The rebuilding of a road on Fiji’s northern Rabi Island is currently in the works.

Fiji’s most recent natural disaster, Tropical Cyclone Keni, destroyed many parts of the country’s main towns.

One of Fiji’s outer islands, Rabi, was also affected by the cyclone.

Although the cyclone did not pass through the 66 sq km island in the Vanua Levu group, heavy rain and wind caused the landslide, blocking a road which connects the main village of Tabwewa to the rest of the island.

The landslide has meant that it is unsafe for locals to use the road. They must either walk around the rubble – or ride a horse.

This is not the first time a landslide has happened in Rabi due to the impacts of harsh weather.

Janet Tawaketini, whose last time on Rabi was in 1995, is visiting the island and was shocked to see the remnants of a previous landslide, also in Tabwewa.

“That’s where my great grandparents’ graves were. Their grave and their bones are literally gone,” she said.

A building company from Savusavu has been sent over to Rabi to fix the most recent landslide.

Hele Ikimotu and Blessen Tom are in Fiji as part of the Pacific Media Centre’s Bearing Witness 2018 climate change project. They are collaborating with the University of the South Pacific.

Since the New South Wales State government was elected in 2012, the massive WestConnex super expressway system in Sydney has been a great example of how this administration just can’t seem to get its head around planning transport. Poorly justified, poorly planned and critiqued by infrastructure experts, the project is still steaming ahead, driven by the Berejiklian LNP corporate-backed machine, hell bent on getting the 33 km network of tollways sold before the next election, early next year.

SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: By Wendy Bacon

You may not be able to see it but it’s the deadliest form of air pollution. It can penetrate deep into the lungs and bloodstream, causing heart attacks, lung cancer, and premature death. It’s called particulate matter, also known as particle pollution or PM.

Over the last month, I’ve been investigating Particulate Matter in the context of WestConnex. The results are disturbing. So far, this year air pollution has exceeded daily average national goals on at least 10 occasions along the route of the WestConnex M4 East, a tunnel between Homebush and Haberfield that is expected to open next year.

Daily exceedances of national goals are supposed to be rare in Sydney.

Before I report in more detail on the results of my investigation, I need to explain some background information. If you already know these facts, you can skip to the results section.

PM, roads and your health
Particulate matter is extremely small solid particles and liquid droplets suspended in air. PM10 is 10 micrometers or less in diameter, PM2.5 is 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter. There are also even smaller ultrafine particles that are not currently measured in Australia.

Short or long exposure to PM can damage your health. The smaller the particle the more dangerous it is. There are no known safe levels of PM 2.5. As well as being linked to cancer and heart disease, PM can also worsen pre-existing respiratory illnesses including asthma. These facts have been well established by scientific research.

More recently, research has shown that PM 2.5 may be linked to increased risks of dementia.

Vehicle emissions, especially diesel, contain PM. Government departments responsible for health, environment, transport and urban planning have known for years that living close to busy roads increases health risks due to PM exposure.

In 2017, University of Sydney Professor of Respiratory Medicine Paul Torzillo told a meeting in Camperdown (where a major WestConnex Stage 3 construction site is planned) that,

Every major program and project like this around the world leads to more cars and more vehicles coming into cities. It’s been very well looked at by a number of research groups. Every single infrastructure project like this leads to more cars and more vehicles coming into cities and you have a greater contribution to air pollution from traffic-related pollution.

Traffic-related pollution – there is a huge amount of evidence that air pollution increases death from cardiovascular disease, that’s the leading cause of death in Australia. It leads to increased hospital admissions from heart disease. It leads to increased stroke. It leads to increased respiratory disease, and it leads to increased deaths from respiratory disease. It leads to higher rates of low birth weight in kids. And there are major reviews by WHO that occur every few years or from groups that are consulted by them and every time one of these reviews occurs the evidence about the strength of the relationship between pollution and bad health get stronger and stronger. There’s no question about this……It’s absolutely true that pollution levels for half a kilometer each side of roads are much higher than they are outside that. Pollution levels will be higher at entry and exit points. They’ll be higher at stack points. But there are big measurement problems here.

• Professor Paul Torzillo, Executive Clinical Director and Head of Respiratory Medicine at Sydney’s Royal Prince Alfred (RPA) hospital, May 2017.

The NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) measures PM 10 and PM 2.5 in accordance with national standards. (Two weeks ago City of Sydney Deputy Mayor Jess Miller raised concerns about the effectiveness of this OEH monitoring because some OEH monitors do not meet national standards. I’ll discuss this further in another post.)

National Standards
PM 10
An annual average of 25.0 μg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter). Victoria wanted 20 but NSW would not agree. Victoria has adopted the stronger standard for itself.

Average 24-hour levels must be no higher than 50 µg/m3.

PM 2.5
An annual average of 8.0 μg/m3 and a 24-hour average of 25.0 μg/m3.

No exceedances are allowed.

