FNQ ag project back on track

05 Jun, 2015 02:00 AM
The greenfield agricultural enterprise will comprise 50,000ha of irrigated cropping land, co-located processing facilities and associated water, electricity and logistics infrastructure.
The IFED (includes) sugar and guar industries in addition to cattle, meat processing and aquaculture
The greenfield agricultural enterprise will comprise 50,000ha of irrigated cropping land, co-located processing facilities and associated water, electricity and logistics infrastructure.

NEW life has been breathed into a major Far North Queensland agricultural project, feared killed off following the January 31 Queensland election.

On Friday the Palaszczuk government announced environmental impact studies would now need to be completed before the proposed $1.98 billion Etheridge Integrated Agriculture Project in the Gilbert River catchment near Georgetown can proceed.

The Integrated Food and Energy Development (IFED) project is expected to include the development of sugar and guar industries in addition to cattle, meat processing and aquaculture over 50,000 hectares.

The project is expected to create more than 1700 jobs during construction and more than 1000 jobs during operation.

Substantial numbers of those jobs are expected to be made available to local Indigenous people.

Under the proposal water would be diverted from the Einasleigh and Etheridge rivers into two artificial off-stream lakes and channelled to pumping stations which supply irrigation.

Queensland Development Minister Anthony Lynham said the memorandum of understanding (MOU) would lay out a transparent and comprehensive assessment pathway for the project.

"The previous LNP government signed a secret development protocol with the project's proponent, (IFED), in November 2013 but the details were not disclosed," he said.

"The Palaszczuk government is honouring an election commitment by rescinding this protocol and releasing it."

Dr Lynham said the MOU would:

  • Provide an independent scientific assessment to ensure the proposed water offtake was sustainable
  • Take measures to address impacts identified by the environmental impact statement
  • That IFED would pay commercial rates for the water.
  • "Most importantly, we require an overall net benefit from the project," Dr Lynham said.

    "This government supports jobs, but projects must stack up financially, environmentally and in the public interest," he said.

    The project had come under considerable pressure from anti-agriculture groups including the Wilderness Society.

    IFED director David Hassum said the MOU was a crucial step in moving the project ahead.

    "The MOU provides clarity and certainty was what is a large greenfield project," Mr Hassum said.

    "The MOU creates a pathway that, if successful, will provide a linkage between an approval process and a water allocation.

    "Under existing laws no such linkage exists. We could do all the necessary work, obtain all the necessary approvals but still not receive a water allocation. The MOU overcomes that issue."

    The job-boosting announcement comes amid growing concern that the scandal-wracked minority Palaszczuk government has been gripped by political paralysis.

    The environmental impact statement is expected to take 12 to 14 months to complete. The project has a planned three-year construction phase.

    No dams will be constructed as part of the project. Instead, flood water will be diverted into off stream storages to supply the project area.

    Shadow Minister for Northern Development, Andrew Cripps, said the Qld government had been forced into a "backflip" over the project.

    "The Palaszczuk government broke an election commitment to the Wilderness Society by providing some certainty to the IFED project as part of a rigorous assessment process," Mr Cripps said.

    “Less than two weeks ago Minister Lynham handed a draft development protocol to IFED representatives, effectively scuttling any chance of the project progressing, but today we saw a dramatic backflip.

    “This is an uncommon win for common sense, but it’s unfortunate that Minister Lynham and Labor have had to be dragged kicking and screaming to provide North Queensland with a chance to secure this significant job-creating economic development opportunity.”

    Mr Cripps said Dr Lynham had overcome political opposition from Deputy Premier Jackie Trad and the dominating influence the extreme green movement had over the new government.

    “Let’s be very clear, neither the former LNP process or the new Labor process gives IFED a free kick, but what can happen now is that the proponents and potential investors can go through the necessary approval processes with certainty and I welcome that," Mr Cripps said.

    Mark Phelps

    Mark Phelps

    is editor-in-chief of Queensland Country Life
    Date: Newest first | Oldest first


    Northern Cocky
    5/06/2015 6:43:31 AM

    Sugar? guar? ethanol? Um, has anyone checked the current and projected prices for these commodities? Before wasting our money by allocating public servants to assess the environmental and heritage aspects of this 'project', I think someone in gov should be going through IFED's costing/finance model with a fine-toothed comb.
    Nothern Worker
    5/06/2015 6:44:00 AM

    I think the heading project back on track is not accurate. I have been following the project and I not sure it was ever on track. The simple fact is it is a company with no development funds, office, paid staff or plant. All but one of its key commodities are not viable. No one in the commercial world will fund it because they offer very little detail on how it will make money and their numbers don't stack up. I live and work on the North and am sick of their rhetoric used in the media to promote it (this is a game changer, etc). How about some hard numbers?
    Mike M
    5/06/2015 6:49:38 AM

    I'm all for developing the north (and I would be an indirect beneficiary) but why is it that Green Oil Plantations comes to mind when I see the proposed size of the project and the employment numbers? Is it a case of 'too good to be true'?
    Drovers Dog
    5/06/2015 7:08:36 AM

    Now where on earth will these blokes raise $1.98B for a project that carries so much inherent risk, not the least being drought and future sugar prices? This smells just like all the other mega, super-dooper, you beaut, whizz-bang projects we have had proposed to us up north for decades.
    Bush Lawyer
    5/06/2015 7:12:33 AM

    Sugar and guar! What? If they were proposing to grow marijuana it might have a shred of credibility, but sugar and guar...hundreds of kms from a port and having to build all infrastructure and services from scratch, c'mon.
    5/06/2015 11:24:00 AM

    I hope there is no Gov money being proposed- as per Henbury.
    5/06/2015 11:24:52 AM

    Why are so many worried about the financial sustainability of IFED? If they want to have a go, and if, if, they go down the tube, let the investors then howl about it. Get the north developed!
    5/06/2015 3:09:58 PM

    Bush Lawyer. Second that!
    Terrance J Loughlin
    6/06/2015 10:32:06 AM

    I wish 'em luck
    8/06/2015 8:33:35 AM

    Contributions by so many to benefit so few to see such a white elephant? Fix up what we already have first.....then see what is needed.
    1 | 2  |  next >


    Screen name *
    Email address *
    Remember me?
    Comment *


    light grey arrow
    I'm one of the people who want marijuana to be legalized, some city have been approved it but
    light grey arrow
    #blueysmegacarshowandcruise2019 10 years on Daniels Ute will be apart of another massive cause.
    light grey arrow
    Australia's live animal trade is nothing but a blood stained industry that suits those who