❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the government's commitment to alternative sites for the Browse gas hub following a Supreme Court decision and inquires about communications with companies other than Woodside regarding the project. The government defends its site selection process and states no other company has committed.
AnsweredQoN 86Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
KIMBERLEY
GAS PRECINCT — NEGOTIATION WITH TRADITIONAL OWNERS
86. Hon ROBIN CHAPPLE to the Leader of the House
representing the Minister for State Development:
My question was asked last week, and things have slightly
altered since then, but I still want to ask the question. With regard to the
proposed gas hub at James Price Point —
(1) Given the
Supreme Court decision that the notices of intention to compulsorily acquire
are invalid, has the government taken this opportunity to further consider
alternative sites for a Browse gas hub?
(2) Will the
government now take this opportunity to complete the assessment of alternative
sites for the gas hub?
(3) If no to
(2), why not?
(4) Further to
question without notice 001, answered on Wednesday, 7 March 2012: since
September 2011, has the government had communications with any company or
companies other than Woodside about being proponents for the Browse liquefied
natural gas precinct?
(5) If yes to
(4), which companies?
GAS PRECINCT — NEGOTIATION WITH TRADITIONAL OWNERS
86. Hon ROBIN CHAPPLE to the Leader of the House
representing the Minister for State Development:
My question was asked last week, and things have slightly
altered since then, but I still want to ask the question. With regard to the
proposed gas hub at James Price Point —
(1) Given the
Supreme Court decision that the notices of intention to compulsorily acquire
are invalid, has the government taken this opportunity to further consider
alternative sites for a Browse gas hub?
(2) Will the
government now take this opportunity to complete the assessment of alternative
sites for the gas hub?
(3) If no to
(2), why not?
(4) Further to
question without notice 001, answered on Wednesday, 7 March 2012: since
September 2011, has the government had communications with any company or
companies other than Woodside about being proponents for the Browse liquefied
natural gas precinct?
(5) If yes to
(4), which companies?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the
honourable member for some notice of this question and advise that this is the
answer that was provided yesterday. Before providing the answer, I would
like to point out to the honourable member that in question (4) he referred to
question without notice 001, when in fact it is Hansard reference 29.
(1)–(3)
A comprehensive assessment of over 40 alternative sites was conducted in 2007
and 2008 by the state government. Sites were considered in the Kimberley,
Pilbara and Northern Territory, and assessed against a range of environmental,
technical, economic and cultural criteria. The location for the Browse LNG
precinct was selected on the basis that it provided the best opportunity to
minimise the environmental impact of developing the Browse Basin gas reserves
by providing a single location for all future LNG development along the
Kimberley coastline, while at the same time creating meaningful opportunities
for the local community. The government will not be revisiting the site
assessment process.
(4)–(5)
The government regularly promotes potential investment opportunities, including
the Browse LNG precinct, in a range of forums. At present, no company besides
the Woodside-led Browse joint venture has committed to becoming a potential
proponent of the precinct.
honourable member for some notice of this question and advise that this is the
answer that was provided yesterday. Before providing the answer, I would
like to point out to the honourable member that in question (4) he referred to
question without notice 001, when in fact it is Hansard reference 29.
(1)–(3)
A comprehensive assessment of over 40 alternative sites was conducted in 2007
and 2008 by the state government. Sites were considered in the Kimberley,
Pilbara and Northern Territory, and assessed against a range of environmental,
technical, economic and cultural criteria. The location for the Browse LNG
precinct was selected on the basis that it provided the best opportunity to
minimise the environmental impact of developing the Browse Basin gas reserves
by providing a single location for all future LNG development along the
Kimberley coastline, while at the same time creating meaningful opportunities
for the local community. The government will not be revisiting the site
assessment process.
(4)–(5)
The government regularly promotes potential investment opportunities, including
the Browse LNG precinct, in a range of forums. At present, no company besides
the Woodside-led Browse joint venture has committed to becoming a potential
proponent of the precinct.
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.