Catholic Diocese of Broome

What constitutes a just outcome? What is a just action? How is this decision said to be just and that decision unjust? Is the justice of a decision to be measured merely by the degree to which it agrees with each individual’s opinion? On the contrary, wisdom teaches us that we must look to the standard of ‘the common good’ when making decisions that affect the life and culture of any society.

In the normal run of public business in any State, town or settlement, decisions regarding the merit or otherwise of a particular proposal, have the power to cause division, even at times serious dissension.

On the topic of daylight saving we have recently had yet another State-wide plebiscite which once again came up with a resounding ‘NO’. One politician said he was “bitterly disappointed”, while another commentator in the same news report was “absolutely delighted”. Such is democracy. Of course decisions like this are easily reversed if the public mood on the matter shifts. Other contentious decisions have consequences that are permanent and as such are irreversible. These matters we need to get right from the beginning.

On the topic of getting it right, the debate surrounding the LNG processing plant proposal in the West Kimberley continues. There are those who maintain that the agreement signed by traditional owners with the Government and with Woodside is a fair deal, a ‘done deal’, and one that serves the common good. Any destruction of the natural environment is manageable and limited, while essential safeguards are to be built in to the conservation plan. The deal, they say, provides for necessary development and employment opportunities, offering a positive future for our youth.

Others regard the deal as unfair, deleterious to the common good, culturally unacceptable, destructive of natural treasures and a matter yet to be adequately dealt with. Some people feel that the price to pay for the cash and kind offered in exchange for the right to develop Prices Point andQuondong is too great.

On one thing all can agree: for those in the YES camp and for those in the NO camp for development, this proposal has become a source of division and strident rancour.

Part of the problem surrounding the division that exists in the community emanates from the process of consultation employed to establish this project. It is quite amazing that so few details of any significant agreement on the contentious issue have been released. Uncertainty and distrust are always the product of secrecy and when the whole of society is affected those who are not ‘in the know’ remain suspicious and unsupportive.

One is tempted to ask “And where is the big picture?” Building a gas processing plant is the precursor to what? You don’t spend that sort of money without having in mind a bigger picture of what would grow from such an investment. And what does that picture look like? How does Broome look with a population in the future of 68,000 inhabitants? What other issues – environmental, social, industrial – accompany this important leap into the future for Broome and the Kimberley?

The time for secrecy is over and the time for intelligent, well informed debate on both sides in an atmosphere of charity is well and truly with us. Backyard deals out of view of public scrutiny are no way to promote healthy discussions and meaningful decisions regarding ‘the common good’ – our good and the good of future generations.