Exceptional events
In 2016, Federal and State governments introduced the National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure (NEPM) ‘exceptional event’ rule for determining compliance against PM10 and PM2.5 goals:

Exceptional event means a fire or dust occurrence that adversely affects air quality at a particular location, and causes an exceedance of 1 day average standards in excess of normal historical fluctuations and background levels, and is directly related to: bushfire; jurisdiction authorised hazard reduction burning; or continental scale windblown dust.

National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure,

Any exceedance day deemed to be “exceptional” is not included when determining compliance with NEPM goals, while an exceedance determined to be a ‘non-exceptional’ event is (NEPM Section 18, 3C and 3D). Note that “exceptional'” is defined narrowly. A hot and dusty day in Sydney does not qualify, and does count against the goals, unless it is during seasonal burn-off, directly linked to an actual fire, or a continental scale dust storm.

Westconnex M4 East and air quality
Construction of the M4 East has now been underway for two years. However, back in 2015, it had not yet been approved. With all this evidence about PM available, it’s not surprising that residents who live or have children attending schools near:

• major construction sites serviced by heavy diesel trucks
• future portals where traffic will concentrate
• unfiltered ventilation stacks
• major roads that will become busier due to toll avoidance

and many other citizens and health professionals were concerned about how the project would negatively affect air quality, both during construction and after the tunnel opens. At WestConnex EIS sessions, NSW Roads and Maritime Services representatives were like a broken record, constantly reassuring residents that their concerns were unfounded. But residents and community action groups didn’t trust them and submitted thousands of submissions to NSW Planning objecting to WestCONnex M4 East on the grounds of air quality. Councils’ hired independent experts whose analysis found major flaws in the WestConnex EIS.

Jozefa Sobski, a highly respected retired senior public servant recently awarded an Order of Australia for her services to women, included these words in her submission:

The air quality issues have not been addressed. The ventilation stacks will be close to Haberfield Public School, the Infant’s Home and residents of Walker Avenue, Ramsay Street and Denham. What scientific proof will be provided that air quality will not be considerably affected for the worse during and after construction is complete?

On November 15, 2015, the Inner West Courier reported:

“The parents at Haberfield Public School fear our children will be at the centre of a toxic triangle of pollution stack and portals after three or more years of construction just metres away from the school,” Haberfield Public School P & C vice president Sherrill Nixon said. Ms Nixon said the streets around Haberfield Public School will see three years of noise and heavy truck movements during construction, only to end up with polluting exhaust stacks less than 500m away.

“The impact on our school community is devastating,” she said. “We insist our kids’ learning and wellbeing comes first.”

Read Sharon Laura’s submission. Her home is 150m from the Ashfield/Haberfield interchange, 300 metres from the Stage 1 and Stage 3 tunnel ventilation stacks, and 600 metres from the City West Link, Haberfield interchange. All of these are currently being constructed. In her submission, she expressed concerns about the impact of diesel trucks, hundreds of which now move around Haberfield each day. She wrote:

I also object to the increase in localised pollution around construction sites. In particular around the Parramatta Rd construction exit onto Bland St, Ashfield by large numbers of diesel vehicles heavily laden, revving up or idling and thus spewing out the most dangerous pollutants. Pollutants which will sit and hang low around the natural gully which surrounds the Parramatta Rd and Bland St intersection, and pollutants that may not disperse quickly or at all, – depending on the local weather conditions and volume of trucks using this location.

In other words, many citizens, councillors, local MPs and action groups did all in their power to warn of the potential harm that could be done to residents and workers. The problem is that no one listened or if they did, they were not prepared to refuse the WestCONnex M4 East application.

In its response, WestConnex EIS dismissed construction impacts as ‘temporary’ and not sufficiently significant to quantify. Temporary in this case can be as long as three years or even six years if you are unlucky enough to live in St Peters Haberfield or parts of Ashfield. This could encompass a child’s first five years or his or her primary school years. It is not temporary. Nevertheless NSW Planning adopted this view.

Under political pressure from the NSW LNP government, NSW Planning overrode the concerns of Councils, residents and independent health experts and approved the M4 East.

Monitoring along the M4 East
The Sydney Motorway Corporation is currently operating 6 monitors along the route of the M4 East, which will open next year along with two huge unfiltered ventilation stacks. One stack is in Homebush, the other in Haberfield. NSW Planning requires the monitors to be operated for one year before the tunnel opens. The monitoring is designed to reveal the impacts of the stacks on local air quality. There are a lot of problems with this strategy, which is aimed at allaying residents’ concerns.

Planning does not require any monitoring to measure the impacts on residents living near the tunnel portals or of the construction impacts that last for years. Nevertheless, the SMC monitoring is useful and provides us with a rare glimpse of air quality in the Inner West Parramatta Road corridor and evidence to use in evaluating WestConnex’s environmental claims for the M4 East and other WestConnex projects, the Western Harbour Tunnel, the F6 and Northern Beaches Link.

Sydney Motorway Corporation, which controls WestConnex, hired a company called Ecotech to do the monitoring. The monitors were turned on in mid-December 2017. Since February, I have been taking snapshots of the data on the website. The data shows the average 24 hour level ( at one point each day) and the average so far for the year (only 3 months of 12).

