BRYLA, Councillor Kathleen (Kathy), Private capacity CHAMPION, Councillor Heather, Councillor, Wingecarribee Shire Council FLOOD, Ms Rochelle, Deputy Mayor, Lane Cove Council McCABE, Mr Michael, Director, Communities and Place, Wingecarribee Shire Council MILLER, Mrs Jessica (Jess), Councillor and Deputy Lord Mayor of Sydney, City of Sydney Council PHEMISTER, Mr Hugh, Chair, General Managers Committee, Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils; and General Manager, Willoughby Council RIGNEY, Ms Emma, Acting Chief Executive Officer, City of Sydney TAYLOR, Ms Tanya, President, Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils; and Mayor, Willoughby Council CHAIR: Welcome. I understand that information on parliamentary privilege and the protection of witnesses giving evidence to Senate committees has been provided to you. I'm assuming that the City of Sydney will have one opening statement. Is that okay? We'll start with you guys. Mrs Miller : Thank you for having me here representing the lord mayor and the City of Sydney and to speak in support of our submission. I'm not going to dwell too long on the water and energy impacts. I think they're very well understood. In the City of Sydney, we're very concerned about the urban impacts. By 2030, the data centres are projected to consume 11 per cent of our grid energy. This grid energy is drawing from infrastructure that the public has already invested in. The case in point in the City of Sydney is a 90-megawatt data centre that is located in Ultimo, which is very close to the city, on prime urban land. It uses 140,000 homes worth of energy each year. In the absence of any regulatory framework or any kind of mandatory lever for council to draw upon, we have lost the ability to use the energy infrastructure and the transfer stations to enable more residential housing. So, in effect, not only is it parasitic in nature in terms of pulling energy from our existing grid and not giving anything back and in terms of using 4,000 homes worth of water each year; it's also increasing the cost of development for future homes nearby. The contribution made for this specific data centre, under a do-nothing scenario—which is effectively what we have now—was less than $3,000. It didn't incorporate or acknowledge the contribution or what it's taking from the local community, and that is very problematic. We are one of the few councils that have a carve-out within our control plans that enables us to negotiate better outcomes and locate data centres in places that are more appropriate, but we'd like to see, moving forward, the federal government provide a framework that enables local government to do good deals with data centres and get the best possible outcome. Had they come to us and said, 'We are going to install 140,000 homes worth of renewable energy in your LGA,' that would have been a very different conversation because we are not maxed out in terms of rooftop solar and local battery infrastructure. That is where we see the opportunity and where the regulatory framework can play an important role. It's not providing rigidity because we expect that every scenario is quite different; it's about enabling local communities to come to the table and legitimately ask for what's going to work for them. It is a very different conversation when a proponent or a developer comes to us and says, 'We will supply you with 140,000 homes worth of rooftop solar and battery in perpetuity.' That's where we need the ability to come to the table with those kinds of levers, whether it's through a design excellence strategy, which we apply for major developments—this is no different, but currently we have nothing. It's a difficult conversation. In the absence of a federal framework mandating that the states work with local government, it goes through a state significant development pathway, which gives us very little say and very little negotiating power. Ms Taylor : Thank you so much for the opportunity to appear before the committee. We appreciate the opportunity to provide a statement. NSROC is a voluntary association of eight member councils who have come together to collaborate and to promote a united voice on key issues for our region. Our member councils are Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai, Lane Cove, Mosman, North Sydney, Ryde and Willoughby. Collectively, our councils service an area of 639 square kilometres with a population of over 660,000 people. Northern Sydney is already carrying a very substantial concentration of data centres. As at May 2026, Lane Cove, Willoughby and Ryde had around 27 existing or potential data centres, representing a significant proportion of the 90-plus operating or planned across Greater Sydney. Together, they represent about 1,000 megawatts of known built-out power capacity and 232,000 or so square kilometres of data centre space. Willoughby alone has 11 identified sites, and 10 are operational. For NSROC, this isn't a theoretical or future issue; our councils are already at the front line of data centre development. We're seeking to ensure that data centres impose no net cost to our local communities and small businesses. We want them to drive investment in new renewable energy generation. We want them to remain compliant with water and electricity usage and noise, fire and stormwater requirements, including those that are under assessment at the moment. We want to make sure they don't have a negative impact on the environment, including tree canopy and light pollution, they don't displace regionally significant industrial and employment lands and they're not located within 800 metres of train or metro stations, to ensure these locations are prioritised for housing and commercial uses that generate travel