❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses sewage spills into the Swan River, inquiring about causes, trends, government strategy, funding, prosecution delays, and preventative measures. The Minister's response outlines geographic challenges, decreasing spill trends, collaborative efforts, and ongoing upgrades.
AnsweredQoN 1974Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Minister’s announcement on the March 30 that she had given her consent for ‘a prosecution to proceed against the Water Corporation for two sewage spills on the Swan River’ (‘Water Corporation to face prosecution over sewage spills’ media release), and I ask -
(1) Why in 2004, do sewage spills need to end up in the Swan River?
(2) What have the trends been over the last 10 years in the volume and frequency of these spills?
(3) What is the Government strategy for ending them?
(4) How will this be funded?
(5) Why has it taken so long (9 months following the last of the two spills last year) for the Minister to give her consent to proceed with this prosecution against the Water Corporation?
(6) Does the Minister still propose to prosecute the Water Corporation for previous spills?
(7) If yes to (6), how will the prosecution be funded?
(8) If the prosecution is successful and the Corporation fined, how will the fines be funded?
(9) What action is the Water Corporation taking to ensure that sewage spills into the Swan River do not occur in future?
(10) What action is the Minister taking to ensure that this situation never occurs again?
(1) Why in 2004, do sewage spills need to end up in the Swan River?
(2) What have the trends been over the last 10 years in the volume and frequency of these spills?
(3) What is the Government strategy for ending them?
(4) How will this be funded?
(5) Why has it taken so long (9 months following the last of the two spills last year) for the Minister to give her consent to proceed with this prosecution against the Water Corporation?
(6) Does the Minister still propose to prosecute the Water Corporation for previous spills?
(7) If yes to (6), how will the prosecution be funded?
(8) If the prosecution is successful and the Corporation fined, how will the fines be funded?
(9) What action is the Water Corporation taking to ensure that sewage spills into the Swan River do not occur in future?
(10) What action is the Minister taking to ensure that this situation never occurs again?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
2 June 2004
Responded by
Minister for Local Government and Regional Development representing the Minister for the Environment
Response time
29 days
(1) For geographic and social reasons there are a number of pumping stations close to the river, leaving a risk of spills. (2) The general trend is for reduced numbers of spills and total volume of spills, noting that year-on-year variations will occur. More information on this can be found in the documents entitled Wastewater Overflows in the Perth Metropolitan Area to June 2003 and Perth’s Wastewater System – Protecting our Health and our Environment on the Corporation’s web site on www.watercorporation.com.au. (3) The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is working with the Corporation on improving the standard of operation of the sewage conveyance system. As part of this, the DEP is preparing a code of practice that will be issued under s122A of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 that will define the minimum standards of performance that will be expected of the Corporation. This code of practice will support a more strategic initiative called the Wastewater Management Framework that aims, in consultation with the DEP, the Department of Health and the community, to prioritise the Corporation’s expenditures on wastewater management issues across the State. These initiatives come on top of the $15 million Riverwise program which was undertaken in response to the 1997 review of sewer overflows. (4) Ongoing upgrades and maintenance of the sewerage system are the responsibility of the Corporation. (5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(2) The general trend is for reduced numbers of spills and total volume of spills, noting that year-on-year variations will occur. More information on this can be found in the documents entitled Wastewater Overflows in the Perth Metropolitan Area to June 2003 and Perth’s Wastewater System – Protecting our Health and our Environment on the Corporation’s web site on www.watercorporation.com.au. (3) The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is working with the Corporation on improving the standard of operation of the sewage conveyance system. As part of this, the DEP is preparing a code of practice that will be issued under s122A of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 that will define the minimum standards of performance that will be expected of the Corporation. This code of practice will support a more strategic initiative called the Wastewater Management Framework that aims, in consultation with the DEP, the Department of Health and the community, to prioritise the Corporation’s expenditures on wastewater management issues across the State. These initiatives come on top of the $15 million Riverwise program which was undertaken in response to the 1997 review of sewer overflows. (4) Ongoing upgrades and maintenance of the sewerage system are the responsibility of the Corporation. (5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(3) The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is working with the Corporation on improving the standard of operation of the sewage conveyance system. As part of this, the DEP is preparing a code of practice that will be issued under s122A of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 that will define the minimum standards of performance that will be expected of the Corporation. This code of practice will support a more strategic initiative called the Wastewater Management Framework that aims, in consultation with the DEP, the Department of Health and the community, to prioritise the Corporation’s expenditures on wastewater management issues across the State. These initiatives come on top of the $15 million Riverwise program which was undertaken in response to the 1997 review of sewer overflows. (4) Ongoing upgrades and maintenance of the sewerage system are the responsibility of the Corporation. (5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(4) Ongoing upgrades and maintenance of the sewerage system are the responsibility of the Corporation. (5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(2) The general trend is for reduced numbers of spills and total volume of spills, noting that year-on-year variations will occur. More information on this can be found in the documents entitled Wastewater Overflows in the Perth Metropolitan Area to June 2003 and Perth’s Wastewater System – Protecting our Health and our Environment on the Corporation’s web site on www.watercorporation.com.au. (3) The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is working with the Corporation on improving the standard of operation of the sewage conveyance system. As part of this, the DEP is preparing a code of practice that will be issued under s122A of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 that will define the minimum standards of performance that will be expected of the Corporation. This code of practice will support a more strategic initiative called the Wastewater Management Framework that aims, in consultation with the DEP, the Department of Health and the community, to prioritise the Corporation’s expenditures on wastewater management issues across the State. These initiatives come on top of the $15 million Riverwise program which was undertaken in response to the 1997 review of sewer overflows. (4) Ongoing upgrades and maintenance of the sewerage system are the responsibility of the Corporation. (5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(3) The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is working with the Corporation on improving the standard of operation of the sewage conveyance system. As part of this, the DEP is preparing a code of practice that will be issued under s122A of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 that will define the minimum standards of performance that will be expected of the Corporation. This code of practice will support a more strategic initiative called the Wastewater Management Framework that aims, in consultation with the DEP, the Department of Health and the community, to prioritise the Corporation’s expenditures on wastewater management issues across the State. These initiatives come on top of the $15 million Riverwise program which was undertaken in response to the 1997 review of sewer overflows. (4) Ongoing upgrades and maintenance of the sewerage system are the responsibility of the Corporation. (5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(4) Ongoing upgrades and maintenance of the sewerage system are the responsibility of the Corporation. (5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(5) An investigation commenced in November 2003 into a sewage spill which occurred on 12 November 2003 at Guildford. The investigation identified, as a result of interrogation of sewage computer monitoring systems, that two earlier discharges had occurred on 29 May and 10 July 2003. (6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(6) Yes, the 29 May and 10 July 2003 sewage spills are included in the current three charges which have been referred against the Water Corporation and its contracted service provider, Swan Water Services Pty Ltd. (7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(7) The investigation forms part of the DEP’s responsibilities as a regulatory body to identify and prosecute breaches of Acts and Regulations for which it is responsible. The DEP’s Environmental Enforcement Unit has formal arrangements transferring conduct of prosecutions to the State Solicitor's Office (SSO). The SSO has agreed to assess and prosecute on behalf of the DEP. (8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(8) If the prosecutions are successful, it will be the responsibility of the Corporation to pay the court imposed penalties. (9-10) See answer to Question (3).
(9-10) See answer to Question (3).
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.