The readings are taken at ten-minute intervals. Frustratingly, the data disappears altogether after 30 days. Also, no rolling hourly averages are shown, which means that peaks during the day are hidden from view. This means that the daily average graphs are rathre misleading because they have a straight line from one point in the day to a point in the next. By comparison, the NSW OEH monitors show rolling hourly averages.

The hourly averages can only be calculated by following the website closely. So far I have taken many snapshots of the data. Getting a more nuanced picture is important because the short-term effects of both PM 10 and 2.5 can be serious.

The data published on SMC Ecotech website has to go through a validation process before it used for monthly reports, which only include very general results. So far there has only been one monthly report—I will come back to that in another post.

Measuring and predicting air quality is a highly complex and technical matter but some basic points can be made. Local air quality strongly reflects broader regional air quality. It can also reflect local impacts including dusty construction sites and nearby traffic. In following the website, it quickly becomes apparent that wind direction is a strong influence at all locations. Wind changes in Sydney are very frequent and can cause readings to go quite rapidly up and down. It’s important to remember that when the wind changes, it may be blowing pollution across the road or to another suburb. The monitors only measure the air quality at one particular location. The air quality may be better or worse at other locations in the area. For example, nearby trees can reduce levels of pollution.

I will begin with some reporting about Haberfield.

Results
In this post, I will report only on the two of 6 M4 East monitors that are in Haberfield.

Haberfield
Haberfield has been suffering the impacts of WestConnex for more than two years. Hundreds of homes and trees were torn down. Huge construction sites were established. Road building, tunneling and spoil recovery happens 24 hours a day. When the road opens there will be portals on both Wattle Street and Parramatta Road. If Stage 3 is approved, there will be more construction sites for another three years.

There are two monitors in Haberfield, one at Haberfield Public School and one at Ramsay Street.

Haberfield Public School
Haberfield Public School (HPS) fronts Bland Street. With the school’s approval, a monitor was placed at the back of the school. It is 200 metres from Parramatta Rd which is a major traffic route and the site of a future portal. Currently the road is being widened and the portal constructed. The HPS monitor is about 410 metres from the location of the unfiltered ventilation stack.

So far the results at the monitor for Haberfield Public School are worrying. However only three months of data have been collected, so the annual average is only an indication of the trends.

PM 2.5

According to the January report (the actual results are no longer on the website), the average for was 9 µg/m³. Since I started monitoring the site in early February, the average has been slowly rising until it is now just over 10 µg/m³.

Here is a search I did of PM 2.5 between February 7th and March 7th 2018.

This snapshot below of a graph of Haberfield School average daily levels of PM 2.5 between February 23 and March 7 shows that the levels were only below 10 μg/m3 on a few days. Not surprisingly, the annual average graph was climbing steadily towards 10 μg/m3. The spikes in levels show the weaknesses of measuring only averages.

On March 5, the daily average reached 23 μg/m3, only two below a national exceedance.

PM 10
On February 15, the PM 10 daily average shot up to just over 50 μg/m3. (Some of the other five WestCONnex monitors also recorded more than 50 μg/m3 on that day.) If this was a NSW OEH site, that would be a national exceedance unless it was later classed as an ‘exceptional event’.

This is a screenshot of a search I did of PM 10 levels at Haberfield Public School between February 1 and 27, 2018. This graph also shows that the annual average for PM 10 so far this year is hovering around the 20 μg/m3. If we were in Victoria, anything above 20 μg/m3 would be an exceedance for a full 12 months.

It shows the daily exceedance on February 15 but doesn’t show that on February 23 around midday, the PM 10 climbed to 131 μg/m3. One of the disadvantages of averages is that it doesn’t show the peaks and troughs. The data could easily presented in a way that showed the variation and still show the averages.

Ramsay Street
The Ramsay Street monitor is about 100m west of the corner of Wattle Street and Ramsay Street. Major construction work is happening not far away. It’s also near a very busy road which would be expected to get even busier when the tunnel portal opens nearby. Many trees in this area have been destroyed, including very large ones. Trees help reduce PM.

The results at this monitor are also disturbing.

There has been at least one exceedance of the PM 2.5 daily average of 25 μg/m3. The annual average for PM 10 is about 9.6 μg/m3 for the first three months of the year. There have been at least 3 days exceedance of the daily average limit of 50 μg/m3 for PM 10. The annual average for PM 10 is so far showing at about 23 μg/m3, which is only two below the national daily average limit of 25 μg/m3. This is well above the limit that has been agreed to in Victoria.

A bad day in Sydney
The weather on Sunday, March 18 was unusually hot and gusty for a Sydney autumn day. Temperatures soared across Sydney and by late afternoon the PM 10 levels were climbing. The weather was unusual but is likely to become more common as climate change progresses.

In the evening, I checked the website and noticed some very high levels of PM 10, both at Haberfield School and the site of the Ramsay Street monitor. Night work was scheduled near the corner of Ramsay Street and Wattle Streets. not far from the Ramsay Street monitor.

