John McVeigh (Groom, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, I present the committee's report entitled Inquiry into PFAS remediation in and around Defence bases—First report.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—Today I present the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's first report into the Department of Defence's national PFAS Investigation and Management Program. This report follows on from the joint committee's previous review of the management of PFAS contamination in and around Defence bases, conducted in the 45th Parliament.

Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, known collectively as PFAS, are a growing environmental challenge. These manufactured chemicals have had wide domestic and industrial application for over 20 years. They are very persistent in the environment and are biocumulative in the bodies of living organisms.

The Department of Defence's national program focuses on remediation of contamination by PFAS based firefighting foams. Aqueous film-forming foams have been very effective in containing fuel and chemical fires. Unfortunately, high concentrations of PFAS are now found in soils and waters around Defence bases and are an environmental hazard for surrounding communities.

The joint committee's last parliament report on this matter, tabled in December 2018, made nine recommendations covering national coordination, health advice and obligations to affected communities, among other matters. With government still considering its response to that review, the report I present today commences a program of scrutiny which will not only monitor Defence's progress but also consider government-wide obligations to PFAS-affected communities.

The Department of Defence established its national program in 2016. At the end of last year there were 28 Defence sites under investigation for PFAS contamination. From experience, like other members of this House, I know the presence of PFAS can be very distressing. Oakey, in my electorate of Groom, was the first Defence remediation site. PFAS can divide communities, disrupt local economies and cause uncertainty, because the health impacts are yet to be fully evaluated or confirmed. In this situation, the government's priority has been to remove PFAS from the environment as quickly and as effectively as possible.

Defence told the committee at its review that its PFAS remediation methods are increasingly effective. Advanced technologies extract PFAS contaminants from water to drinking-water-safety standards. Soil is being cleaned for re-use, extracted PFAS concentrations can now be stored securely and research is underway to break these chemicals down. Defence is also to be commended for its public information program. Its website is now well developed. There are reports on all affected sites under investigation and management, with monitoring data regularly updated.

At the same time, the committee notes that there are no financial or detailed performance reports on PFAS identifiable in either the 2017-18 or the 2018-19 Defence annual reports. The committee also considered that information could be better calibrated so that affected communities get the advice they need on core matters, the implications for property post treatment and, of course, the ongoing health and safety of families in those communities.

At the first hearing in this inquiry, the committee heard from the ANU's PFAS health study of the volume of overseas research being done to establish the health impacts of PFAS. The ANU aims to deliver verifiable local data on both the physical and mental effects of PFAS by the end of this year. Meanwhile, the safety standards for PFAS in soil and water are being made more robust as evidence mounts on the detrimental effects of high-PFAS concentrations in the environment. In this context, this first report from our subcommittee does not yet make recommendations because the committee commits to ongoing and thorough review of the evidence in regular reports as the nature and impact of PFAS and its treatments are being better understood. As I mentioned earlier, in the meantime the committee awaits the government response to the report of the committee in the previous parliament. We are very hopeful of seeing that in the not-too-distant future.

The PFAS subcommittee thanks ANU experts and the Department of Defence for frank evidence given to date, and looks forward to evidence from other agencies in the coming weeks and months. I commend the committee's report to the House.

Meryl Swanson (Paterson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I rise to speak on the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's report Inquiry into PFAS remediation in and around Defence bases.

I would firstly like to thank the chair of the subcommittee, the member for Groom, and all other members who have played a role in this report, and of course the ongoing and hard work of the secretariat. This inquiry resonates with me, not only as a member of the committee but as the federal representative in this parliament for the people of Williamtown, Salt Ash and Fullerton Cove, who have been living with this disaster for too long. It will be five years this September since my community learned of PFAS contamination and how their lives would be literally turned upside down by it. But the story starts well before five years ago.

