Radio Interview, ABC Melbourne Drive

SUBJECTS: Legal action against 3M Australia and 3M Company

ALI MOORE, HOST: So, PFAS, we know it is in so many things, including at detectable levels at 85 per cent of Australians. So, does it worry you? Do you try and avoid it? It's not very easy to avoid. And what do you make of the news today that the Federal Government is suing the US manufacturing giant 3M, which makes the firefighting foam containing PFAS. And it's a claim that is specifically around contamination of 28 Defence bases across Australia. The Government says it is the largest legal claim they have ever bought. Peter Khalil is the Assistant Minister for Defence. Peter Khalil, welcome to the program.

PETER KHALIL, ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR DEFENCE: Thanks for having me, Ali, and being on the program with you.

MOORE: Why these bases? Why these 28 bases?

KHALIL: Well, Ali, as you said in your intro, we have announced the most significant legal action undertaken by the Commonwealth Defence, probably in living memory. And it's because the 28 Defence sites across the country where there has been the use of the 3M product of firefighting foam. We have spent $1.3 billion of taxpayer money in remediation efforts, in removing and treating PFAS from soil and water and supporting affected communities. And we are now seeking to recover those costs of $2 billion in damages for past costs that we have incurred and also future costs incurred in that, the mitigation and the management of that PFAS contamination across Australia.

MOORE: What's the basis of the claim? Why should they have to pay for that?

KHALIL: Well, Ali, the Attorney-General outlined in our press conference this morning some of the statement of claim or the legal claims that we are making based on the withholding of information and false statements about firefighting foam containing PFAS that was put forward by the 3M Company. And so that will play out in the legal proceedings. What's important, I think, to note, is that this case is very much focused on the environmental, economic and cultural impacts of the historical use of PFAS contaminated products on those sites and the future costs that we'll be incurring and continuing to provide that support for affected communities.

MOORE: What about the health impacts? You're being very clear there that this case is not around the health impacts.

KHALIL: Yeah, look, obviously the health and safety of Australians and affected Australians is our number one priority. It's important to remember that this action doesn't relate to personal injury or any human health effects alleged to have been impacted by PFAS exposure. We've taken, Defence, has taken our advice. We continue to rely on the public health advice provided by the Australian Centre for Disease Control. Currently, there is limited evidence of human disease or other clinically significant harm resulting from PFAS exposure. This case is very much focused on recovering $2 billion. We're seeking $2 billion in damages to recover costs arising from the current and the past and future environmental, economic and cultural impacts caused by 3M's products that contain PFAS. And that has included Ali, the fact that we have spent $1.3 billion, including in removing and treating more than 200,000 tonnes of soil, to remove it from the soil, treating water, providing seven water treatment plants, establishing them around the country, providing water assistance for affected communities. There's been $408 million in settled claims, some litigated, some non-litigated claims. So, we are seeking to recover those costs and I think we're doing the right thing in supporting and supporting the communities that have been affected. And when I have gone out -

MOORE: Peter Khalil, can I just, can I just interrupt you for a minute? Because it's very clear that this involves obviously the firefighting foam that's been used on bases. But that foams been used in lots of places. What about all the other communities and the environmental impact in other communities?

KHALIL: Well, this case is very much focused on the environmental impact that has occurred on the Defence sites. The Defence has spent $1.3 billion in those remediation efforts across those sites to try and contain the spread of PFAS from the bases, but also to support affected communities nearby those bases. In fact, I've set up a national coordinating body working with state and local authorities on that body. Local community working groups engage with local communities to provide that support. 

MOORE. So, is it possible that if this claim is successful, could it form the basis of broader claims?

KHALIL: Well, that's a matter for the courts. I know that what we're doing is the right thing because we are supporting communities. We're standing up to a multinational, global multinational company and holding them to account, Ali for what has occurred.

MOORE: Has there been a claim like this in any other jurisdiction?

KHALIL: There have been legal cases globally. There have been cases in the US and Europe. So, there is some history there. Again, I don't want to prejudice the case. That'll all play out in the legal proceedings, Ali.

MOORE: What is the timeline on this, Minister?

KHALIL: Well, that's uncertain. You know, lawyers and courts, they go through the processes so I can't really give you a definitive answer on that.

MOORE: Peter Khalil, thank you very much for talking to us.

KHALIL: Thanks for having me, Ali. Cheers.

MOORE: Peter Khalil there the Assistant Minister for Defence. 

ENDS