According to the website, at 8.30 pm, the PM 2.5 level at Ramsay Street was an extraordinarily high 51 μg/m3 and the PM 10 was 48 μg/m3. At Haberfield School, the levels were 15 μg/m3 for PM 2.5 and 68 μg/m3 for PM 10. Ten minutes later, the levels remained nearly the same at Haberfield school but at Ramsay Street, the PM 2.5 was still very high at 51 μg/m3 and the PM 10 levels had shot up to 112 μg/m3. At 9.50 pm, the Ramsay Street levels remained the same for PM 2.5 μg/m3 and had climbed to 88 for PM 10.

I wanted the check whether levels were rising at other monitors in Sydney on the OEH site on which rolling daily averages get updated hourly. Unfortunately, the OEH website for that page was not working and was not fixed until Monday morning. I later confirmed that the levels were high for PM 10 but mostly not nearly as high as Ramsay Street.

By 9.10 pm, at Haberfield School, the website showed PM 2.5 had increased to 21 and the PM 10 to 54 μg/m3. By this time, the PM 2.5 levels at Ramsay Street had dropped back to 12 μg/m3 but the PM 10 was an extraordinary 438 μg/m3. Twenty minutes later it was still at that level at 9.30 pm. The PM 10 was also rising higher at Haberfield School.

At 10 pm, the air quality had deteriorated even further. By this time the PM 10 levels at Haberfield School was 260 μg/m3 and the PM 2.5 was at 23. Other sites along the route were also high. Ramsay Street PM 10 had dropped back to 239 μg/m3 but even more worrying the more dangerous PM 2.5 was **183 μg/m3 ** where it stayed until sometime between 10.50 and midnight. In case, you don’t believe me, I took a snapshot.

I would like to know what caused the very high levels of PM 2.5 at Ramsay Street on Sunday night. While the PM 10 levels were high (although mostly not nearly as high) at monitors across the region, the PM 2.5 levels were much lower elsewhere. Does WestConnex have monitors on site? Were workers including young night traffic controllers warned? If the levels were that high at the monitor, could they have been even higher elsewhere? How many residents were exposed?

When early risers were getting up around Haberfield School on March 19th, the PM 2.5 levels were 27 μg/m3. At midday, the PM 2.5 was 30 μg/m3. By the time children were getting ready to leave school, the PM 2.5 was still 27 and PM 10 was 117 μg/m3.

According to the OEH website, it appears that only at Liverpool in Sydney’s South West were PM 2.5 levels nearly as high as at Haberfield School for most of Monday, March 19th. (The fact that there was somewhere else in Sydney was as bad as Haberfield, doesn’t make the situation any better.)

On March 20th, between 6 am and 2 pm, the PM 10 levels at Haberfield School averaged approximately 65 μg/m3. For short periods, the level was higher than 110 μg/m3. This observation is for 8 hours so it does not represent another national exceedance. It does, however, provide evidence of the air quality experienced by children at school that day.

As I finish writing this report, it’s now 9.30 pm on the evening of March 22nd. The air has cooled and it has been pouring for hours. The wind is low. The levels of PM 10 have gone down in Haberfield and elsewhere in Sydney. When I last checked at 8.10 pm on Thursday, the PM 2.5 level at Haberfield School was 10 μg/m3 and at Ramsay Street, 13 μg/m3. This is much higher than other monitors across Sydney.

Update: When I checked the Ecotech website at 8 am on March 23, the levels were 12 μg/m3 and 11 μg/m3.

Conclusion
I have a lot more information and analysis to present about air quality, including about other sites along the M4 East. I would appreciate any assistance with further information or analysis.

Apart from being seriously concerned about the impact of WestConnex on the health of Sydney’s communities, there are several specific issues that concern me.

• How does this information reflect on the methodology and results of the AIr Quality report in the WestConnex EIS? What should be done if the assumptions and predictions on which the approval was based turn out to be based on misleading or false information?
• Why were the community’s views not shown more respect by decision makers in NSW Planning? Consultation without respect is meaningless. An EIS that is controlled by Sydney Motorway Corporation and conducted by a company [AECOM that has a big commercial in WestCONnex], was bound to present the material in a positive way. I’m not suggesting that information was falsified but that the process was limited and hopelessly biased towards approving the project without sufficient protection for the community. For more on AECOM’s role, read one of my investigations published in New Matilda or this piece by Carmen Lawrence .)
• What is the situation at other WestConnex construction sites in St Peters, Arncliffe, and Kingsgrove where there are no monitoring reports available? Or further West on the widened M4 at Auburn North Public School that lies on a narrow strip of land between the WestConnex M4 and Parramatta Rd, which is busier since tolls were imposed on the widened M4.
• Originally Haberfield residents were promised that there would be no major above-ground construction in Haberfield even if Stage 3 was approved. But this has now changed. If Stage 3 is approved, WestCONnex wants to establish a major construction site even closer to the school on the corner of Bland Street and Parramatta Rd. This Stage 3 proposal is currently being actively considered by NSW Planning. We must try to stop its approval. In the light of the evidence available, I find it hard to believe that any responsible person could approve these sites.
• How much worse will the air quality get when the tunnels are opened? How many people will suffer life-threatening health illnesses or other health problems as a result of WestConnex, NorthConnex and other major road projects? What about the apartments on the southern side of Parramatta Rd where there is no monitor? WestConnex tore down buildings that sheltered these buildings from Parramatta Rd traffic and now they look directly over the construction site.

