I did support the project as it was first designed, but over the last 10years it has not shown the value for money committed to the project compared to the disruption to the community or the country. I believe it will only benefit very few unless you are in Melbourne, Parkes, Toowoomba or outside Brisbane. the project is missing the opportunity to grow inland Australia.

I recommend the Minister should refuse the project in its current form or that the design of
the project should be changed to address concerns of all affected landowners.
The Minister require the ARTC to undertake more community consultation and detailed
information before approving the Project .
Route selection , Alternative route using more of the existing Coonamble line.
This is an alignment for which ARTC have no community support.

Please see attached, which in the main, are supportive of the project

Objection to this project is attached.

I submit my objection to this project as a First Nation woman descendant of the Wiradjuri and the Wurundjeri nation with deep ties and obligation to protect our country. I am also a community member of the Narromine CCC of the Inland Rail project.

Consultation & Biodiversity issues
Recent I submitted questions to ARTC as to why they are clearing farmland containing native bushland to establish new quarry pits when many existing quarry businesses are located near-by and many are closer to the project. ARTC’s response to me was to look my own answers up in their EIS document.
I am very unhappy with this response and have found the EIS to be lacking in any explanation. I object to ARTC’s handling of my concerns as to why can’t they answer the questions? ARTC should support legitimate quarry businesses in our community rather than destroying 20 hectares of native bushland and grasslands.
The EIS rehabilitation strategy has no way to restore culturally significant plants such as lilies, orchids, rushes and other herbs in their strategy. These plants have significance for First Nation people and with less than 5% of our country with any bushland left it is not acceptable to destroy more when alternative options are located nearby.
The assessments of all the sites was undertaken during a severe drought and basically describe everything as poor condition. ARTC seem to have little idea what they will be destroying. How much time will be spent surveying for plants before it is excavated and lost? They say seed will be collected, how much time will be allocated to collecting and will all species be collected? Bushland is more than just trees, it is all the plants and animals on country.
This EIS does not have answers for our communities. ARTC does not consult with community it spends all its time and resources promoting the project. This EIS has insufficient detail for the community. ARTC needs to put this detail so the community knows how and why decisions were made and how ARTC are going to repair all the landscapes they will be destroying.