In 1938, a chemist by the name of Dr Roy Plunkett was experimenting with refrigerator coolant by placing various chemicals in small cylinders at dry ice temperatures. When he opened a cylinder expecting to find gas, he instead found a white powder. It was heat resistant and chemically inert, and had such a low surface friction that other substances wouldn't adhere to it. PFAS chemicals were created accidentally, used ubiquitously and marketed slickly. He showed this powder to his employer, American chemical giant DuPont, which then marketed PFAS chemicals as the most slippery substance on earth. They went on to be used in over 3,000 products worldwide, including non-stick cookware, waterproof clothing, camping gear, dental floss and even weapons. However, it was the use of PFAS in firefighting foams that caused these chemicals to leech into the land that surrounds RAAF bases all over Australia, including in my electorate of Paterson. The properties that made this chemical so popular also made it extremely difficult to expel from the environment and from the blood and body of humans. This report is the first step into how the Australian government plans to do this.

When this inquiry was announced, there was an overwhelming sigh in my community, but it wasn't a sigh of relief. This is the third inquiry around PFAS contamination and this government is still yet to respond to the last report, as the chair has already mentioned. There is still no PFAS policy, and communication between the Liberal government and residents in my community has been inconsistent, unreliable and inconclusive. In the absence of leadership, a class action was formed by residents in Williamtown, Oakey—as the member for Groom has pointed out—and Katherine, and in April it will finally be before the courts. I have pleaded with the Attorney-General to settle this matter outside of court, and I understand that this battle is ongoing. Regardless, it is a disgrace that it has come to this.

Last year, I welcomed the shadow minister for defence, Richard Marles, to Williamtown, again to meet with residents. It was after that meeting that I started a petition calling on the Prime Minister to visit Williamtown, to meet with residents—and I reiterate that invitation—something both he and the Minister for Defence are yet to do.

Last week, long-term resident and advocate for Williamtown Lindsay Clout penned an article in the Newcastle Herald. He referenced a critically acclaimed Hollywood movie about PFAS contamination in the USA called Dark Waters. It will be released in Australia this month. The film's based on a true story about a lawsuit against the chemical company responsible for contaminating thousands of people with the forever chemical PFAS. The lawyer representing the plaintiffs, Rob Bilott, highlighted how both government and regulators in the US failed to protect communities against PFAS contamination. He told Time magazine recently:

If we can't get where we need to go to protect people through our regulatory channels, through our legislative process, then unfortunately what we have left is our legal process …

Lindsay Clout, from my electorate, wrote in the Newcastle Herald:

That quote hit … home this week after the shutting down of a $6.7 billion road tunnelling project in Melbourne because workers came across PFAS contaminated soil. That project wasn't halted because a regulator said it couldn't go ahead. It wasn't halted because of legislation. It was instead two of Australia's biggest construction companies who said they were not prepared to put workers at risk. That decision highlights the utter contempt with which both the state and federal government have treated the families in Williamtown—

and across the country—

whose homes and properties are also contaminated.

For more than five years, the federal—

Liberal, coalition—

government has said there's not an issue with PFAS contamination still leaking off the Williamtown airbase. Health and environmental bodies in NSW have given residents confusing and—

at times—

conflicting advice.

Our political leaders and health and environmental regulators have utterly failed PFAS-contaminated communities like Williamtown. And as Rob Bilott says when that happens you have just one option—

the justice system.

I'm proud to be a voice in parliament for these people who I represent, especially those who the government has abandoned. We will continue to look, via this report process, at what the government is and isn't doing and hopefully get one step closer to justice for the people affected by PFAS contamination.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I also rise to speak on this very significant report in relation to an issue of great importance to my community—that is, the presence of PFAS on defence sites.

Mr Deputy Speaker Mitchell, as you know, the Bulimba Barracks site is in my community. Last year there was an announcement of a preferred purchaser for the site. The sale of the site has been underway ever since, and I anticipate that settlement will be announced soon. But, in the meantime, it's important to note that last year it was revealed that there had been PFAS found on the site.

I met with the minister to raise with her my concerns about the presence of PFAS on the site and to ask that action be taken in relation to remediation on the site. Alongside my colleagues in the state and local spheres, the Hon. Di Farmer MP and Councillor Kara Cook, we have been supporting a petition to ensure that any contaminants found at the site be remediated promptly. I want to make it very clear to this House that we, the local representatives for that particular area, will continue to insist that contaminants be remediated, particularly contaminants of great concern such as PFAS, especially given the proximity of the site to the river and to neighbouring properties. Thanks very much for the opportunity, Mr Deputy Speaker.