• The community needs more independent experts on their side. Many health experts warn against the health impacts of car dependency and massive road projects but detailed professional research and analysis on specific locations need time and money. Many environmental firms only work for big government and corporate players. Is there a role for citizen scientists that could amplify the work of independent scientists?
• If you start following the website, you’ll find that there are quite a few negative results, mostly for PM 10. You obviously can’t have negative PM. The community needs to know how these odd readings affect the overall findings and what a negative reading at one point of time means for the readings shortly before or afterward. Do these get adjusted upwards later? I contacted two industry sources who did not wish to be named. Both confirmed they are errors. One attributed the errors to intense moisture. The other said it could be moisture but could also be caused by other factors. Extremely positive results of 985 also occasionally appear and I have assumed those as errors which also need explaining.

This is a complex situation that needs more media attention. If any other journalist needs information, I am happy to share information.

Research support: Luke Bacon. Thanks to Lorrie Graham for 2015 photos of children protesting in Haberfield.

Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who is also a political activist. She wants her journalism to be useful to those who resist abuses of power and seek social justice rather than supporting existing power structures, which is what most journalism does. She is also a board member of the Pacific Media Centre and Frontline editor of Pacific Journalism Review. She blogs at Wendy Bacon.

Another major road construction in Port Moresby, the Koura Way, is expected to be completed in September.

It is being built by the China Harbour Engineering Company at a cost of more than K80 million (NZ$35 million) funded under a BSP Group loan.

National Capital District (NCD) Governor Powes Parkop — who is a decisive early leader in the counting for his electorate in PNG’s 2017 general election — said the aim of the major road projects around Port Moresby was to ease traffic congestion and to promote a spread of businesses on the edge of the city.

Governor Parkop visited the construction site today to see that work progress has reached 60 percent complete.

He said the project was on schedule for the completion date of October 21.

The 4.5km four-lane road links Waigani Drive to the Hanuabada bypass. Initially, the road was supposed to connect Waigani Drive to the Badihagwa High School, but plans had changed.

About 250 energy saving lights will be installed to power up the road.

Other services
Parkop said the project had also provided a way for other services like water, sewerage, electricity and telecommunication services to be added to the area.

He said the project had generated about 400,000 cbm of fill materials — almost all of this being used for the Ela Beach redevelopment.

He said there were plans for another road to link Koura Way to Sir William Skate Highway to link at the Baruni Bypass.

If that materialises, them the second phase of Ela Beach would be completed.

Delly Waigeno is a senior journalist with six years of experience in the television industry. She has a Bachelor of Arts degree in literature and English communication with a minor in journalism from the University of Papua New Guinea. In 2012, she was awarded a Business Reporter of the Year commendation by the Media Council of Papua New Guinea.

• Other PNG stories

If you live in or visit the seats of Grayndler and Sydney, you can’t help but be aware of the issue of the WestConnex toll road that is beginning to carve up neighbourhoods with massive dusty constructions sites and the forced acquisition of hundreds of homes and parks.

The $16.8 billion project is meant to be about solving traffic congestion – a claim disputed by expert traffic planners, the City of Sydney, and 16,000 community groups and individuals who sent submissions to the NSW Department of Planning. More than 99 percent of these submissions objected to the whole project. The NSW government approved it anyway.

This presents a political problem for local Federal MPs Anthony Albanese and Tanya Plibersek. Labor – including leader Bill Shorten and Shadow Minister for Infrastructure Albanese – supports WestConnex.

The convincing wins of Greens candidates in Newtown and Balmain at last year’s NSW state election was partly attributed to a rejection by voters of Labor’s support for Westconnex.

This was a perfect time for Labor to engage in a post election rethink of its policy. There is plenty of expert evidence on which it could rely to argue that WestConnex is a waste of public funds and will not solve traffic congestion. It will saddle Western Sydney with tolls for generations.

Instead, Labor has kept supporting the project, which is why it remains a burning issue across Sydney’s inner west.

In this campaign, Albanese and Plibersek and their teams began by trying to convince voters, including by direct phone calls, that WestConnex is only a state issue. However, anyone who looks at the WestConnex website will see that it involves a partnership between the NSW and Australian governments. $3.5 billion in Federal funds have already been allocated to the project.

COf this, a $2 billion loan and at least $300 million in grant money is still to be paid over. Community groups WestConnex Action Group, No WestConnex, and the City of Sydney are campaigning for the federal funds and construction to be stopped, at least until a federal audit of the project is over.

Albanese told a packed Balmain Town Hall in May that he would not attempt to block the funds although he would not support additional funding. He failed to answer a question on what evidence Labor’s support for WestConnex is based on, and left the meeting for another appointment before it had ended.