movements and maximise productivity and returns from public transport investment. We're seeking a long-term strategic lens for how and where data centres are developed, and we would welcome the opportunity to have greater input into the planning and delivery of data centres. Ms Flood : Thank you for the opportunity to appear today on behalf of Lane Cove Council. Our council recognises the need for data centres as part of our digital future, but we hold significant concerns about the way in which they're being developed and the rapid expansion, particularly in communities like Lane Cove West. Data centres aren't just another factory or standard industrial building; at the scale now being proposed, they're essentially an extractive industry. They're using enormous amounts of energy, water and land, and our local communities are being left to carry the costs with little to no benefit. Our experience here in Lane Cove shows why our current planning system is ill-equipped to deal with the rapid expansion of data centres. Our core concerns as a council are, first, that the planning framework does not ensure that hyperscale data centres are located away from homes, schools, sensitive bushland and our rivers. We currently have a hyperscale data centre in the planning pipeline that is approximately 16 metres from the nearest home and 160 metres from a local primary school. It will back onto bushland, adjoin Lane Cove River and overshadow our local community nursery. These are huge concerns for our community, and we would like to see a planning framework that ensures data centres cannot be located in locations like this. The current framework also doesn't allow for adequate input from communities or council. The expedited planning process through state significant pathways and other expedited avenues gives proponents an easy path without giving our communities a meaningful say in planning decisions that will impact their lives. We're concerned that the cumulative impacts of these data centres are not being adequately addressed. They have the potential to impact air quality through the use of diesel generators, and, as I said earlier, they use enormous amounts of energy and water. Just for Project Mars, which is a Goodman project, we're looking at approximately half a billion litres of water a year, and Lane Cove is looking at four data centres across our LGA. The cumulative impact on this for a community that cares about sustainability is enormous. In Lane Cove West, these data centres will also take up a large portion—almost 50 per cent of our business park, significantly reducing employment land for our local community. At the end of the day, we want laws that ensure data centres are sustainable. They need to use renewable energy and deliver new renewable energy, they need to use recycled water and they need to be located in areas where they're not going to have an unreasonable impact on communities and our bushland. Until that's in place, we would like the government to support a moratorium. Without a moratorium, communities and our environment will be left dealing with the impact of poorly planned data centres for years to come. Councillor Champion : I've been actively representing our community's concerns about Cloud Carrier's proposal to build one of the largest gas plants in Australia to serve future data centres on the site. We are facing an industry that is developing extremely fast at national scale. The Southern Highlands can offer the committee a powerful regional case study of how urgently government regulations need to catch up. Cloud Carrier has three proposals totalling 703 megawatts of off-grid gas power generation. Analysis indicates this would produce over two million tonnes of emissions a year and wipe out all of New South Wales's expected emissions cuts for 2028. It would power a private data centre but not our community. As a councillor, I have been overwhelmed by messages of concern for people's health, for our local economy based on tourism and agriculture, for the rising costs of gas and water, for our drinking water catchment and koala habitat, and for our climate. For most people I've spoken to, the potential harm significantly overshadows any possible benefit. These worries have mobilised our community. In March, I brought a motion to council opposing the proposal, which didn't pass. Since then, about 220 people attended a protest on a rainy morning, more than 450 came to a community forum and almost 800 have signed a petition. By August, council voted unanimously to advocate for a federal public benefit test, a prohibition on data centres driving new fossil fuel generation and a moratorium on approvals until regulations are in place. This rapid turnaround shows communities are keeping up with the speed of change, but government regulations are not. Imagine what could be approved in just another six months. In the current regulatory vacuum, we could see more proposals like this going ahead, embedding irreversible long-term impacts. But the biggest story is the lack of consultation. Despite the wave of opposition to this proposal, the community has not yet had a voice. Council has not yet been consulted on the largest proposal. There is little transparency or engagement from the proponent, and the fragmented assessment processes mean cumulative impacts can't be seen or evaluated. Under these conditions, social licence is both impossible and meaningless. What's needed most is time and consultation. We need a moratorium to consult with communities and to get the regulations right so that they serve the public benefit. Ten years from now, we don't want to look back and realise that we got this wrong because governments failed to act with the urgency that this moment demands. CHAIR: