A major Queensland hospital has abandoned its role in a campaign endorsing a new coal project that a court recommended for state government refusal after the proponent possibly breached air pollution limits.
The Mater hospital on Friday confirmed it had pulled its logo from an advertising campaign that called for government approval of New Hope’s controversial mine expansion at Acland.
It came after the Guardian revealed last week that the hospital, whose board contains three coal executives including its chair – mining magnate Brian Flannery – had prompted outrage among doctors with its public support of the mine.
Flannery, a prominent mining industry figure and BRW rich lister, had told the Guardian the hospital stood by the move. But the hospital has since withdrawn from the advertising campaign after the board met to review the decision this week.
Flannery issued a statement on Friday on the board’s behalf expressing “regret” over the use of its logo.
“Mater’s logo on the advertisement should in no way be seen as support from Mater for any coal-related activity that doesn’t meet the many strict environmental and health-related government mandated requirements,” he said.
“Mater regrets the use of our logo beyond the fact that we are a client of New Hope as we currently have a reliance on coal supply to run some services at our main South Brisbane campus.”
David King, who works in the Mater’s refugee health clinic, said the hospital’s chief executive had met him and other representatives of Doctors for the Environment Australia and the Climate and Health Alliance to discuss the decision.
“There is regret that it happened. They’ve pulled their spot for the ad campaign and let New Hope know,” King said.
The chief executive had said there was a “silver lining” from the affair, in that it “will speed up our move away from coal ourselves”, King said.
Flannery said the hospital had for “some time been actively investigating alternative energy sources” to the coal it has sourced from New Hope for decades to fire its on-site boiler for sterilisation and other activities.
“Mater’s primary consideration as a health care organisation is the health and well-being of all of our patients, carers and staff from the many communities that we exist to serve, and this will always be our focus,” Flannery said.
Flannery last week told the Guardian the hospital would rely on coal “for some time to come” as “alternative energy sources to run these essential services … will take a considerable period of time to put in place at a significant cost”.
The Mater had confirmed New Hope was the only supplier of small customers in the region, he said.
Land court member Paul Smith in May ruled that the government should refuse mining and environmental licences for New Hope’s mine expansion.
Smith found the impact on groundwater was the key problem but he had “no doubt that [residents] have been greatly inconvenienced and impacted by dust produced by the [existing] mine”.
He said it was “quite possible [environmental licence] limits with respect to dust and particulate matter have been exceeded”.
Smith found that landholders who complained of noise were treated “very poorly” by both New Hope and the environment department, and that the department’s monitoring was “laughable”.
New Hope has appealed in the supreme court, while the government has delayed its decisions until 2018.