WestConnex and the Federal election
I’ve been researching the WestConnex story, including Federal parliamentary debates on the issue, for more than 18 months. So when I read the pamphlet that Albanese distributed across the entire Grayndler electorate before the July 2 Federal election, I was surprised to see this:

Many locals have also raised their concerns over WestConnex with me. I share these concerns which is why I have raised the issue of WestConnex specifically in relation to problems of financing, planning, lack of community consultation and the impact of the WestConnex project within the community, more than 30 times in Parliament.

Judge for yourself, but I understood that to mean Albanese shared concerns of the electorate about WestConnex and that he had raised these concerns on behalf of his community in Parliament more than 30 times.

A review of the 16000 submissions reveals that key community concerns include; traffic congestion, granting construction contracts to companies before an Environmental Impact Statement was completed (which, by the way, was eventually done by AECOM, a company with record of misleading traffic studies), pollution, loss of parks and biodiversity, dislocation of communities, loss of housing and heritage buildings, underpayment of those whose homes have been acquired, poor community consultation and secrecy.

Although I don’t agree with some Labor policies, I expected that the basic content of its leaflets would be factually accurate but this statement did not ring true.

I began with a search of Hansard. It revealed 23 occasions on which Albanese had made a speech mentioning “WestConnex” and one occasion when he raised the issue in a Committee. I asked two people familiar with the tricky Hansard search engine to do the same search and they confirmed my results.

So I decided to write to Albanese.

I wrote:

As a journalist, I have covered WestConnex extensively since December 2014. I was somewhat surprised by your statement, so I did a search of Hansard. I’ve identified 23 occasions on which you have mentioned Westconnex in Parliament and one occasion in a Committee hearing in 2015.

I have not been able to identify any other occasions when you have specifically raised concerns about ‘community consultation’ and very few references to what could be described as ‘impact of the WestConnex project within the community.’

I intend [to]publish an article about your statement. I wish to make sure that my search of Hansard has thrown up correct results. If you have information or research suggesting that my search is wrong, I would appreciate it if you or your staff could send me a list of more than 30 occasions on which you raised your concerns about WestConnex by 9 am on Monday.

On Sunday, I attended a rally of hundreds of residents protesting against WestConnex and calling for a halt to the funding. Albanese made a brief appearance to talk to people one on one and walk a dog. He declined an invitation to speak at the rally.

Later on Sunday, I received this reply from Albanese.

Dear Wendy,

It is remarkable that you would claim to be acting as a journalist rather than a campaigner for a political party, but I guess how you reconcile that with the journalists’ code of ethics is a matter for you.

I have raised the issue of Westconnex as a member of the House of Representatives on at least 33 occasions. Further, as a member of the Joint House Committee on Public Accounts and Audit, I have raised the issue many times at public and private hearings. As you may know this Committee provides Parliamentary scrutiny of the Australian National Audit Office and the ANAO has announced an audit into Westconnex. I note the Greens political party have not sought to participate in that Committee.

I do not anticipate these facts will alter the partisan nature of your contribution.

I will return to the question of ethics.

The language in Albanese’s reply was noticeably different from that in the pamphlet. The words “raised….  in parliament” were missing.

By then I had identified seven questions that Albanese had asked in Parliament mentioning ‘Westconnex’ so that brought my tally to 30.

For example, a year after the Abbott government was elected in September 2014, Albanese asked the Minister for Infrastructure Warren Truss why there were no bulldozers and cranes for big projects as the Coalition had promised in opposition. Truss assured him that work on WestConnex would begin soon. Another question just asked for a list of infrastructure.

On other occasions in 2014 he asked whether residents would be consulted or given information about WestConnex. He was told, as you would expect, that this would occur. I can’t find anywhere where he pursued widespread concern about the flawed consultation process or secrecy surrounding WestConnex.

In fact, after analysing all his interventions I concluded that if his claim was intended to communicate that he had raised community concerns on more than 30 occasions, it is false.

In September 2014, Parliament debated changes to Infrastructure Australia. In this context Albanese complained several times about traffic congestion that would be caused by the project in St Peters, Newtown and Haberfield near the WestConnex route. This was in the context that  Labor “were of the view that there is a real argument to extend the M4 to city. It is absurd that it is some considerable distance from the city and then people after being on the M4 hit a traffic jam.” He referred to contributing “$25 million to the WestConnex project to make sure that it got up to speed” when he was the Minister for Infrastructure. In October 2014, he told Parliament that the “M4 has to take people to the city  – that policy was right then and right today.”

Building WestConnex to the CBD is Labor’s policy. It is a concept that has almost no community or planner support. Labor has never explained where the giant portals would be along the route and where the tunnel would emerge in the CBD. Albanese also said WestConnex New M5 should go to Port Botany, an idea which has more support. But he never explained what route it would take to get there or what suburbs and scarce open space and endangered species would be affected.

On October 30, 2014, he complained that the Abbott government had granted a $2 billion concessional loan that had been paid to the NSW government before a cost benefit analysis. This is the first sign of a big ‘misunderstanding’ by Albanese that the loan had already been transferred to NSW. He continued to complain in parliament that it had been ‘made available’. In fact, no agreement was signed until last year and not a cent has been transferred.