Thank you. I'll go firstly to Senator Henderson. Senator HENDERSON: Good afternoon to you all. I just want to understand what representations have been made to the New South Wales government in relation to this planning black hole, as you see it, in relation to the development of AI data centres. Has anyone been engaging directly with the government in relation to this? Mrs Miller : Yes. There was a parliamentary inquiry into data centres, and there has been a full submission to that. The city have put forward our concerns, and there are a myriad of other concerns as part of that process as well. So we're not starting from a static base; there is some momentum. The government are aware of what's going on. Senator HENDERSON: What's the scope of council planning powers when it comes to data centres? Does it vary between councils, or have you largely lost control? Ms Taylor : We've largely lost control because they're state significant developments. Senator HENDERSON: And they're all categorised as state significant developments? Ms Taylor : Yes. Mr McCabe : At Wingecarribee, we're faced with a bit of a cumulative impact. We have a DA lodged from the same proponent where council have a consent authority, and it's currently in the Land and Environment Court. But, in parallel, they've sought a state significant development application. Their documentation was given to us at the start of that application in September for the council DA. At the same time, they prepared state significant development documentation, but council were not privy to that. So you have this— Senator HENDERSON: Hang on. There's a DA that was made through your council. Mr McCabe : That's correct. Senator HENDERSON: It was not disclosed that there was a separate state significant development application made, which would basically override your planning powers. How, then, can you assess the DA application if you haven't got full visibility of what's going on? Mr McCabe : Yes, that's somewhat correct. I'll just go through a little bit of detail. The site, at 30 Douglas Road, is Cloud Carrier's—they're known as Nakar Property Pty Ltd. CHAIR: That's the one that we were hearing about earlier today. Mr McCabe : They have approval for a 14-megawatt gas-fired power plant and two data halls currently. That's occurred over a series of DAs where council have a consent authority—some of them were determined through the court—over five years. There were five DAs over five years. We now have one which was lodged in September 2025—a year ago—and the proponents, within a couple of months, lodged what they call a deemed refusal through the Land and Environment Court. So council and the community really don't have enough time to assess the complexity of that application. It was 16 megawatts and a battery. Senator HENDERSON: What's the threshold in relation to a state significant development? When do you cross that threshold? Mr McCabe : At the moment, it's 30 megawatts of power and a battery energy storage system of 30 megawatts, and that would also trigger designated development. At the moment, they have 14 megawatts approved. And the DA currently before the courts, which will be at full hearing in October, is another 16 megawatts, reaching that threshold. Anything beyond that is state significant development. Ms Taylor : There's also a monetary threshold of $75 million for the development. Senator HENDERSON: It's the total cost of the development? Ms Taylor : Yes, that's right. Senator HENDERSON: What's been the response of the state government, in terms of the deep concerns you've raised? Ms Taylor : NSROC put in a submission to Infrastructure NSW back in May on the NSWdata centre consultation paper. We haven't had a response back as yet. We also lodged a submission just recently—I think it was last week—to the IPART on reforming electricity network and cost recovery for data centres so it's more around the electricity usage. Senator HENDERSON: So you've had no formal response from the state government as to whether your concerns are even being heard. Ms Taylor : No, not at this point. Senator HENDERSON: Do you understand whether there's anything in the pipeline that the state government is considering in relation to— Ms Taylor : Well, they asked for our feedback, so we're hoping that they'll take that into consideration. Senator HENDERSON: That's wishful thinking, but do you know whether there's anything in the pipeline at all? No. Councillor Flood? Ms Flood : At the New South Wales level they have announced a new framework for data centres and a new dedicated path for certain data centres that meet a higher standard. But our concerns with that are, first, that it's optional for them to meet this higher standard. So it's possible for data centre proponents who don't want to opt for the higher sustainability standards to still go through the state significant development pathway, which is expedited as it is. Then when you do look at what they've put in the new guidelines—unfortunately, it doesn't really cover issues around diesel fuel use. It doesn't account for noise pollution, which, in the case of Lane Cove West, given the proximity to homes, is a huge concern. And it also doesn't really look at the location of data centres in the sensitive locations that we need to be looking at. So my understanding is that that is something that's definitely in the pipeline, but it doesn't go far enough. CHAIR: And it's not mandatory. If you want a faster pathway, you can choose that. But if you want just the normal expedited pathway, you choose this. Ms Flood : Yes. Senator HENDERSON: And isn't the other issue that you don't know—as you mentioned, Mr McCabe—the cumulative effect of various different data centres being approved without understanding