"There is widespread concern that the public debate on Australia's environmental management has in recent months started heading rapidly back to the bad old days of lack of consultation, grandstanding and bans," Barry Jones, Executive Director the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA), said today.

"And two of the major culprits are the computer and the Internet which simply are not the information 'saviour' tools that they are taken granted for in the field of communication," Jones said.

"Processes for dissemination of information have to be fundamentally overhauled by government and industry - reliance on the Internet is not enough. Like minded interest groups and journalists need to recognise that because it's on the Internet it is not necessarily true or comprehensive."

Jones was speaking on the eve of APPEA's 2003 Environment Workshop, which is being held at Fremantle's Esplanade Hotel on Tuesday and Wednesday this week.

More than 100 delegates from the oil and gas industry, government bodies and non-government organisations are attending the environment-focused workshop, with speakers drawn from industry professionals, government decision makers and key environmental groups.

Jones said the upstream oil and gas industry has substantially changed its operational culture on the environment over the past 10 to 15 years and has built good working relationships with conservation groups and government.

"However, we at APPEA believe there remain some fundamental flaws in the current consultation processes as they relate to appropriate environmental management outcomes and proposals," Jones said.

"These cracks in the system are holding up progress on environmental debate and are distorting the real targets of identifying the most important community values when it comes to economics and conservation," he said.

Are all parties appropriately resourced?

Jones said one of the major causes of stress in the achieving appropriate environmental management outcomes and processes was that some elements in the community are being disenfranchised by the decision making processes.

"Put another way, some community elements consider that they face an 'information/time inequity', which leaves them no option but to resort to the sensational," he said.

"I suspect, quite perversely, that major causes of a perception of disenfranchisement include the computer and the Internet.

"It's the norm now. To make information public, just stick it on a web site. Just have a look at how the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Heritage works or how most EIS's are handled by project proponents for example."

Jones said this "let's rely on the net" syndrome assumed everyone had a computer.

"It assumes everyone has Internet access and quality access. It assumes we all know how to use the net. It assumes we can all find the appropriate site easily. It assumes we can download and understand what we find. It assumes we have adequate time.

"This set of assumptions is operating in a world where our capacity to quickly generate and distribute information has increased exponentially but our capacity to process it has stayed relatively constant.

"Another assumption, I suspect, is that many information consumers assume that everything they find on a science or conservation web site is fact. Frankly, I suspect every one of these assumptions is flawed."

Jones said an equally important question was to ask "are we suffering from consultation overload"?

"I think this is a valid question for individuals, for conservation groups, for company staff, for industry associations and for government," he said.

"In the case of government, all too often we have consultation for consultations sake rather than relevant departments having a clear plan of what we are talking about and what outcome we are seeking.

"To me it is clear - some sub groups of the community, particularly (but not exclusively) organisations that rely on voluntary contributions of time or donations for their resources, are having trouble dealing with multiple consultations, multiple issues, multiple projects and complex documentation

"Therefore, I think it is a highly valid question to ask - "are our decision making processes flawed because one group or another is under resourced?"

"On the other hand, I think it is equally valid a question to ask "are our decision making processes flawed because the decision makers are not adequately skilled or don't have enough time?"

Jones said the process of implementing up to date environmental science, resource management and data assessment had changed dramatically in recent years.

"I suspect that the skill base of industry and some of the larger conservation groups is better than that of government (or of reporters covering environmental issues)," he said.

"Public service management practices have changed. Departmental staff is rotated much more frequently - it is the age of the generalist, not the age of the expert.

"The balance of power between the Minister's office and departmental officers has changed. I suspect in many cases those making decisions really don't understand the legislation they are dealing with or the policies they have inherited.

"I also suspect that one of the major causes of stress and sensationalism in discussions about the interplay between community economic values and community conservation values is a resourcing issue in government, in industry and in like minded interest groups."

Jones said government funding priorities needed to focus more on gaining better knowledge, recruiting skilled staff and provision of skills training for all parties.

"There is a clear acceptance by the petroleum industry that at times good commonly accepted science will tell us there are some places where the conservation values are so high or the risks so great that no action by industry should be contemplated at this time," he said.

"In all other areas, access to allow assessment of economic resource potential is a necessity if community lifestyles are to be maintained.

"Zero risk is not an acceptable benchmark. "Public domain sensationalism is a political tool - nothing else. It is a sign of system failure for some parties - it is not a statement of an absolute truth.

"We, the petroleum industry, are willing to sit at the table with anyone who wants to work constructively to jointly acceptable outcomes."