New Matilda confirmed this with the Department of Infrastructure on April 26 and the Minister for Roads Paul Fletcher confirmed it again on June 2.  Last year, when concerned residents raised it at a Labor party forum in Arncliffe, Albanese told them it had been ‘prepaid.’ This was before the loan agreement had even been signed.

I do not know if Albanese genuinely misunderstood or if he was merely looking for a way to criticise the process of the project without actually opposing it. But only when confronted with the evidence at the recent Balmain Town Hall meeting did he accept that the money has not been paid. He then said that if he wins Grayndler again, he would not attempt to stop the $2 billion loan being passed to the NSW government. Greens candidates Jim Casey promised to do “everything in his power” to stop it.

This year, more details were released about WestConnex Stage 3. It became clear that a third part of the Grayndler electorate in Rozelle and Balmain would be badly affected. Albanese accepted an invitation to a community meeting. Just before parliament was adjourned on May 4, 2016, he made a short speech expressing his concern. But his focus was on ‘uncertainty’ in the community, not the strong opposition to the project and its impacts.

On three occasions, Albanese has mentioned Vince Crow a constituent who got two letters on the same day, one stating that his house would be resumed and another that it wouldn’t. He has never spoken about the hundreds of people who have lost their homes in St Peters or Haberfield or the destruction of heritage homes. He has never mentioned the pollution that will threaten the health of residents and children, not just in inner Sydney but in south west Sydney as well. He hasn’t mentioned the contracts being let before the EIS was completed or the farcical community consultation, concerns that have been expressed thousands of times in submissions. He has not referred to independent reports providing evidence that tollways such as WestConnex will not solve Sydney’s traffic congestion.

If less informed voters have got the impression from his leaflet that he has supported his community on WestConnex or communicated its impacts to the broader public, they would be wrong. It is true to say that on several occasions he has expressed concerns about uncertainty, planning processes, and traffic congestion.

Journalism, politics and ethics
It is the job of journalists to hold politicians accountable for their statements.

Albanese raises the issue of my integrity. I know from experience he is thin-skinned so I was not surprised by his response.

As I have explained on my own website, I am an activist and a journalist. If you ever read the Daily Telegraph, you’ll know that many journalists are activists for particular political causes, but those who work in the mainstream media don’t usually disclose it. I do where relevant – see the bottom of this story. I apply the ethics of my union, the Media Arts and Entertainment Alliance.

I am also a long term supporter but not a member of the Greens. My reasons include their anti-corruption stance, donations reform in NSW, support for those experiencing miscarriage of justice, support of public education, resistance to the privatisation of TAFE services at a time when Labor was supporting privatisation, opposition to coal mining, coal seam gas, and to fossil fuel subsidies.

I support their strong feminist program including decriminalisation of abortion, support for equal rights in every sphere including equal marriage. Unlike Labor and the Liberals, they opposed the Federal Intervention in the NT, which I also strongly opposed. Last but not least, I would not consider voting for any party that condones what I regard as concentration camps on Nauru and Manus and our inhumane refugee policies.

I have campaigned for both Jim Casey for Grayndler and Sylive Ellsmore for Sydney and endorsed Senator Lee Rhiannon in tomorrow’s election.

But that’s not going to stop me being a reporter.

Road lobby donations to WestConnex
Facts do matter, so I have been delving a little deeper into why it might be that Labor got locked in so early to the WestConnex project.

There has been a perception that it is all about votes in Western Sydney. Labor politicians may have convinced themselves of that but a small No WestConnex poll suggests that support is not strong and a case could easily be made that $16.8 billion would be better spent on public transport rather than roads.

Democracy for Sale, a project associated with Senator Lee Rhiannon, published a report just before the Federal election showing donations from big road industry companies over 15 years.

Support for roads has been built through donations over a long period.  Over 15 years, major companies associated with the industry have donated more than $15 million with Labor receiving slightly more than the Coalition, probably because there were more Labor governments in power during the selected period. Macquarie and Leighton Contractors ( now CIMIC), both of which are heavily involved in WestConnex, have been the biggest donors.

Since the GFC, NSW reforms banning developer donations in 2009, along with the publicity around the corrupting influence of donations, have seen a reduction in donations, but the timing of more recent Leighton donations is interesting.

The Gillard Labor government went to the polls in August 2010. It was always going to be a tightly fought contest.

Leighton’s annual return for 2010 – 2011 shows that the company made a $50,000 donation to Federal Labor on July 7, 2010 and further donations to Federal Labor totalling more than $10,000 between July and April 2011. On July 7, Leighton also made a donation of $70,000 to the Federal Liberal Party and on July 30, $5,500 to the Federal Branch of the National Party and a further $10,000 on August 27 and $1,750 before June 2011.

The NSW LNP government was elected in March 2011 and then Premier Barry O’Farrell set up Infrastructure NSW, which was chaired by ex-LNP Premier Nick Greiner. In October 2012, Infrastructure NSW recommended a 33km tollway system which it called WestConnex.