the bigger picture, which can have then a very different and more significant impact on local communities? Do you understand the need for data centres in Sydney? Is that being questioned by any of you at all? No? Mrs Miller : I think there's a legitimate acknowledgement that they're an inevitability. The question is not the why; it's the how. The New South Wales guidelines, as I understand, would require renewable power within four years—the city would support this requirement—and proposed mechanisms for cost recovery. They're the relevant ones that we think would help it work. We don't expect that this is never going to happen. It's about whether it is appropriate to the site. Is it delivering as much as it takes? And how can we actually leverage the opportunity, and with what mechanisms, to get a good impact? I think we all accept, too, that this could be a huge catalyst for renewable energy uptake and a huge opportunity to really get the changes we need to transform the grids. At the City of Sydney, we see it as a great opportunity to potentially insert urban renewable energy zones, which we would desperately love. We'd love to see minimum thresholds required for a share of renewable energies to be local, through solar and battery. We want real-time matching so renewable energy is produced and then used; otherwise, it causes costs and problems from the grid and other energy users. And we want to make sure that when there's an uptake of the renewable—because it blows the grid out—we're basically using that investment instead of buying our renewable energy elsewhere. It's really important that the benefits from the payment are locally based. There's been a lot of talk from the big data centres at a national level about power purchasing agreements and all that sort of thing. But, really, I think we just see that as creating a problem here to solve another one over there. Senator HENDERSON: I want to ask about the Goodman proposal in Lane Cove. I'm appalled that it is proposed that that centre be built as close as 16 or 20 metres from someone's home. What has local council done in relation to that proposal? Councillor Bryla : We've sent through an official objection, which we've got in front of us here. It's 40 pages of reasons why our local council doesn't see that it meets our planning guidelines or our community's needs. Senator HENDERSON: That's in relation to the entire development. You haven't suggested setbacks or ways in which the data centre— Councillor Bryla : We've related it back to every clause. It's a lot more technical than I'm making it sound. Senator HENDERSON: Sure. Councillor Bryla : For instance, it is 10 metres above the height limit just to start with. So we've listed every clause that it's breached. Senator HENDERSON: So it's 10 metres above the council's height limit. It's 16 or 20 metres— Councillor Bryla : It's not set back. Senator HENDERSON: away from someone's home. Councillor Bryla : It's on bushland with a huge storage of diesel. It's not breaching the fire zones, because there was a change in fire zones. But, practically speaking, it is breaching that. Senator HENDERSON: When you talk about breaches, do you mean breaches of council planning laws? Councillor Bryla : It's a bit more complicated than that, but yes. Senator HENDERSON: Could you provide us with more— Councillor Bryla : Yes, definitely. We could provide you with the report. Senator HENDERSON: If you could provide that to us on notice, we'd be very grateful. So you've objected to that proposal. When was that objection lodged? What, then, has Goodman done? Ms Flood : We lodged the objection quite early. and the department has— Senator HENDERSON: When was that? Ms Flood : It was lodged on 20 April. There was a record number of community objections as well. Since then, the department have asked Goodman to provide further information to clarify their proposal, because there are significant issues with it. Sydney Water have also asked for more evidence, particularly around the water use concerns. Our council has also been asking for more community input into this planning process. Goodman did a flyer drop and then offered to do webinars. We've tried to do an in-person community meeting—council have offered to facilitate it, to make sure it's run well—but they've really refused to engage with the community in any meaningful way. Senator HENDERSON: So you've refused the DA based on the current proposal. Is that right? Ms Flood : We don't have right of refusal, unfortunately. So we are putting in a submission to object to it. We're just waiting for the decision. Senator HENDERSON: So you don't have a right of refusal because it's a state significant development? Councillor Bryla : Correct. Senator HENDERSON: So you have just objected as an interested party, not as the local planning authority. Ms Flood : Yes. Mrs Miller : And that's the crux of the problem. We are not the consent authority over, I think, a five-megawatt threshold. We've got a special carve-out within the planning controls that enables the City of Sydney to determine where data centres go that are small. That is unique to the City of Sydney. No other council that I'm aware of in New South Wales is a planning consent authority for data centres, and there's no state environmental planning instrument that guides how this all works. You don't even have to conform to neighbours. Senator HENDERSON: Have there been any cases where the Land and Environment Court has overruled a state significant development application by a data centre? Are you aware of any? Councillor Bryla : I'm not aware of any. Senator HENDERSON: Could you take that on notice? Councillor Bryla : Yes. Senator HENDERSON: I'd just be keen to understand the legal framework once an SSD