Senator Allison asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 8 September 2003:

(1) What representation, if any, has the Government made to the proponents of Basslink and to the Victorian and Tasmanian State Governments on the recommendation of the Joint Advisory Committee (JAC) that an environment review committee be established to monitor developments.

(2) Why did the Government not make the establishment of such a committee a requirement of its approval of the project.

(3) Has the Government been advised by proponents of Basslink that a metallic return cable is now to be used in order to reduce the magnetic field; if so, has the Government called for the Integrated Impact Assessment Statement to be amended and resubmitted; (a) if not, why not; and (b) has the Government called for a report on the detail of this new technology.

(4) What effects will the new technology have on marine organisms including breeding, migration and feeding habits.

(5) What does the Government understand to be the impact of this technology on shark behaviour in the area.

(6) Have the proponents of Basslink provided details as to how the cables are to be kept in close proximity in order to reduce the magnetic field; if so, can these details be provided.

(7) Is it the case that cables will now be installed in separate ducts or trenched through the dune system; if so, what assessment has been made of the impact on dunes.

(8) What assessment has been made of the means by which cables will be protected and kept together over the very dynamic marine environment, where sand shifts of 4 metres in depth can occur overnight and large rocks are moved about on the sea bed over a distance of up to 5 kilometres.

(9) Given that, according to Basslink, polypropylene rope proposed to be used to bundle cables during the laying operation will not last the life of the project, what assessment has been made of the life of this rope.

(10) (a) How many kilometres of the rope will be used; and (b) what effect will it have on fauna, boat propellers and marine life when the rope unravels and drifts away.

(11) When the rope unravels, how will the cables be kept together.

(12) What are the effects on Ramsar sites of changes to the coastal processes caused by the proposed rock berm designed to protect cables underwater.

(13) Is it the case that the Tasmanian Government has applied for a fishing exclusion zone around Basslink; if so, what is the impact of such a zone on the fishing industry.

(14) Given the advice from Basslink that coaxial cables and underground cables rather than pylon transmission would increase the cost beyond $500 million and make the project unviable, what does the Government understand to be the viability of the project now that it is estimated to cost $780 million.

(15) What information does the Government have about how this additional cost will be funded.

(16) Is it the case that the Tasmanian Government is underwriting the profits of National Grid International's subsidiary, Basslink Pty Ltd.

(17) Will the proponents of Basslink be required to establish a bond or financial guarantee that would fund the removal of infrastructure and rehabilitation, where necessary, in the event that the project proves to be unviable or the proponent becomes insolvent.

(18) What does the Government now understand to be the greenhouse implications of the project, including transmission losses but excluding the proposed but, according to the draft JAC report, unviable Tasmanian windfarms.

Senator Hill (Minister for Defence) —The Minister for the Environment and Heritage has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:

(1) Discussions are currently taking place between Basslink Pty Ltd and the Australian, Victorian and Tasmanian Governments concerning the establishment of the Bass Strait Environment Review Committee.

(2) Condition 2 of the Exemption Certificate issued by the Minister under the Sea Installations Act 1987 requires Basslink Pty Ltd, amongst other things, to cooperate with any advisory body established by the Australian, Tasmanian and Victorian Governments to review the outcomes and results of the approved Environmental Management Plan for Commonwealth Waters.

(3) In response to concerns raised by the community and the Joint Advisory Panel (JAP) in its draft report, the installation of a metallic return cable across Bass Strait, rather than the sea-earth return initially proposed, was publicly advised by Basslink Pty Ltd in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Supplement to the Draft Integrated Impact Assessment Statement (IIAS). The JAP acknowledged in its final report that Basslink Pty Ltd intended to use a metallic return cable across Bass Strait.

(4) Based on the findings of the environmental impact assessment conducted for the proposal and the findings of the final JAP report, the impacts of the new technology on marine organisms will be minimal.

(5) The environmental assessment concluded that no substantive evidence had been presented that cartilaginous fish, and in particular sharks, would be significantly affected by electric fields from the bundled Basslink cable.

(6) Yes. Appendix E of the Final EIS/Supplement to the draft IIAS indicates the cables will be bundled together continuously with polypropylene rope with plastic or stainless steel straps located at intervals.

(7) I am advised that the horizontal directional drilling beneath the sand dune system will avoid interference with the dunes.

(8) The JAP and an independent consultant commissioned by them undertook the assessment.

(9) The polypropylene rope will be buried with the cable bundle and is expected to last beyond the life of the Basslink project.

(10) (a) Polypropylene rope will be used for bundling the undersea cable across Bass Strait. (b) In Commonwealth waters the bundled cable will be actively buried or elsewhere self-buried in soft substrate. It is therefore most unlikely that the rope would unravel. In the unlikely event of damage to the cable bundle, Basslink Pty Ltd estimates that only a short length of polypropylene rope (up to 1 metre) would be exposed at the seabed.

(11) See answer to question 10.

(12) There are expected to be no effects on Ramsar sites.

(13) Information on Tasmanian Government activities should be sought from relevant Tasmanian Government Ministers or agencies.

(14) Issues relating to the commercial viability of the Basslink proposal are primarily matters for Basslink Pty Ltd to address as part of its business investment and management practices.

(15) See answer to question 14.

(16) Information on Tasmanian Government activities should be sought from relevant Tasmanian Government Ministers or agencies.

(17) There is no requirement for a bond or financial guarantee in the Exemption Certificate issued under the Sea Installations Act 1987. Information about the requirements established by the Victorian and Tasmanian Governments should be sought from relevant Victorian or Tasmanian Government Ministers or agencies.

(18) The JAP stated in its final report that Basslink Pty Ltd had undertaken appropriate modelling of the impacts of Basslink on greenhouse gas production in the national electricity market, including estimates of the effects of implementing a metallic return, and that these modelling scenarios indicated a range of possible outcomes from a small reduction in greenhouse gas emissions to a small increase. The JAP noted that it was difficult to be more definitive as the actual outcome of Basslink will depend on a range of factors including growth in demand for electricity in Tasmania and the mainland, developments in the electricity market and in electricity generation and transmission, and developments in greenhouse policies and programs.