On January 28, 2013, the then Shadow Minister for Infrastructure Anthony Albanese announced $25 million to “advance the WestConnex project”. The NSW government invited a number of companies to work on the business case that would justify WestConnex.

Despite the corruption allegations and the company’s record of being involved in failed tollways, Leightons was one of several companies that was invited to be part of the planning and development of WestConnex. This was a key moment in a number of decisions through which the O’Farrell government attempted to make the project a political fait accompli.

Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon raised the issue of donations and WestConnex tollway company political donations in February 2013 when she told the Senate, “The ears of politicians have been successfully bent by the likes of the motorway construction companies… companies like John Holland, Leighton, Thiess and Macquarie Bank have given big donations to the major parties. The public do not know if deals are done behind closed doors, but there is the perception that MPs are favouring private road building businesses at the expense of public transport.”

In the March 2013 budget, Labor included $1.8 billion for the WestConnex. One of its conditions was that it should go to the Sydney CBD. The LNP opposition promised $1.5 billion. In 2013, Leighton Contractors and its subsidiary Thiess were awarded more than $4 million dollars to work on early plans to justify WestConnex.

Analysis of Leighton’s donations for 2012/2013 shows that several donations during this critical period totalled $7272 to Federal Labor. The pro-tollway Tony Abbott led opposition also received $2450 in donations to the Federal Liberal Party branch, $2,200 to the Tasmanian Liberal Party and $909 to the Nationals. In 2013/2014, Leightons donated a further $10,700 to Federal Labor with the Liberal party only receiving $3000.

But the Democracy for Sale report reveals some fascinating detail about the politicians who were directly funded by Leighton in early years. Unfortunately later donation returns do not include such detail.

In 2005/06, Leighton executives attended a private dinner with the then Liberal Minister for Foreign Affairs Alexander Downer, a fundraising lunch with Labor’s Kim Beazley, lunch and dinner with then Liberal shadow Minister Chris Hartcher, who retired in 2014 after NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption investigated his involvement with Liberal party donations, a dinner with then ALP MPs Paul McLeay and Michael Costa, dinner with National Party MP Warren Truss, and a boardroom dinner with Victorian ALP ex-Premier Steve Bracks. There was also a private dinner with Wayne Swan and Peter Garrett, lunch with former LNP Defence Minister Kevin Andrews, dinner with Queensland Labor ex-Premier Peter Beattie and a NSW Labor cabinet dinner for which $5000 was paid.

In 2006/2007, Leighton’s donations returns record that the Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen’s Prospect Campaign received two donations totally $2700 and Labor’s now Deputy Leader Tanya Plibersek Election Fund received $1800. In the same year, Tony Abbott’s Warringah campaign received $1000. In 2007/2008, Leighton’s donations return shows that then Labor Minister Martin Ferguson’s campaign account received $3000 in September 2007, and the current Shadow Labor Minister for Communications Jason Clare’s campaign received two donations of $2000 in July and August 2008.

Transfield Services, which has since been acquired by Ferrovial, a major player in tollways, also provide some earlier details of support for particular politicians.

The donations return for Transfield Services in 2010 recorded that in March 2010, the NSW ALP organised a fundraising lunch with Labor Treasurer Wayne Swan and the Minister for the Status of Women Tanya Plibersek, at which Transfield Services donated $2,500. On June 7, 2010 Transfield Services attended a dinner with then Labor MP and now Opposition Leader Bill Shorten and Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Anthony Albanese and donated $2500. Two weeks later, Transfield attended a dinner for PM Julia Gillard at which a further $5000 was donated. A week later a further $1000 was donated at an NSW ALP budget dinner. On June 5, 2012 Transfield Services donated $5500 to the North Sydney Business Forum, a business political funding associated with then North Sydney Liberal MP Joe Hockey.

It is likely that donations to the Coalition and Labor have had far more influence on transport policy than the concerns of ordinary citizens.

Just before the Federal election, Albanese pulled in ex-Prime Minister Paul Keating for an old style boots and all attack on the Greens at a Labor campaign meeting in Grayndler. I found this ironic because just 30 years ago, I was one of several Fairfax journalists who published an expose on the links between Keating and the property industry in NSW. Our attempts to expose ALP corruption in NSW so angered Keating that it led him to punish Fairfax by allowing Rupert Murdoch to take over the Herald and Weekly Times in 1987. This delivered News Corporation the dominance that allows it to so unfairly campaign against Bill Shorten and the Labor team today – except Albanese, of course. News Corp is campaigning to SAVE ALBO, providing him commentary space and a whole front page promotion to kick of his campaign for Grayndler. I wonder why?

Wendy Bacon, who lives in Newtown, a community heavily affected by this roading project, is a supporter of the Greens and endorsed Lee Rhiannon for reelection — she succeeded. Both Labor’s Anthony Albanese and Tanya Joan Plibersek were also reelected. Bacon supports the WestConnex Action Group. This article was first published by New Matilda and is republished here with permission.