application has been made and whether, even under those circumstances, it can be rejected on any appropriate or relevant grounds. CHAIR: Senator Ghosh. Senator GHOSH: In relation to the evidence that was given about power a few moments ago, what frameworks or systems would you want in place, from a power perspective, if a data centre were to [inaudible] CHAIR: Senator Ghosh, can you turn your video off so we can get your audio a bit clearer. Senator GHOSH: In relation to power, water and planning, what matters would you need to be satisfied with? What principles would you want to see in place before you'd be comfortable with a data centre proceeding? Councillor Bryla : To clarify, social licence is really important to Lane Cove as well. There's a lot of talk about water and environmental measures, which—don't get me wrong—are very important too. But the social licence of the community is also really fundamental. They need to be engaged with. It needs to be transparent and sincere. Feedback needs to then be given back to the community. At the moment, because we don't have local consent authority, it is more and more the case that it is going right over the top of our local community and over the top of our council. Councillor Champion : Wingecarribee offers a really interesting example because we are outside of the city and we're in a regional area, The location where our proposal sits actually has domestic-scale grid supply. So, when you put these proposals for data centres or future data centre plans into a regional context, and we're looking at domestic grid scale, if we just say that data centres need to bring their own power, what that encourages is a gas plant. That's why we're looking at a giant, national-scale gas plant in our area. So what we're asking for and what council has requested in our submission is that data centre developments be required to bring their own renewables and ensure that no new fossil fuels are brought on as a result of any data centre proposal. Mrs Miller : And the starting position is that we'd require 100 per cent renewable energy and no drinking water used. But it's the enabling infrastructure as well that's really important—that is, grid connections and also the waste heat reuse spurs. It's all of the infrastructure that goes around it, which currently is effectively being cost shifted or not captured as part of any kind of planning process. It's a scenario at the moment where decades worth of public benefit and investment has been made into our very fragile energy infrastructure only for data centre developers to swoop in and locate where there's already infrastructure that they can take. The arrangement with Ausgrid, as I understand it, is that the credit allocations are provided on a 'first come, first served' basis. So, in allocating credits to a data centre, they're credits that are not allocated to our communities. Who bears the cost burden of that? We do. It makes housing more expensive, it makes council costs more expensive and ultimately it makes costs to government more expensive. CHAIR: Can I ask you to explain that a bit more. What does being 'first in, best served' for Ausgrid mean in reality? Mrs Miller : If I'm a data centre developer and I'm looking for where I want to locate my data centre, I don't want to have to pay to build a substation and I don't want to have to pay to build connections, so I'm going to look for a piece of land that's already well connected. That's, as it is in the city, likely to be somewhere in Lane Cove. So, in the absence of any regulation at the moment, what can happen is that they can connect to that substation to access the energy required to power them 24/7, and each substation only has a limited number of credits available. They are allocated on a 'first come, first served' basis. CHAIR: Therefore, if there was a housing development that came later on, there's no capacity to power it. Mrs Miller : That's exactly what's happened in Ultimo, whereby the 90 megawatter has subsumed the allocation of credits to a nearby power station which is required for future development in the bay's west precinct. There are an additional 8,000 homes slated to go into that area. Those developers are going to have to pay to build their own energy infrastructure— CHAIR: Which then makes the housing more expensive. Mrs Miller : Exactly. CHAIR: So these things aren't quarantined— Mrs Miller : No. CHAIR: and there's no ring fencing around 'this is specifically for housing' if you've got a property developer who's coming to do the development of a data centre as opposed to the development of homes? Mrs Miller : Yes, and it's one thing to pay your way out of the energy use. We can say, 'Sure, it can be renewable energy use,' but you can buy RECs. You can enter into a purchasing agreement, but that's for the use of the energy. That does not cover the cost of the grid connection, the substations and the water infrastructure, nor does it cover the opportunity cost of using well-located land for either housing or commerce. These are just big dead zones. CHAIR: Senator Pocock. Senator DAVID POCOCK: Thank you all so much for your time here today. I'm based in the ACT. We've got one level of government, so it's very interesting hearing about the challenges that you're facing. How can the development assessment frameworks be reformed so that these sorts of overrides don't strip local councils and local communities of any say on development in their area and what their area is going to look like? Unidentified speaker: It needs to go back to local council. Mr McCabe : There was a question earlier around if Wingecarribee council has responded to the New South Wales government. In relation to state legislation, that is the key in relation to regulating