Nineteen years ago, on this day, October 29, 2004, activists in Victoria won a legal battle about a filthy coal-fired power station.
Justice Stuart Morris delivered his judgement to a packed courtroom on 29 October 2004, ruling squarely in favour of the environmentalists. On one level, the decision is a straightforward administrative law judgment about a Minister overreaching her statutory powers. Yet in reaching the conclusion on this procedural point, Justice Morris had occasion to consider for the first time under Australian law the relevance of indirect greenhouse gas emissions of a major development.
(Berger, 2007: 166)
Quinn saved his most vicious attack for the environment movement. In an internal note to Hazelwood employees issued on the day of the decision [29 October 2004]
Extreme environmental groups who are hell bent on closing our industry obviously have a right to a say in our democracy, but these delaying tactics by such lobbying groups should never be allowed to frustrate legitimate critically important state energy projects… We have spent over $400 million on environmental and operational efficiencies since 1996, and it is about time that commitment was recognised by these groups. Their views are anti-coal, anti-business and anti-jobs, and if they succeed, they will cost thousands of local jobs with their narrow and simplistic arguments.
(Berger, 2007: 167)
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 377.7ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures.
The context was that pro-life pro-sanity campaigners had been doing legal stuff around trying to get Hazelwood shut down. For yonks. There was a court case and they won. In the short term, at least.
What I think we can learn from this
The legal venues are one way forward, but by no means the only one. And any legal victory is only worth what happens next. (This is something that I first encountered as an idea while paying attention to the McLibel Trial and having this pointed out to me by Dave Morris.)
“They make the laws to chain as well.”
“I fought the law and the law won. “
“This isn’t a Court of Justice son. This is a court of law. “
Ah the songs.
What happened next
Greenpeace started to do direct action around Hazelwood in 2005.
What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.