‘You can make fracking better but you can’t do it well’

2550 Lauren MellorSir – Frack-free NT rejects the Chief Minister’s claim that its new onshore gas reference group can deliver “a safe and reliable fracking industry”.


The science and lived experiences of communities demonstrate that unacceptable fracking risks persist despite regulation and good intentions.


The reference committee is a cynical attempt by the Gunner Government to drag community organisations and stakeholder groups with strongly held concerns about fracking into implementing the government’s disastrous policy decision to frack the Territory.


What the science tells us is that you can make fracking better – but you can’t do it well.


Adopting checks and balances on this high-risk industry does not explain or excuse the irresponsible decision by the Gunner Government to approve fracking in the first place.


While the reference group will include some important voices at the table, the pro-fracking bias of many of its appointees make it clear the Gunner Government has no genuine interest in acting on the risks that stakeholders in the environment, tourism, pastoral and farming sectors have identified.


We will continue to stand with Territory landholders and communities to prevent the imposition of fracking gasfields across our regions and work towards a permanent Territory-wide ban.


Lauren Mellor (pictured)

Frack-free NT




Be Sociable, Share!

A new way to support our journalism

We do not have a paywall. If you support our independent journalism you can make a financial contribution by clicking the red button below. This will help us cover expenses and sustain the news service we’ve been providing since 1994, in a locally owned and operated medium.

Erwin Chlanda, Editor

2 Comments (starting with the most recent)

NB: If you want to reply to a previous comment, start your comment with this notation: @n where n is the number of the comment you want to reply to.
  1. Evelyne Roullet
    Posted June 21, 2018 at 3:18 pm

    Pity he did not follow the same pattern for the National Aboriginal Gallery.

    View Comment
  2. Mark Fraser
    Posted June 21, 2018 at 9:14 am

    The NT Government did exactly what it pledged to do, to hold a moratorium (a temporary prohibition of an activity), and hold a formal Independent Scientific Inquiry, and then base a decision on whether to ban onshore gas or to permit it under highly-regulated circumstances in tightly-prescribed areas on the recommendations in the final report.
    Moratorium – tick.
    Formal Independent Scientific Inquiry – tick.
    Wait for final report before making any decision – tick
    Decision to ban or permit (based on scientific recommendations) – tick.
    What we see in social media echo chambers by anti-onshore gas activists, is an attempt to rephrase the NT Government’s commitments to portray is as having been a guaranteed outcome of a ban, which was never the case.
    The Independent Scientific Inquiry was made up of an array of scientific specialities, suited to study each claim or concern and be able to discredit it as false or misleading or validate it as relevant and define recommendation to mitigate or eliminate these potential risks.
    The fact that the findings of a panel of respectable eminent scientists did not side with the more extreme views of those opposed does not make the inquiry or the NT Government some kind of plot or conspiracy to betray the NT public.
    Far from it, it actually followed a proper course of investigation and made an informed decision which should now be respected.

    View Comment

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *