Opposition Leader Tony Abbott is not usually prone to gaffes on points of law, but he found himself badly embarrassed by comments on radio last week that farmers should have the right to refuse mining exploration companies access to their land.
No farmer, indeed any landholder, has the right to refuse a mining company access to their land or to the minerals which lie beneath, a point which Mr Abbott, who holds a degree in law and economics from the University of Sydney, ought to have realised.
But in his desire to express solidarity and sympathy with the farmers of the Liverpool Plains and the Darling Downs - many of whose properties are being explored for coal seam gas mines - Mr Abbott left himself open to gibes from the Government about putting mining investment activity at risk.
He will have further occasion to rue his remarks when Parliament resumes today, as the Greens are proposing to present a Bill to the Senate within the next fortnight which, in the unlikely event it is passed, would require companies to obtain the written permission of landholders before exploring coal seam gas reserves on their properties.
Mr Abbott's faux pas is perhaps understandable: the debate over coal seam gas, involving as it does job and wealth creation but at the risk of possibly serious environmental damage, is highly contentious.
Had these gas deposits been found in the outback, there would be no debate.
Unhappily, most are located under Australia's most reliable and productive farm lands.
All mining activity carries an environmental penalty, but the hydraulic fracturing techniques employed in coal seam gas extraction have the potential to seriously disrupt or poison underground water supplies and aquifers.
This is due mainly to the fact that the fluid injected into a well to facilitate extraction of gas sometimes contains highly toxic chemical additives.
Not surprisingly, miners and geologists tend to minimise the threat to underground water supplies from fracking (while emphasising the economic benefits).
But evidence of its destructive potential is not hard to come by in areas of the United States that have been extensively exploited.
Concerns about fracking prompted the French Parliament to outlaw the method last month, and while the debate here has not reached that point, many people are sympathetic to the views of farmers that the long-term health of our most productive agricultural areas is vital to the national interest and should not be risked for the short-term gains available from exploiting coal seam gas reserves.
Mr Abbott may well have recanted his statements of last week, but the need for governments to proceed with utmost caution remains.
Cycling divisions
With the decision to consolidate Civic as Canberra's preeminent employment, retail and entertainment hub, it has become increasingly obvious that improved access for cyclists is one of the keys to ensuring that traffic congestion is kept to a minimum.
But opinion on what might work best in and around Civic - dedicated on-road lanes or paths built either to one side of the arterial road or within the median strip - is sharply divided.
In a submission to a feasibility study commissioned by the Government into bus, pedestrian and cycle options in and around Civic, lobby group Pedal Power has urged the Government not to shunt cyclists off the road and on to dedicated cycle paths.
Common sense suggests bicycles should be separated from cars and trucks where possible.
In the case of Northbourne Avenue (and other major thoroughfares into Civic) ample space exists in the median strip for a dedicated bike path.
Nevertheless, Pedal Power believes that off-road paths are less direct and likely as not frequented by pedestrians, thus ensuring slower travel times.
It claims that riders will continue to use the roads regardless of whether off-road paths are built or not, and segregated bike lanes should therefore be provided.
Pedal Power's assertion that cyclists are legitimate road users who need better facilities (and protection from cars and trucks) is not in dispute.
But if off-road facilities can be built more cost effectively and operated with less disruption to vehicular traffic than on-road lanes, then that is what should occur.
As the median strip of Northbourne Avenue was always intended for light rail, it makes good sense to site a dedicated cycle path there as well.
If an adequate cycle path is available alongside a busy arterial road or highway, then cyclists should be encouraged to use it - by warning them to stay off the road if needs be.
.gif)