and assessing data centres. And it's not only data centres; it's the energy source related to data centres. For our example, we have a gas fired power plant. They're not proposing any more new data centres. It's a gas fired power plant. It's not only the data centre itself, but it's the other infrastructure required to service it. We made a submission to the New South Wales Legislative Council inquiry on 23 March, and we were invited to respond to that. We have a Hansard record of 22 May. There's also an Infrastructure New South Wales consultation paper which we made a submission to on 8 May. That has what they call principle based considerations for data centres. I'd encourage the inquiry to have a look at that. In relation to your question, I would say that for integrated assessment of data centres, obviously, there's a consent authority. Whether it's local or whether it's state, it's important to be integrated. That's the most important thing. And there's the enabling infrastructure. There's a lot of discussion in New South Wales about the proponents delivering the infrastructure they require for their proposal but not so much about what the community expects or the community requires. Strong energy and water sustainability requirements, full infrastructure and cost recovery, mandatory cumulative effect—this is a real issue for us at Wingecarribee. We've had five DAs. Some of them have been approved through the court, and now we have a subsequent SSD. That is a real issue for us. There's also meaningful local community involvement. At the moment, for the SSD, the information limited to the community is a 28-page scoping report from the proponent, and a 15-page SEARs, which is the secretary's environmental assessment requirements in New South Wales. They don't say much. That SEARs says to the proponent you have to consult with the community. I can guarantee you there has not been much consultation. I think we need clear both national and state interest and public benefits in relation to data centres. Senator DAVID POCOCK: And just—go ahead. Ms Flood : If I can just add to that as well—Lane Cove really would like to see it be required that they come to local council and go to our design review panel, that there be a mandatory period of community engagement and that that then feeds in to the statement of environmental effects and the final design of the actual data centre. We would like to see all of that brought forward and that engagement happening much earlier and in a more meaningful way to ensure the views of the community are actually heard. We do think that can happen as well within a broader framework that ensures either at the state and/or federal level that we have safeguards in place around the energy, water—all of those additional concerns. But we do think local councils in New South Wales are the best place to be looking at the design location and the impacts on communities. Ms Taylor : I echo those comments, but I also add the community participation plan rules in New South Wales have just recently changed. It's a state-based community participation plan now rather than council based. The state designates who gets consulted with at what time and for how long. Having that come back to council, particularly for data centres, would be very useful. From NSROC's perspective, we think there's a lack of strategic oversight in general here and also spatial awareness of the data centres and how they're being rolled out across New South Wales—where they're going and what the impacts are to the community. Yes, we'd like to have the consent brought back to councils, but there does need to be some more general strategic oversight as well. Mrs Miller : The simple answer is just a state environmental planning instrument. In the absence of that, we can write you a laundry list of all the things we'd like. But unless there is a regulatory, legally binding planning tool that requires it, it's all wishful thinking. Whether or not the government compels that through the national building code is one thing, but you've got to have a compulsion from the feds. It needs to be baked into a regulatory planning instrument so that council has a lever to pull at a local planning level. Then, alongside that, we'd like to see a national data centres transparency code so that we're seeing that the reporting is happening in real time so that we're not making things up on the run and there's a level of flexibility in terms of what we can ask for based on evidence, not based on lobbying. Senator DAVID POCOCK: One of the other things I'd be interested to understand is: is it your understanding that the state government is looking at the cumulative effect of these approvals, in terms of both the number of data centres and the location, and then, if they've all got diesel generator backups, how that all accumulates if they're using this new gas plant? Is that just its impact or the overall impact when you take in everything else? Is that being looked at? Mr McCabe : What I can say from a local level is that the cumulative impact is one of our contentions in relation to the DA that's subject to the Land and Environment Court at the moment. As you may know, there's a mediation process through the court. We've been through that mediation process. Some matters are resolved. However, the cumulative impact, particularly in relation to resources, has not been resolved. Also, with that DA at the moment, WaterNSW, to my knowledge as at August, still did not give concurrence or comments to that current DA, which has been in for a year and is subject to a full hearing of the court next month. Ms Taylor : I think the key thing, as well, is that it's unconstrained growth at the moment. They're just coming at us. There's no strategic