hunter region.

The newsletter stated that Tillegra is needed for 160,000 population growth.
Again wrong. Hunter Water’s own documentation and a report by BIS Shrapnel have both stated that this population growth will not significantly change the storage simulation from current demand.

The newsletter stated that the alternative to Tillegra is a Desal Plant.
This is desal fear mongering at its best. Water planning specialists have argued a variety of alternatives to Tillegra. These include: dam upgrades, demand management, recycling, water harvesting and desal readiness. These alternatives were also in Hunter Water planning documents from 2003-06.”

The newsletter stated that Desal would cost twice as much as Tillegra.
Hunter Water had costed desal at $500 million in its Why Tillegra Now paper. Suddenly Hunter Water now say that desal will cost around $1 billion. These costings need to be questioned.
The Hunter community must be properly consulted on the level of water savings it wants, and properly informed of the huge economic, social and environmental costs of building a large dam. It is time, right now, to implement a full independent inquiry into this white elephant.
For more information on this media release, contact Sally Corbett on 0403892093.