oversight, as I mentioned. CHAIR: There's no big plan, is there? Councillor Bryla : I just want to add, on a very local note for us here in Lane Cove, that we have in our strategic plan a commitment to climate change and climate mitigation. We have targets to reach net zero. I don't love the phrase 'net zero', but that's our target. This has a cumulative effect. Actually, even just one of them wipes out any chance of us getting there. So, as a community who has voted in councillors who are very strongly supporting this shift for us as a community to be reaching these goals, we don't know how we'd ever get there with this happening at a state level, over the top of our community targets. For instance, we banned gas in Lane Cove two years ago, in our DCP. We're about to upgrade our LEP to that. But this sits in a whole different realm, so all of a sudden we have to say to our community— CHAIR: 'You've all done the right thing, but these guys over here'— Councillor Bryla : Yes. Senator HENDERSON: I'm not sure about that. I don't quite take that same view. Councillor Bryla : You might not, but our community does, and it did vote us in as four Independent councillors and one Greens councillor. That was an outstanding result in our last election. So we are doing what they've asked us to do at our capacity. So it's quite frustrating for me as a councillor in that sense. Councillor Champion : I'd like to add that Wingecarribee Shire Council has also adopted a climate emergency motion—it was prior to the current term of council—but we're not even talking about emissions that would blow away our adopted targets. We're talking about state-level targets. Councillor Bryla : That's right, and water as well. We had targets for water and water conservation as well, and that's another blowout. Senator DAVID POCOCK: There are two sets of rules here. Just looking at local employment, obviously these hyperscale data centres have big footprints for relatively small employment numbers. What mandatory mechanisms do you think should be implemented to ensure that host communities receive direct, verifiable, long-term benefits rather than a sort of pat on the head—'We'll create some jobs'? Ms Flood : We would like to see a negotiated community benefit agreement,, and we would also like to see pathways for local employment opportunities as well within those data centres because, as I mentioned in our opening statement, we're looking at losing 50 per cent of our business park. That's the bulk of our employment land in Lane Cove, and I've been in contact with some of the business owners in that area who felt that they weren't adequately consulted by Goodman. They're going to have to relocate. There's really nowhere in the area that they can reasonably relocate to. Those are local businesses that have been around for a long time that will just be leaving our community, and it's going to have a huge impact on our local economy, potentially. So we need to have concrete community benefit that looks at the economic loss that we could be facing as a result of data centres, the employment loss, and how communities can be adequately compensated, because at the moment what we're seeing is a privatisation of the costs of these major companies coming in. Meanwhile, the community is left carrying all of the impact, with no benefit. Mr McCabe : I'd like to say a little bit about employment. The site that is in Moss Vale is 67 hectares. It has two data halls and an approved 14-megawatt gas-fired power plant. The current DA proposes a 16-megawatt power plant in addition. As part of the proponent's documentation, they propose that that generates employment of two full-time people—two. That same proposal has two exhaust stacks that breach our height limit by approximately four metres each, so you get one person employed per exhaust stack! What I will say is that, in comparison, we have equivalent zone land in that area, called the Southern Highlands Innovation Park, of over a thousand hectares. Our own studies look at the desirous number of 7,500 employees. It's 67 hectares generating two employees versus 1,000 hectares at 7,500. Ms Taylor : And it's not just the immediate employees for the data centre itself; it has a cumulative effect across the area for our industrial areas. It has an impact on the cafe that provides sandwiches to the workers that are no longer there. They suffer. So it has an indirect impact as well. Senator DAVID POCOCK: The federal parliament is obviously now starting to talk about mandatory standards—as usual, late to the party—and, in the meantime, we're seeing this flood of approvals to try and get in before they come into force. Should those be retrospective? Should all data centres have to abide by minimum standards? Ms Taylor : Absolutely. I said that in my opening speech. We stand by that. We we're worried about the approvals that have been given already. They're not going to need to abide by any of the new rules. CHAIR: Yes. What's the point? Councillor Champion : I think otherwise we're just seeing a race to the bottom; we're just enforcing the worst possible behaviour until those standards come in. Mrs Miller : Beyond that, it's the opportunity cost as well. We're displacing heavily productive land for nothing. At the same time, if there's a mechanism that can require or incentivise local renewable energy benefits, that's an injection into local economies, whether that's an install onto rooftops of commercial buildings, whether it's rolling out the battery program faster. It's not as if we're being naive about this not happening at all, ever, but it's got to be done in a way that recognises the opportunity, has a level of creativity, and actually listens to what people want. In the absence of any of that dialogue or any of that talk about solutions or what the best outcome might be, our communities are just like, 'Absolutely not.' The social license can be earned, but we've had no indication so far that they're even willing to do that. In conversation with counterparts in Melbourne, we're really trying to manage up our state leadership so that it isn't a race to the bottom, because, if it's easier and more compelling to do cheap business in Sydney, then we lose out. Similarly for Melbourne, if it's cheaper and easier to do it in Sydney, they lose out. It's really concerning that the NT and Queensland have these carve-outs, because we really need the feds to set the standard and empower us to be able to negotiate good outcomes on the ground. CHAIR: I guess there's also a difference between the data centre capacity that we need domestically for Australia versus what is being imposed and what we know is coming in from some of the big hyperscale companies. It's not for Australian use. This is for international use—a lot of US use. Therefore a lot of the arguments that have been made—we heard it this morning from a number of the proponents—are 'you need these data centres because they need to be close to where people are', but a lot of these data centres that are being planned are actually not even for the next-door neighbour. They're AI factories which are teaching their machines, and they could actually be anywhere. They don't have to be in our suburbs. Senator Ghosh. Senator GHOSH: In relation to the regulatory tool that was referred to in the evidence earlier and how that feeds into planning instruments, I'm wondering if there are any examples of where that's working well in the world for data centres? Local governments are dealing with this type of issue in various different parts of the developed world, in particular. Are there sorts of best practices that you would point to and say, 'That's actually the type of model we should adopt'? Councillor Bryla : Are you speaking about the actual planning process? Senator GHOSH: Yes. Councillor Bryla : I'm not one hundred per cent an expert on this, but I do know, just, as a basis, in parts of Europe, all their planning is done by councils, and the councils actually get a lot higher proportion of the taxes so that they can have the resources to really make sure that, beyond the planning process, buildings are actually built and then managed in the correct way after building. Bring it back to councils, and give us the money to do. There are better examples around the world. Ms Taylor : In our submission to Infrastructure New South Wales, we do have a case study that we've mentioned in the Netherlands—the national spatial strategy and spatial strategy for data centres. We can provide you with a copy of that and some details. CHAIR: That would be helpful, thank you. Mrs Miller : We're part of the C40 Cities network, so we can refer you to some stuff that's happening in Paris and Helsinki as well. CHAIR: Could I ask about one of the concerns that was raised by local community representatives this morning. On the water front, has the impact of PFAS—which I know has been an issue for your councils anyway with various different industries that use PFAS—been raised with you? Is that something that you've been able to raise directly with proponents or state government? Mr McCabe : I can talk to PFAS. The lady you're talking about this morning was Gaye White from WinZero. Wingecarribee Shire Council are our own sewer and water authority. We have EPA licenses. Unlike the rest of Sydney with Sydney Water, we're responsible, and, at the moment, under those licenses or across New South Wales, PFAS does not need to be monitored. That's probably, in summary, my response to your question. CHAIR: So it's an unknown unknown. Mr McCabe : Totally. We do sample testing; we have an environment team that goes out to our natural environment and our built environment and does samples. We do have some data, but it's not required to be reported. CHAIR: Does anybody else have any concerns about those issues? Ms Flood : We're concerned not just with PFAS but with the quality of the water that's coming out of these data centres more broadly. We have some clarification in more detail from the proponent on how they plan to treat the water that will be discharged through the wastewater system. Unfortunately, we really haven't had an adequate response to that, particularly given the sensitive location for some of the ones we're looking at in Lane Cove, where they're near important critical bushland— CHAIR: And right on the river here. Ms Flood : And right on Lane Cove River, which flows into the harbour. That's obviously a concern for us, both from the unknown with the PFAS question as well as the impact more broadly on water quality in the area. Ms Taylor : Not so much on the PFAS but on e-waste, I can give you some statistics from the Total Environment Centre. They estimate that one megawatt of data centre capacity with 100 server racks would include between 54,000 kilograms and 68,000 kilograms of servers alone, excluding the weight of racks, networking equipment, power, security or cooling infrastructure. When something is at the end of its useful life, where does it go? There's going to be a lot of e-waste. CHAIR: Proponents' plan for end-of-life time period is a good question for us to chase up with a number of them. Thank you all very much. We appreciate your time today, particularly for the councillors who travelled a significant distance to be here today. I'm sorry we're not down in Moss Vale, but we are really hoping to get the proponent to our Canberra hearing. We'll endeavour to do that, because it's important that we put a number of questions to them. Thank you, everybody..